The debate over the 50p tax rate overlooks a bigger problem, tax havens (Letters, March 20).
Nicholas Shaxson's book Treasure Islands shows these are the main cause of higher taxes for the majority and small businesses, via billionaires, banks and big firms avoiding taxes through them.
Shaxson estimates that around $12 trillion, a quarter of the world's wealth, goes untaxed in tax havens. If banks and companies were included, the amount would be at least twice that. Every Footsie 100 company from Tesco to RBS has subsidiaries or partners in havens to avoid tax.
Tax havens also provide secrecy to avoid regulation, which allowed the fraudulent financial derivatives such as collateral debt obligations which caused the financial crisis. Every fraud from BCCI to Enron has relied on them.
Unless tax havens are closed down effective regulation is impossible and it is only a matter of time before there is another crisis. The banks and hedge funds don't care as they have bought up enough political influence and become so large they are guaranteed another bail-out.
Politicians claim it's impossible to close them down, yet capital controls (ie limits on transferring money between countries) worked fine from 1945 till 1971 under the Bretton Woods agreement. They claim there's no political will –but that's the result of politicians and billionaire newspaper owners telling everyone the problem is benefit fraud, estimated at just 0.6% of claims.
Politicians say they can't do anything without an international agreement. In fact if one country takes a lead in closing down it's tax havens, public opinion in others will demand they follow. The UK, which allows tax havens in the Square Mile (governed only by the City of London Corporation), Jersey and the Cayman Islands, could take the lead.
Duncan McFarlane,
Beanshields Farm,
Braidwood,
Carluke.
Are we expected to believe that someone in the 50p tax bracket on earnings over £150,000 may pay up to five times more in tax when the rate is reduced to 45p and that someone who sees the 40p tax band reduced from £42,476 to £41,450 will think this likely or equitable? I'm glad that Mr Osborne has removed the disincentive I had of aspiring to upwards of £150,000.
R Russell Smith,
96 Milton Road,
Kilbirnie.
Targeting the PAYE system (noting also that National Insurance contributions drop from 12% to 2% on earnings above £42,000) and in particular people with medium to good earnings while treating the rich like listed buildings is hardly surprising.
Twas ever thus. But, by George, pointedly provoking the pensioners is, and petty minded with it.
David Easton,
30 Pullar Avenue,
Bridge of Allan.
The hysteria generated by the Granny Tax is as unfounded as George Osborne's presentational and policy skills are incompetent ("Blow as 'granny tax' aims to raise £3.3bn", The Herald, March 22).
Why on earth should pensioners such as I (and much wealthier bankers, NHS consultants et al who may indeed still be working) benefit from a higher tax-free allowance than the hard-working population, many with young families, in addition to paying no National Insurance, purely due to our age?
Whatever the original justification was for age-related allowances, it no longer exists.
What the Coalition should have announced in June 2010 was an early move to incorporating our tax-free cash benefits like the winter fuel allowance into the taxable state pension, linking that pension to both the tax-free allowance and the minimum wage for 18 to 20-year-olds, amalgamating income tax and NIC, extending VAT to many VAT-free items and improving the progressive tax structure.
John Birkett,
12 Horseleys Park,
St Andrews.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article