Ah, yes, he probably did mean that.

Sorry for confusion.

So, any even vague concern for human rights, like all that guff about being the 'greenest government ever' is out of the window. As predicted.

No, the apologies are all mine, I did mean the VAT registration threshold, but used ambiguous phrasing.

The registration threshold is going up to £77k from £73k - a biggish jump.

The reason I ask is because it seems to me that VAT is so much more a tax on jobs than Employer National Insurance Contributions, but is never raised as such by either the usual suspects or the Left. More, it's so hugely an impediment to expansion for small businesses that it seems to totally undercut Tory claims to be the enterprise party - rather, a lowish registration threshold (although it has been raised more than I would have expected today) seems to me to favour the big boys and screw over the little as it's such a barrier to have to overcome, that many wealth creators just don't think it's worth the bother. So they cut back their economic activity once they get near it.

And of course, what goes hand in hand with that is that many of the unscrupulous amongst the small business community have a double incentive to suppress their declared (not actual)just their actual) turnover - not just to avoid registering for VAT, but also to declare a lower level of turnover - and hence profits - for the purposes of Income Tax Self Assessment. And if they're masking their true level of economic activity, they make wish to make it appear that they employ fewer people for fewer hours than is actually the case - which means less PAYE & NIC flows through, also undercutting the Contributory Principle on which so much of the Welfare State is built on.

It just seems odd to me, that's all, the focus on Corporation Tax and the rates of Income Tax etc. and the effects they have at the macro level - it just feels like there's a debate missing.

And that's without going into the arguments about VAT being so regressive and hitting the poor harder, and what with their higher marginal propensity to spend what this all means for the ongoing failure of aggregate demand.

Sorry for all the capitals on nouns - it may look a little German from a distance.

I'll not have "wealth creators", but the VAT threshold etc does seem to be part of their concentration on big business, while saying that small enterprises are the key to "the recovery".

I am pleased to announce I'm not remotely qualified to answe SW2's point. Despite my authoritative pronouncement earlier.

Wealth creators was used in a droll fashion, TonTon, but notwithstanding the perversion of language by ideologues, it is surely the case that under capitalism wealth is created by trade and economic activity, surely?

Someone will be along shortly who can put all the big stuff about these sorts of taxes into context, I'm sure.

It all depends what you mean by wealth, capitalism, economic activity; they're all non-neutral terms

You're not wrong.

It is completely misconceived to criticise the government for not raising the VAT threshold by more. The threshold has been raised (as it virtually always is each year) by the inflation adjustment which is the greatest increase permitted by EU law. Many other EU member states have not taken as full advantage of the UK has of the discretion to have a meaningful threshold which actually excludes many small businesses/sole traders. From the perspective of EU law and the Commission's policy objectives, the carve-out for small businesses is an anomaly which is tolerated by our EU masters only because of the administrative simplification argument.

There's frequent debate in the UK about things the government "ought to" do to change VAT law which is an idiotic waste of words because the suggestions in question would be illegal under the Directives to which we've signed up. For example, new candidate goods or services are often suggested for zero-rating, ignoring the fact that the Directive prohibits the extension of zero-rating to any goods or services which have not always been zero-rated.

Generally, VAT is an EU law tax governed by the Directive, and member states have fairly limited discretions in relation to it.

Fair dos.

Can I just have a quick moan at all the newspapers repeating the fallacy that Osborne helping his chums by cutting the 50p rate is somehow "offset" by the increase in personal allowance from £8,105 to £9,205, which will allegedly benefit "all of us"? This ignores the very obvious fact that it won't benefit the millions of people who earn less than £8,105 a year.

Haven't the IFS calculated that the people that gain most from the raising of the lower threshold - the Lib Dems' sacred cow - are the upper-middle income strata?

Nick Clegg, of course, has described this budget as "something every liberal can be proud of".

And for once I agree with him.

With this administration we are witnessing the final realization of the Thatcher revolution. It’s almost complete- the transfer of public goods into private ownership and the total dismantling of the welfare state ensuring a compliant and desperate reserve army of labour further pushing the profits of big business and Tory donors even higher and pushing wages down.

Think about it- remember when Thatcher came to power and started the privatization bonanza? It was sold to a wary and still to be respected public as an exercise in “shareholder democracy”. The ordinary citizen could participate in the market and own public services. Freedom comes with a mortgage and an interest in the FTSE 100.

That’s now been completely dispensed with. Apart from the fact the public utilities "shareholder democracy" is now a "shareholder oligarchy", there is now not even the slightest attempt to hide the fact that privatization agenda is anything but an obscene private profit grab- ATOS and A4E in welfare, the NHS, roads etc, etc.

This is due in large part to the fact that there’s no need to persuade the great British public anymore- they are either credulous, couldn’t care less or cowed. In the case of the cowed, this is the majority with the enormous mortgage and personal debt up to the eyeballs. Don't rock the boat or the house disappears.

The same old trope about the ‘efficiency of the private sector in delivering public services’ is blithely accepted despite tonnes of evidence to the contrary- the railways for starters which are outrageously expensive, shit and attract a higher Government subsidy than British Rail ever received, which rather than being used to fund a nationalised service, goes directly into the train operators Croesus sized wallets. The current privatized UK rail network makes British Rail look like Japanese rail.

Let’s also take the current wheeze to privatize the roads. The Tories want private contractors to build roads to which they will be able to charge taxpayers to use them over a 60 year initial period. Rather than the Government investing in roads as public infrastructure through the issuing of bonds (which are at almost historically low levels), the Govt is keeping it off the books whilst allowing private contractors to toll taxpayers- a nice little earner. Oh, and let’s just see which contractors get preferential treatment. Substantial Conservative party donors perchance?

And this is before we even get on to the bare faced lies that the reduction in top rate of tax will boost tax revenues.

The Conservatives genuinely do not have to care anymore. Just look at the caliber of politician they have implementing this ideological loonery- Gove, Lansley, Osborne et al. Political amoebas the lot of them. They no longer have to give a shit about debate, persuasion, gravitas or integrity to implement their plans- the country is a complete walkover.

The austerity ‘we’re all in this together’ rhetoric was simply a fog of obfuscation designed to complete the Thatcherite revolution- all public services sold off to the highest bidder (to the Conservative party treasury) at the top end and a desperate welfare-less workforce prepared to undercut each other and thus keep real wages down at the other. And with a debt shackled majority in the middle.

And wherefore art thou “The Left”? Either agreeing almost wholeheartedly with the neo-liberal narrative- the Labour Party or the too busy arguing amongst each other as to who holds the correct interpretation sectional Socialists.

Or in other words (to use the short version of my post)- the gig is well and truly fucked.

E10 Rifle wrote:


Some of their "professional advisers" have popped up in the FT and are complaining about the general anti-avoidance rule that's been talked about. Apparently they won't know where they are and their clients could be hit afterwards with big bills.

So either make provisions for it, or don't do as much sharp practice. Next?

And apparently the rich paid themselves extra a year early so it got charged at 40p. That rather makes the economic performance worse. All that money's been in the economy and the performance still isn't very good.

They can't do that trick every year, so had the 50p rate hung about, they'd have been caught. Instead, it's going, so they can defer a bit and pay less.

Cue some disingenuous rubbish about how little the 50p rate raised.

E10 Rifle wrote:


You're right again, twice.

An excellent post young Geoffrey.

Anyone notice this earlier in the week?

ht.ly/9QdDf

Incredibly, given the "entrepreneur" schtick, Osborne's apparently added 750,000 to the 40p rate of tax.

And for a government who wants to get people enrolled in private pensions, it's done another odd thing:

www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/budget/91618...l-tax-allowance.html

Where can I get a briefcase like that?