I am aware that my old friend, Howard Reed, has produced the data for the TUC\u2019s proposed new wealth tax.<\/p>\n
As the TUC say:<\/a><\/p>\n The TUC has called for a national conversation on taxing wealth, as it publishes new analysis today (Friday) which shows a modest wealth tax on the richest 140,000 individuals \u2013 which is around 0.3% of the UK population \u2013 could deliver a \u00a310.4 bn boost for the public purse.<\/p>\n The analysis sets out options for taxing the small number of individuals with wealth over \u00a33 million, \u00a35 million and \u00a310 million, excluding pensions.<\/p>\n The TUC says these options are illustrative examples of what a wealth tax could look like, using Spain\u2019s existing policy<\/a> as a potential model.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s time for a national conversation\"<\/p><\/blockquote>\n I certainly agree with the last point. That is why I have spent much of the summer, so far, working on proposals to collect more tax from those with wealth and high incomes. Sixteen proposals have now been drafted. I think there are eight more still to come, although that number might still grow a bit.<\/p>\n As the TUC says on their proposal:<\/p>\n The TUC says it is publishing the analysis to \u201ckickstart a conversation\u201d about tax \u2013 with the TUC general secretary Paul Nowak declaring \u201cnow is the time to start a national conversation about taxing wealth\u201d.<\/p>\n According to analysis commissioned by the TUC, conducted by Landman Economics, cumulative one-off wealth tax (excluding pensions wealth) on:<\/p>\n Together this could raise more than \u00a310 billion for the exchequer.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n I am very familiar with the data that Howard used to prepare these estimates. I am also using it. And, based on it, Howard\u2019s proposals make sense.<\/p>\n My concerns are threefold, at least.<\/p>\n First, I think this would be an immensely difficult tax to administer, assess and collect. Valuation disputes would drag on for years and be immensely costly. This is not an efficient way to raise additional tax in that case.<\/p>\n Second, there are vastly easier ways to find \u00a310 billion, or much more. Simply introduce tiered interest payments on central bank reserve accounts as\u00a0I proposed this week<\/a> and I suspect the revenue saving might be three times that from this proposed wealth tax over the next three years, with very little effort expended.<\/p>\n Alternatively, just remove the inheritance tax exemption on residual sums in pension funds when a person dies and considerable sums might be available. Pension pots of over \u00a31 million have a value of at least \u00a31,323 billion as I also showed this week<\/a>. Bring even part of that sum \u00a0within the scope of inheritance tax and vastly more than \u00a310 billion a year might be raised.<\/p>\n I am not saying Howard and the TUC are wrong. I am saying that this conversation on tax needs to focus on what is most efficiently done. I don\u2019t think that suggests that a wealth tax is appropriate.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"\n