As readers here will know, the weekend before last, Gary Stevenson admitted that he did not know how to create a wealth tax and would need help in the process of doing so.
He asked for that help, and I offered it because I have the experience to create such a tax based on my background of over 45 years working with taxation, my success in taxation campaigning and tax reform, and the fact that for most of that period I was a Fellow of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales, although I am no longer a member.
I wrote a note to Gary setting out why and how I could help. I received no reply, so I sent a chaser to make sure that it had not gone astray, copying it to two addresses, and I have still had no reply.
I know that many people here posted comments on Gary's YouTube suggesting that he should talk to me, but he has not, so I think we have to presume that he does not wish to do so, whatever his reasons might be.
What I do know is that he has been working very closely with Tax Justice UK, which has not now, and never has had, any real tax expertise amongst its staff. I know this in part because I helped create it, and now I much regret doing so.
You cannot run a think tank if you know nothing about the subject it is talking about, and that is the problem with most of the UK's organisations that now work on tax justice. They might have their hearts in the right place, although they might also be most interested in preserving their own employment, but whichever it is, since the time that John Christensen and I departed the tax justice scene not one of them has come up with an idea that in any way takes the tax justice agenda further forward in a way that might have real world impact, whilst many of ideas that they do promote take it decidedly backwards.
I am, of course, aware that stating this might be the very reason why Gary does not wish to speak to me. But let's be clear about this: the wealth tax that Gary seeks to promote is not going to happen because he has no idea how it can happen, and has no one who can explain how it might work to him or for him. As a consequence, however much noise he might make, people are wasting their time supporting his cause and that of the other organisations promoting this idea. Unless you can show your proposal works, you do not have a proposal. You have hot air, and that changes very little. Until he and others demanding increased taxation on wealth accept reality about the way in which taxes work, why they work, and how they have to function within society, they can make no progress, and there is no sign that any of them is willing to do that.
It's a shame, but until the day comes when the left decides to stop being idealistic and instead becomes pragmatic about achieving its goals in ways that can deliver for the people of this country, it has no hope of changing anything. And that is a very good reason why this country is in the mess that it is, and why people who need help and representation in this country are not getting it.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
“You cannot run a think tank if you know nothing about the subject it is talking about,”
Come to Brussels – the NGOs and “Think Tanks” are packed to the rafters with people with no technical expertise whatsoever – but they know how to waffle on about e.g. energy policy. I recall that Col Smithers made some comments about the leadership of some orgs (e.g. charities) which are used as political stepping stones – paraphrasing, the right shiny faces – experience & knowledge not required.
Could it be that Gary’s experience as A TRADER does not really translate into the mundane world of “how to we develop taxes for a fairer society”? Devil in the detail etc etc.
Much to agree with.
Aurelian’s latest article covers this in depth. Well worth a read, as ever. A couple of quotes below.
https://aurelien2022.substack.com/p/the-truth-market
“….modern politics, and modern life, are full of people who “just know” things, and who are often popular and respected as a result. After all, asked to choose between someone who says “look, it’s all very complicated,” and someone who says “no, in fact it’s very simple,” who are you most likely to want to believe? Demagogues and cultists have always worked this way, but the habit has been spreading in recent years throughout the Internet, and many pundits have acquired influence and made good careers from it. ”
And: “…What has developed in the last generation or so is a political assault on the concept of expertise (and thus knowledge) itself from other quarters. The ingredients are well-enough known: the narcissistic promotion of the ego, the primacy of emotion over intellect, the preference for “lived experience” over acquired knowledge, and of course the attack on the very possibility of objective knowledge itself.”
Agreed.
But, we also have to acknowledge that having a PPE degree from Oxford does not prove intelligence. We have set up false standards for authority and the left has been strangling itself with them.
It is a shame that Gary has not adopted your tax ideas; for a self-confessed “non-expert”, they are an “off the shelf” answer that can be adopted pretty easily within our current tax system.
However, does this post make discussion with Gary or his adoption of your suggestions more likely? I doubt it.
I have given up the idea in the sense I won’t be pursuing it again: I see that route as a dead end and was deliberately signalling the fact. They can revive it if they want. I am not expecting it to happen. C’est la vie.
“However, does this post make discussion with Gary or his adoption of your suggestions more likely? I doubt it”.
For what it is worth, I think Clive’s observation is ……… both acute and pragmatic. Neoliberals, as a general rule seem to network more effectively.
Agreed.
And that is annoying.
But let’s be clear, I have tried here, and it has failed and not for my lack of trying.
Richard,
I am reluctant to comment further, as I am not privy to your communications with Gary Stevenson, and that makes any comment I make unreliable; but I would only make this observation. From memory (and I am only working from memory), you have written about Stevenson’s economic views before and more than once; in quite blunt and even harshly critical language as I recall it; and whatever the things that bring people together, that kind of criticism can make people bristle, and it can have a lasting effect. That is all I can say. It is often the manner of approach; the spirit it is done and sensitivity to the self-esteem of others that matters most.
John
I am unapologetic. What Gary Stevenson is proposing is unworkable and he is wasting people’s time promoting an idea that cannot deliver. Three thoughts followed from that.
One, does he not know?
Two, does he know but not care, which blows apart his whole campaign.
Three, is he more interested in his ego, and not admitting that he has got this wrong, then trying to do something that might deliver?
I have now spent far too long in my life working with people who believe that they are, as George Monbiot calls them this morning, junk tankers, who are a total drain on all efforts to change our society. I am not willing to walk softly when robustness is necessary to ensure that we get our desire.
Richard
I’m a Patron of Gary’s and a reasonably long time reader of your Blog Richard. So I would love to see you two working together. I echo John’s sentiment about being wary of what I can sensibly say without knowing details of the communication that you’ve previously shared. However I sense a clash of personalities/approaches that is keeping you both apart.
I was one of those to commented on Gary’s video about speaking to you about a pragmatic tax plan as well as following it up with an email. Gary hosts regular QA sessions for his patrons and in the latest one responded to the influx of message he’s had on this topic. He and his assistant made references to some correspondence you both had in the past that may have hit the wrong note for both of you. I get the sense that you’ve never met each other in person so, reading between the lines, the intent of your shared communication may have been lost in translation.
You both have much to offer but you reach different audiences. Gary is preaching a populist message that is needed to engage an electorate. You provide facts that reflect the reality, but you’ve got to admit 99% of people will never read the Taxing Wealth Report! There is much you could do together but you are both very ‘confident’ in your opinions. I suspect this may be a source of friction.
I think you may do better if you can both find the ability to leave your ego’s at the door for a while and have a proper discussion. Please don’t take this personally, we are all guilty of this, and I said the same to Gary. The trick is recognising it and extending the olive branch despite ourselves. I hope you’ll continue to try and contact him as I will continue to encourage him to do the same. It would be sad to not have to such strong progressive voices working together and disastrous to have you working apart.
I have put my ego aside.
I offered, despite my concerns aboiut Gary’s massively arrogant claims in his videos, which he could never justify.
But, if he doesn’t like what I am doing, that’s his choice, but he’s already admitting he is going nowhere, and I fear he won’t. And let’s be clear, March April and May this year apart (after which his viewership his fallen very heavily) he often reaches no more people than I do in a month, overall, so I don’t actually need him. Despite that, I made the offer. He seems to be the problem. He won’t even reply. I have done my best, and am satisfid with that.
Thank you Mr Herd. We are on the same page. At least this dialogue produced Mr Herd’s contribution. There are interested parties on both sides of this debate that would like to see something happen. We cannot make it happen; it is not in our patronage. But there are enormous benefits to be gained by closing this gap; because it is badly needed and there is very little otherwise in both the economics and the politics of Britain that is positive. We need a breakthrough from somewhere: very, very soon.
I am a Bear of little brain however even I can see that income is income, you know what it is where it’s from and tax it accordingly
Who owns stuff and what it’s worth is decidedly less easy
What is it that these people don’t understand
As we have discussed here before, we don’t really need the rich nor their money for the investment we need. Have you seen the proposed racing horse strike over the betting tax?
I’ve had interviews on my TV with pretty stable girls telling everyone how much they love their jobs and their horses getting up at all hours etc., (I bet loads of working men and women who no longer have jobs in manufacturing were getting up at all hours but it did them no good).
Tax seems like a lost cause and when you talk of taxing betting I go a bit ballistic as it is everywhere – it’s the adverts that need cutting and the ease by which to do it. Betting on football games – I mean the world is just full of derivatives isn’t it? Side bets on anything socially useful. Paddy Power as a financial institution ‘creating markets’ like Goldman Sachs!! Whilst imports go up, with no jobs for graduates!
How long will it be before you can go into your NHS and whilst you are there, have a flutter an on a fellow patient’s possibility of recovery from a disease or ailment?
The whole thing is absurd. And then they want to tax betting because they have not got the minerals to just print the money and invest.
Surely what we need is a transaction tax in the City? They’re using pounds, the Government rents out the currency – tax it at suitable levels but I would not use tax to deal with betting. The betting conglomerates need to be reigned in by the law.
Sorry for the rant.
Rants allowed.
Maybe you could send Gary Stevenson a copy of the Taxing Wealth Report 2024 with a polite letter outline the position as you have explained above and see what happens. There may be then a chance he actually reads it and uses your ideas in his blogs/YouTubers etc. His channel has a wide following and has got great traction now.
That has been done.
The people around me as I grew up and started work, were quite conservative. Their ideas seemed justified by claiming to be realistic about the world.
I went to teacher training college and started to meet more people from educated and professional families and, it was the mid sixties, many were quite left wing and progressive. My ideas began to change but I did notice that some of them were quite intolerant and regarded their views as Holy Writ. And many were indulging in wishful thinking.
What I learnt and have reinforced over the years is that people will often accept uncritically things which fit their world view. We saw an example this week. But we have to analyse our own beliefs and opinions as carefully as we do of those we don’t like. As you say, Richard, it is about being able to accept reality.
It doesn’t always please one’s friends.
I think this debate highlights that there is no alternative story to combat that of Nigel Farage and his like.The story that immigrants are the cause of our woes.
I agree that the “Tax the Rich” approach is only part of the story and that MMT describes the role of money better.
But Labour continue to offer austerity lite and we know they will not tackle inequality.
If those of the left or centre left do not offer a solution to the average voter, then it is highly likely Reform Party will win the next election.
We can say “C’est La vie” but we will all be affecting by the consequences.
So my question is, how do we push back against the Reform Party narrative? Because according to the polls they are flying high. Whatever approach we currently have, it is not working.
What strategy do we have that will turn this around? What strategy do we have to give us all a little bit of hope?
I dearly hope someone can present it to me.
I live in Scotland. Is the answer to vote for SNP?
I am genuinely looking for an answer. I want hope, not despair and resignation.
You have to vote for independence…but there is, I agree more to it than that.
I should make a series on the issue.
Richard, yes, I would look forward to such a series. The aim to get MMT and similar ideas into the public consciousness.
Sadly I believe the time has come to by-pass Gary. As much as I like him, I cannot see why he is not biting your hand off for help. He is at risk of undermining his sincerity and his message. His main contribution has been to raise the profile of inequality as a, if not the, most pressing political issue which he has done extremely well. But, and it is a big but, his message has been adopted and is being pursued by others, most notably Zak Polanski of the Green Party who strikes me as being politically savvy. KUPTG Richard.
Interesting that gov.uk. is looking to increase betting tax by 350 mill/p/a when the ceo of just one betting co. has pulled out one billion in compensation in the four years ending Jan.2024. Another betting company ceo pulled out over 150 mill in one recent financial year
So maybe betting company ceos are the ones to be specifically targeted in this proposed tax drive against the betting industry rather than the punters and employees, because, lets face it – under this proposal – its the punters and employees who will pay the extra tax levy.
And also in politics – such as Richard Burgeon MP banging on about the need for a 2% wealth tax – never shows the slightest interest in how to do it – or to look at the RM ‘Taxing Wealth’ report.
They seem to think that a dog whistle is all that’s needed. ‘Wealth tax’ sounds good , but absolutely no interest in whether its feasible or what alternatives might be better.
Very disappointing.
Professional jealousy? You might outshine him or others? Self-interested others whose lifestyle depends on controlling the Gary brand?
His skills are good for predicting a corrupted system.
He is very good at calling out the corruption, and making a broad diagnosis for change, but does he have any real experience and expertise on the detail needed to create a functioning fair tax system?
UK especially England has become obsessed with trivia and celebrity.
There is disdain and outward hostility to expertise across the board.
Really would like you to make a series on why Scotland must leave the neoliberal sink hole. If Scotland were to leave it would reduce the power base in Westminster,
IMHO the answer for England also lies in more devolution, more democratic power to regions. More transparency, localism and accountability.
Noted
Yes, I’ve been fantasising about devolution really. I think its the solution to a lot of our problems and certainly the disenfranchisement.
Our government is too top down and really I think regions should be putting out tenders to the main parties in central government and then choosing whichever solution they think fits best for their area and constituents.
Just announced: Gary Stevenson will be one of the speakers at the Make Them Pay demonstration in London on the 20th.
I shall be there, and will be listening to Mr Stevenson with my critical faculties un-suspended.
I realise I’ve come late to the party on commenting on this blog (my sister’s been staying so I’ve been busy), but here’s my tuppence worth, and these are not exclusive of each other.
First, if, as Stevenson mentioned in the video I watched, he’s been in discussion with people in the government then I’d strongly suspect he’s been warned off aligning with you.
Second, in my last few years as an academic, my experience of suggesting to young academics (of Stevenson’s age) that it might be worthwhile to collaborate on papers/projects/research was more or less gently declined. If a reason was given it was often that they already had all the feedback/interaction they needed through the various social media channels they used. I know I was not the only one who experienced this. But this is in marked contrast to my experience from the early 1990’s, when working collaboratively was accepted practice (and was in most cases beneficial in terms of the quality of the output).
Third, if you’re a “star” on YouTube, or any other social media channel, is there any benefit (especially in financial terms) of sharing your “stardom”. In short, isn’t pursuing any angle that might in some way water down or weaken your online status anathema to the whole “influencer” (for that’s what Stevenson is, ultimately) culture?
Anyway, just a few thoughts that occurred to me.
Thanks
Reminds me of those on the fractional left whose solution to neoliberalism is ‘workers rise up and overthrow the capitalists’. Not a bloody clue how this will occur. They’re often blind to the mass of decent people who want a new version of post war socialism. You then ask the question ” What can we practically do”…
Gary recently did a Q&A with us patreons in which a few of us asked about the situation with yourself, he said that he has been incredibly busy and he has received lots of messages from important people so he is struggling to keep up. I’m personally of the opinion that they should make time for you but they just see you as another person on the internet I think. I’ll keep trying to ask him to set up a meeting because I think it would be important.
On the point about think tanks, Gary has also said that that they don’t come up with good ideas, that’s why it would be great for him to meet you and your community!
Thanks, and noted.
Hi Richard!
Do you know how Norway administers its wealth tax?
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/norway-conservatives-jens-stoltenberg-stavanger-erna-solberg-b2821735.html
“The wealth tax is a levy of up to 1.1% on assets and shares worth more than 1.76 million kroner (around $176,000), though there are various reductions and discounts, for instance taking account of debt and property. ”
“Many, including the Labor Party, say the wealth tax is one of the most effective levers for removing inequality. Norway is one of only three countries in the 38-member Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, a club of rich countries, which levies a tax on net wealth.”
In detail no. I discussed it a long time ago, when in Norway, but my recall is unreliable. The point is though, Norway is a very different society when it comes to tax and transparency.
As I gaze in to my crystal ball and look 4 years ahead, I can’t see Gary Stevenson. I can however see more and more disillusioned people looking to understand why we are where we are and for pragmatic workable alternatives that will of benefit to all.
I suspect you are right.