Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

The hunt is On.
Sponsored by
Can you track down Scotland's wildest beastie?
 
 
Friday, 5th December 2008 Change Date

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Salmond's local income tax'will hamper bid to retain HBOS jobs'



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 26 September 2008
THE local income tax proposed by Alex Salmond will damage Scotland's chances of retaining jobs and headquarters functions when Lloyds TSB takes over HBOS, Labour said yesterday.
Iain Gray, the new Scottish Labour leader, used his first confrontational exchange with Mr Salmond at First Minister's Questions to demand the Scottish Government drop its local income tax (LIT) plans.

Mr Salmond insisted, however, that not only did Scots want a local income tax but the "vast majority" of workers in the financial sector would be better off under the new levies.

This was Mr Gray's second appearance at First Minister's Questions since he succeeded Wendy Alexander earlier this month, but it was the first time he and Mr Salmond had clashed on policy.

Last week, the chamber was united in trying to find out what would happen following the HBOS deal and all the party leaders stayed away from party- political attacks.

By yesterday, that consensus had disappeared and Mr Gray used the takeover to lambast the SNP government's controversial plans for a replacement for the council tax.

In an assured and combative performance, Mr Gray said Mr Salmond had promised to "strain every sinew" to retain HBOS headquarters functions.

"We have to make Scotland as attractive as possible to do that," Mr Gray said.

"There is a consensus that his Scottish national income tax plan will do the opposite."

The Scottish Government has promised to push ahead with its local income tax plans in the face of heavy criticism, particularly from the business community.

The CBI has said the tax could damage hopes of growing the economy and attracting talent to Scotland, and other business bodies and unions agreed.

"There is a consensus," Mr Gray said. "Will the First Minister strengthen Scotland's case for the HBOS HQ right here, right now, by committing today to ditch his damaging local income tax plans?"

The First Minister replied: "Local income tax carries a consensus support of the Scottish people. We will see in due course whether it carries the support of the Scottish Parliament.

"The vast majority of workers in the financial sector would also benefit from fairer and local taxation.

"Iain Gray should join the consensus of the Scottish people, who think the days of the council tax should be over and local income tax should come in," he added. Mr Gray retorted that recent polls suggested only 46 per cent supported the new tax, not the "consensus" of the Scottish people, Mr Salmond claimed.

"There are thousands of jobs at stake," Mr Gray said. "Those workers are concerned that if we fail to keep those jobs here in Scotland, they won't be paying any tax, certainly not income tax, because their jobs will have been lost.

"I say to the First Minister, think of the signal this would send to Lloyds TSB and to those workers about how serious he is about making this case.

"Does he care enough, is he big enough? He said he would strain every sinew, but in reality, he is standing idly by on this. I ask again – will he drop the discredited local income tax now?"

Mr Salmond denied he could be accused of doing little over the past week. "The reality is that we have sought to build a consensus," he said.

The HBOS jobs and HQ issue was "absolutely fundamental", said Mr Salmond.

"I think I should demand as First Minister for this chamber to unite behind the positive Scottish case we are presenting to HBOS."

The current state of affairs had come about under the watch of UK authorities, he claimed.

Mr Salmond said: "How much better it would be, in making the argument to any corporate headquarters, if we could make the argument for a competitive corporation tax in Scotland that would bring jobs, investment and real decision-making into this economy."

The full article contains 652 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 25 September 2008 9:13 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Halifax Bank of Scotland
 
1

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeen/shire 26/09/2008 00:15:08
So there we are. Gray becomes Wendy.

I thought for a minute he would approach things differently. But in the midst of this financial crisis he chooses to manufacture a link between HBOS and LIT (or Scottish National Income Tax as Gray calls it. Nice soundbite.)

Back to playground politics where politicians try to satisfy their own egos, while 'national taxpayers' pick up the cost of their hard-earned salaries.
2

Royster,

26/09/2008 00:17:05
Why would a bank puts its HQ in Scotland if its senior management will be worse off under Local Income Tax? Okay for call centres I suppose but not for HQs. Salmond is dumbing down Scotland though he plays to gallery by running around to make it look as if he is doing something useful.
3

alba nach,

Tarbert 26/09/2008 00:21:17
Hamish must have been watching a different FMQs to the one I watched today. No mention of Gray being put firmly in his place. No mention of the spectacular own goal over nuclear power.
4

Jwil,

26/09/2008 00:22:25
Grays HBOS/LIT strategy:

A red herring or a red faced herring.
5

Rufus T. Firefly,

26/09/2008 00:25:57
Royster, senior lloyds management are simply paying Salmond lip service. Nothing more.

There is no way that the HQ will come to Scotland. Indeed why should it? London is the obvious choice.

As for safeguarding Scottish Jobs, thats a non starter as well. Why should Scottish jobs be treated as a priority over English and Welsh ones? The answer is, they shouldn't.
6

PJ07,

26/09/2008 00:33:25
Scottish jobs should be a priority for SCOTTISH politicians.

ROYSTER/RUFUS there is medicatio9n you can get for your psychosis you know.
7

Col. Blimp­IV*,

26/09/2008 00:46:02
Once it dawns on the Unionists that nobody will shed tears over the LIT bill faced by people who "earn" more in a day than they do in a week and probably still wouldn't if even they thought there would be no ceiling on LIT, unlike the CC.

And if any thought that, it would be proof that they are incapable of thought.


He will be telling us that LIT is Poll Tax mkII and it will cripple the low earners.

OH!...they already have.

Hmm...I take it nobody believed them.

8

Edward,

26/09/2008 00:52:02
Its obvious that Labour MSP's in Holyrood have now been breifed to link LIT as much as possible with the HBOS story, regardless of how stupid they sound in doing so. We had Wendy going of on one the day before, which sounded idiotic. Now we have Iain Gray making a bigger idiot of himself than usual. Dont they realise they are making themselves look idiots, when they start to go of at a tangent, when trying to talk about HBOS and how to ensure jobs are secured.
9

Edward,

26/09/2008 01:00:32
Last nights Newsnight Scotland decended into farce, when Labour's David Whitton managed to get the soundbite of 'Nationalist Tax' in when trying to talk about saving HBOS. Even Gordon Brewer thought he was stupid to try and link the two.
The bigger idiot however was Mike Rumbles of the Libdems, being beamed from Aberdeen (safe distance), who realy became an embaressment as he couldnt stick to the HBOS story, but started in on talking of the Libdems proposed 2p tax cut!. Even when reminded that he was supposed to be talking about what his views were on the Scottish Goverenments efforts on HBOS, he ignored and continued like some deaf uncle that babbles on incoherently - o the extent it was noticable that David Whittom and SNP's Alex Neil seem to share a joke and laughed at Rumbles!
10

Col. Blimp­IV*,

26/09/2008 01:02:18
#5
Rufus T. - " Why should Scottish jobs be treated as a priority over English and Welsh ones?".

If the Scottish Goverment doesn't prioritise the interests of the people who live here...nobody else will.

In fact there would be no point in having a Scottish Government if they didn't.

Ever wondered why the Unionists didn't call their wee Mutual Admiration Society "The Scottish Government"?

The answer is; It was neither Scottish nor a Government.
11

Edward,

26/09/2008 01:45:27
#14
What on earth are you on about? Forgotten your medicine or something as your comments,like Labour bare any relation to the story
12

JamesMc,

Asia 26/09/2008 03:24:12
Shame on Labour again....trying to make a political issue out of saving a Scottish Institution.

The only consenus here is that the Scottish people do not want the council tax: SEE recent You Gov poll for Sunday Times:

Alex Salmond has announced that he wishes to replace Council Tax with an increase of 3p in the pound Income Tax, so that the standard rate would rise from 20p to 23p in the pound. Do you support or oppose this measure?
Support 46
Oppose 31
Don't know 23
13

Royster,

26/09/2008 03:29:09
Salmond's policies are counter-intuitive. Set up your HQ in Scotland then your well-qualified, high earners can pay more tax than they would in England. It's going to go down a storm at board level that one. And Salmond's a 'trained' economist don't you know?
14

Richardinho,

26/09/2008 04:08:55
This pathetic posturing from Labour will actually make it more difficult to try and save HBOS jobs. Why give Lloyds TSB an excuse to get rid of the Bank of Scotland altogether? This really beggars belief from the labour party.
15

Theologist,

Auckland 26/09/2008 04:43:11
#9 Wuddled Fords........may forget their sums, but not their old Genesis records, it seems
16

donald,

glasgow 26/09/2008 04:43:16
I hope Gray's gumboil gets better.
17

Dougie Douglas,

Brisbane 26/09/2008 04:54:11
You have to have a bit of a laugh at the unionists and their desperation here.

LIT - 'Scotland Income Tax' - LOL

How about the 'Scotland zero rates benefit'.

Disengeniously playing with words. It's this attaitude that will prevent Scotalnd from having a Scandanavian type liberal democracy more than anything else.

Partisan self interest - shamefull
18

Royster,

26/09/2008 05:26:05
#23. Dougie, the council tax is peanuts compared to an extra 3% on income tax for a high-earner. It pushes Scotland's tax rate to 43% compared to 40% in the rest of the UK.
19

Mercutio,

FALKIRK 26/09/2008 05:56:25
#24 Please provide an example of your calculation,I make 3% of £100,000 £3000 I pay £2100 on a realtively modest property at the moment.
20

Royster,

26/09/2008 06:14:12
#25. What about dividend payments?
21

Royster,

26/09/2008 06:15:29
#25. What about bonus payments plus those of wives? It's not as if the people running Loyds TSB can't make a case for London is it?
22

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/09/2008 06:22:19
25

LIT is a replacement tax Royster not an additional tax as you are so clearly trying so hard to imply.
Anybody earning more than just over 74000 per annum will end up paying more sure enough but everybody earning below that sum pays less over all tax.
Thats what makes LIT a more fairer more social and more palatable tax than the council tax added onto income tax.

But you knew all this already the LIT arguement has been done over dozens of times already
23

Royster,

26/09/2008 06:25:44
#28. People who decide where HQs go don't give a stuff about fairness otherwise they wouldn't be at the top of their profession. Ony deluded idealists think differently.
24

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/09/2008 06:26:07
26

What about them? dividend payments are charged under corporation tax didnt you know that?

Been over all this.

What about bonus payments?
25

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/09/2008 06:27:31
29

Oh right we are back to personal opinion again as a base for arguing company policy well Royster your entitiled to yours.
26

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/09/2008 06:36:40
24

And would you believe we had New Duncan on here the other day swearing blind that the high earners would be the only ones to benefit from LIT.
You unionist trolls cant even agree on your anti LIT spin but then it doesnt matter does it the only real problem with it is its going to cause a major disparity in tax levels north and south of the border with those down south being much worse off.
Another poll tax type rebellion is on its way and thats the only reason Labour are fighting it.
27

Richardinho,

26/09/2008 06:40:02
"People who decide where HQs go don't give a stuff about fairness otherwise they wouldn't be at the top of their profession. Ony deluded idealists think differently."

So you agree that Local Income Tax would be a fairer system?
It seems that the Labour party is simply taking the side of the rich against the interests of the poor who would benefit from LIT.
Plus ca change!
28

Royster,

26/09/2008 06:42:13
#32. I wouldn't call it 'spin'.. simple logic may be. Making the bosses pay more income tax compared to the rest of the UK is hardly an incentive for them to come to Edinburgh is it... especially when Lloyds TSB already has an HQ in London? Of course, this may not appear fair but we are living in the real world not hoppity bunny land like most SNP supporters.
29

Mcsnagpile,

26/09/2008 06:44:19
What Alex should realise is the BOS is an antique piece. I have been a loyal customer for many years despite the lack of services. Multi currency account –ye wot. Until recently I had to have a Lloyd debit account to use overseas. My offshore account is an expensive joke. An Indian Brummy with milk bottom glasses as a rep for the BOS is an insult to the Scottish nation. Maybe the Scottish are really Indian Brummies in disguise— nobody seems worried. The property crisis is not a cause but a symptom.

Get rid of Halifax, Lloyds is a dinosaur They should be getting in tow with a bank like HSBC( or a major European bank), that can give us multi national 21st century services and still preserve the dignity of the BOS—something that HSBC needs.
30

Colin Wilson,

Aberdeen 26/09/2008 06:47:38
I can't see anything in Iain Gray's comments where he explains what the connection actually is between LIT snd the decision about HBOS.

Unionists often claim that LIT will raise less revenue than the council tax. I don't really understand why it should be, that a lower tax burden would deter businesses from operating here.
31

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/09/2008 06:49:05
34

But Royster if they stay up here they wont have to pay council tax.
LIT is a replacement tax not an added tax.
In fact the bosses can own 2 or more homes in Scotland and not be penalised for it.
They can spend their massive profits and salaries on massive homes and not be penalised for it.
Now that would sound attractive to me where I a boss with money to spend.
32

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/09/2008 06:52:36
34

And another benefit of LIT not mentioned so far is the benefit it would have on the housing market.
People can now buy the best property they can afford without being penalised for it.
33

Royster,

26/09/2008 06:53:25
#37. They can stay in England, still buy the houses and make even more.
34

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/09/2008 06:56:31
36

Thats because there isnt one new Labour and the tories are terrified that they will have to reform the local taxes down south Whent the benefits of LIT kick in in Scotland or risk another poll tax type rebellion and that on top of the fact that it effectively takes the local tax burden away from those who can least afford it and puts it onto those who can afford it.
Very unconservative.
35

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/09/2008 06:57:31
39

But if they stay in England they get hit with a double whammy of LIT and council tax.
36

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/09/2008 06:58:28
41

Actually thats not true they wont get charged LIT at all but they will get charged council tax.
37

GalacticCannibal,

Murrieta CA for more WAR VOTE McCain 26/09/2008 07:00:30
23
Dougie Douglas,
Brisbane

Hey, are U one of those dudes, who abandoned Scotland and then hypocritically tongue lashes all that is not of a SNP mind set.

If all the Scots did what u did, abandon the ship of Scotland.

The country would be filled with roaming wild life, and the Queen and her mutant gang, would have it as their own hunting, shootin, and fishin playground.

People who abandon their country like U did . are like the people who do not vote . They have no right to bitch about the elected government in their original country.

Chill dude U can change nothing .

GC
38

Richardinho,

26/09/2008 07:04:35
"it effectively takes the local tax burden away from those who can least afford it and puts it onto those who can afford it."

That's it. This is not a case of 'taxing the rich until the pips squeak', this is a case of people paying according to their ability to pay, which strikes me as a fair way of doing things.

Royster is essentially saying that the wealthy should be taxed less to encourage wealth creation, as if these people are the only ones capable of creating wealth.

Having a more even system of taxation will encourage greater numbers of people to invest and start businesses, and apart from anything else, a successful business needs customers with money to spend.
39

MWM,

Argyll 26/09/2008 07:08:44
Usual cr*p we have come to expect from the Hootsmon. Hamish MacDonut has now obviously been given a new job as Iain Gray's Spin Doctor.

40

Rufus T. Firefly,

26/09/2008 07:18:34
Hey Parcel, you need to get yourself a life. You sit on here 24 hours a day commenting on every story going.

It cannot be very healthy. Have you never thought of taking up a hobby or even getting out the house for half an hour?

41

scottishcoffindodgerno1,

Tram City 26/09/2008 07:18:51
what would ian gray put in the place of council tax.Bad mouthing the Snp polices is ok ,but only if you have polices that are better and will work to the benifit of the scottish people.I am a pensioner and i will pay zero under LIT,so as the the gerbil would say
BRING IT ON.Gray by name GRAY by nature
42

argonaut,

east lothian 26/09/2008 07:26:06
Truly - there are some selfish gits on here.
Since i was a kid in this country local taxation has always been an issue. rates , poll tax , council tax - none popular with the general joe public and none of them destined to last for one very simple reason - scottish joe public want to percieve that the monies they give in local taxation is at least fair. tax based on our ability to pay ! its a universal concept. property has never or shall be an indicator of the monies an individual actually has and property certainly does not dictate what local services that person/persons utilise - humans do !!
taxation based on ability to pay is nearest we can come to fairness. I was hoping Gray would be his own man at holyrood, forlorn hope - his strings like wendy's are defo being pulled from num10. the labour strategists have clicked - LIT in scotland = more happy scots = labour get an even bigger kicking. gray was right on one thing. the snp would happily watch cameron win num10 and he will. england will vote him in..ironic really - after all this time - of all external factors - it shall be the english that do more for scottish independence. cameron knows scotland is lost to his party forever, strategically they have long given up on us. cameron will be the next PM, english votes for english issues or english parliament follows,union fractures even more - shortly after - scottish referendum takes place. scotland once again becomes a sovereign country and bans trident etc etc etc. no brainer really
43

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/09/2008 07:33:16
46

A life? like trolling for the Scotsman under multi logons? that kind of life?
44

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/09/2008 07:33:40
46

I am out of the house now.
45

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/09/2008 07:36:15
47

New Labour plan to upgrade the council tax by changing the band levels upward of course to refect todays house prices relative to the house prices of 1991 and to increace the tax annually above the rate of inflation as usual.
So I can see the case they are building against LIT I really can.
46

Montford's Jaicket,

26/09/2008 07:37:29
LIT will cost Scotland the HBOS HQ - NotLabour tells us so - it must be true. Unfortunately, NotLabour, to my memory, have told us many things over the years - they told us they wold be tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime. They told us they would listen to the public's viewpoint. There is long list of things NotLabour have said, starting with Phony Tony's list of things he would do in 1997-2001.

Why should we listen to - or worse still believe - ANYTHING that Labour say to us any more? All I want our NotLabour PM to tell us is that he is calling a General Election. Fact is NotLabour won't stop telling us things.Fact is, they are not to be trusted. NotLabour. NotHonest. NotWanted. By anyone.
47

Royster,

26/09/2008 07:39:52
#41. Not if they own second homes in Scotland.
48

Linda,

Edinburgh 26/09/2008 07:41:43
Disgraceful performance by Labour and Lib Dems to break Scottish Parliament consensus behind Alex Salmond's sterling efforts on behalf of HBOS workers and customers.

The case for or against LIT or Lib Dems nonsensical idea to reduce Income Tax by 6p (Clegg's 4p plus 2p in Scotland) which will take £2.4 billion from Scottish Government's budget have no bearing on saving HQ functions which are already happily located in Edinburgh.
49

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/09/2008 07:44:03
53

Are you talking about an Independent Scotland?
Why on earth would anybody have first home in a country which is taxed and a second home in a country which isnt?
50

Proximaking,

Aberdeen 26/09/2008 07:46:16
What we need are lower taxes not different taxes. A huge proportion of council monies go to social work departments that create dependancy and enforcing a halving of staff numbers in these areas every year for the next ten years should see us down to less than a hundred of these worthless jobs, then in the final year we can ban the job altogether. If you want to help people then lead by example and sitting in a non-job as social workers do and stealing money from the taxpayers isn't setting a good example. Stop all payments of tax monies to single mothers including automatic housing provision and see how quickly they get a man into their childrens lives and the children's behaviour improves at home and at school. In short get the government off of families backs from taxation to the interfering busibodies of social work and things will only improve. Neither Salmond nor Brown seem to understand this extremely simple fact. Luckily given the world financial "disaster" they will have no choice in the matter.
51

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 26/09/2008 07:47:31
Salmond must produce solid proof that most Scots want local income tax (as he claims). There is no evidence, so far.

ANY tax that punishes wealth creation is STUPID!
52

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/09/2008 07:49:30
56

What we need are lower taxes not different taxes

With LIT yer getting both unless you earn over 74k per annum. But I agree we need to cut taxes even more our tax burden is a nightmare and we pay far too many different types of taxation.
53

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/09/2008 07:50:26
57

Where was the solid proof for introducing the poll tax and council taxes? and what did it prove?
54

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/09/2008 07:51:49
57

Council tax punishes wealth creation doesnt it?
When property assets increace in value the tax on them increaces as well.
No of course your not an idiot.
55

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/09/2008 07:53:15
57

And what about LVT? wouldnt an increace in land value not also increace the tax value on that land?
56

Richardinho,

26/09/2008 08:11:28
'Salmond must produce solid proof that most Scots want local income tax (as he claims). There is no evidence, so far.'

The proof you require is the last election.

"ANY tax that punishes wealth creation is STUPID!"

So you too believe that only the wealthy can create wealth?
57

Jacqueline Hyde ,

On the shelf 26/09/2008 08:14:35
#62
Dave, where on earth are you going to find a "well respected" financial guru?

Every day it becomes clearer that the current problems are the result of financial terrorism by the financiers - aided and abetted by the politicians.

Line the lot up against the wall!
58

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/09/2008 08:15:17
62

Its all irrelevant without Independence.
59

Rufus T. Firefly,

26/09/2008 08:15:30
Hey Parcel I do not use multi Logons, I am always the much hated Rufus.

Are you posting from work then?

You should tell them to invest in a spell checker. Anyone who cannnot spell 'increase' could probably make a very good case for one.
60

Royster,

26/09/2008 08:16:07
#55. Obviously if the big Lloyds TSB boss works in London at the current HQ he and his wife will pay only 40% income tax on their salaries, dividends, rental income, bonuses + worldwide income. He will also pay Council tax on his home in England. Should he wish, he could still buy a second home in Scotland and pay nothing towards the local community as, being resident in London, he will not have to pay Scottish LIT. If he moved the HQ to Scotland - I assume he would be resident in Scotland though he could commute from Berwick - he would then have to pay 43% on all his different sources of income which would be thousands more than he saves on council tax. As a wealthy person, he may be able to afford this but why would he if he has no link to Scotland? Of course, the boss of Lloyds TSB only has one vote so the SNP doesn't care. The SNP doesn't care about Scottish jobs being lost, it just wants votes.
61

It's me!,

26/09/2008 08:19:40
Labour want to replace council tax with a property based tax. In other words they want to tinker around the edges of the present tax and give it a new name. Not good enough! Labour MSP's are closed to anything other than their own agenda believing only they can have good ideas. Well, others have good ideas but I haven't seen Labour come up with any good ideas for some time now. They are stale, yesterdays people, and need to be binned.
62

Cramondo,

Edinburgh 26/09/2008 08:19:45
By calling a tax levied at Sotland level a "local" income tax, are the Nats saying that Scotland is a locality, not a nation?

I appreciate that whatever the chief banker, Mr Salmond, says must be right, and it is treasonous treacherous quisling-ery to challenge him, but still....
63

Royster,

26/09/2008 08:20:36
I think expensive Berwick property will benefit the most from LIT. It would make sense for wealthy Scots to move there.
64

Royster,

26/09/2008 08:22:02
And they could still claim they weren't leaving Scotland.
65

Jacqueline Hyde ,

Back on topic 26/09/2008 08:23:12
Political hot air from Grey-Gray doesn't really impress anyone.

There's a whole barrowload of reasons why local income tax will prove to be too difficult and too expensive to collect - for a start, almost 20% of Scottish residents are employed by companies that base their payroll systems in England and are, therefore, taxed through English tax offices. Unless the entire UK tax system is re-organised to accommodate the Scottish tax, the Scottish Government will need to set up a whole new tax collecting structure. The mind boggles!
66

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/09/2008 08:25:13
71 72

Oh aye no doubt Berwick is set to become the new London.
67

Richardinho,

26/09/2008 08:25:27
#73 But the collection system doesn't have to change, only the rate at which people pay.
68

Richardinho,

26/09/2008 08:25:27
#73 But the collection system doesn't have to change, only the rate at which people pay.
69

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/09/2008 08:27:02
73

That a load of cack thats already been brought up here at least a dozen times. LIT is easier to collect than council tax or poll tax ever was. Its just 3p added onto an already collected income tax system which will be earmarked for local spending.
70

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/09/2008 08:27:29
73

And its harder to avoid.
71

Royster,

26/09/2008 08:31:43
#74. Well it's quite a nice place with a good rail link and if you can save thousands of pounds by moving there, why not? I'm talking about Scottish millionaires of course. You may even see Souter sneaking off there. Of course, the Nats couldn't accuse him of abandoning the country.
72

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 26/09/2008 08:35:35
#67 It's absolutely hilarious that you're attacking this issue with such terrier-like persistence. You SERIOUSLY think that a bank would make a decision on the positioning of its HQ based on whether the chief exec - people paid in the MILLIONS - might have to find an extra £2000 in tax?

Seriously?

Is that truly and honestly your position?

Of all the things a bank might consider when making such a decision, you reckon a personal extra tax expense for senior management of about 0.1% is going to be the thing that swings it?

Are you drunk?
73

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 26/09/2008 08:36:50
(Bearing in mind, of course, that the SNP's position is that an independent Scotland would also have much lower Corporation Tax.)
74

Richard Lionheart,

26/09/2008 08:39:41
Strange, when Iain Gray was Enterprise Minister, I don’t recall him thinking that Government policy could have any adverse effect on the Employment market. Funny the way opinions change in opposition.
75

Calum Crubag,

26/09/2008 08:46:21
SALMOND'S LOCAL INCOME TAX WILL 'STRANGLE ALL NEW BORN BABIES'.

By Pravda Labourrag
76

Royster,

26/09/2008 08:46:29
#80. A lower corporation tax would trump an income decision but that's not currently an option whereas scrapping the LIT is. But you assume that an independent England would not match - or even undercut - a cut in corporation tax by an independent Scotland. Of course, the people who decide on the location of the HQ are the extremely wealthy board members and their decision has to be approved by shareholders. Given the current set up with LIT, Scotland is simply less attractive especially as Lloyds TSB currently has a perfectly good HQ in London.
77

Calum Crubag,

26/09/2008 08:47:45
LOCAL INCOME TAX MEANS THAT RICH SCOTS WILL NOW BE POORER THAN ERITREANS

By Peter MacMaThoin
78

Royster,

26/09/2008 08:48:09
#80. We're not talking about 2,000 quid. For the very wealthy, we're talking about savings of tens of thousands if not more.
79

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/09/2008 08:48:18
80

No he is a troll he doesnt post anything unless it has a wind up value.
80

It's me!,

26/09/2008 08:49:27
Cancel council tax UK wide and add a levy to be collected with vat. That way everyone will pay a share according to their means irrespective of income or dividends. Most council spending comes from central government anyway and this sacred cow that an element must come locally is just plain daft. Hundreds of local authority collection offices can close (except for collecting arrears)and the staff put on jobs where they actually provide services which is what they are supposed to do. Buy a Ferrari then pay a bit extra. Buy a rugby or football top then pay a little bit extra. Hard to avoid and much, much fairer.
81

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 26/09/2008 08:51:32
#84 So you ARE still sticking to the line that such a major decision would be made on the basis of a 0.1% extra personal tax burden on a tiny handful of already absurdly wealthy senior managers?

Honestly? You're really telling us you believe that?

You seem extraordinarily confused on the other matters. Why is lower corporation tax "not an option" yet LIT is "current"? Unless I've missed a news story, we don't have LIT yet, and we have a minority government that isn't capable of forcing it through. Should we ever get a majority SNP government, it seems highly likely that we'd be independent then or very shortly afterwards, enabling the Corporation Tax cuts to be made.
82

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/09/2008 08:52:29
84

Royster all of that is your own personal opinion based on an anti SNP bias nothing more.
You can neither prove any of that produce any precedence when or where this has happened in the past nor back it up with written statements from HBOS management stating they are going to move down south because of LIT.
Your post is worthless as anything other than party political bias opinion.
83

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 26/09/2008 08:54:12
#86 "We're not talking about 2,000 quid. For the very wealthy, we're talking about savings of tens of thousands if not more."


Yeah, because these people already pay their full tax obligations, of course. They certainly don't employ armies of accountants to slash their tax bills to fractions of what they should be.

To the "very wealthy", £10,000 is a single tankful of fuel for the yacht. (Handy trivia fact that I picked up watching Top Trumps, fans of local colour.) It's the equivalent of the loose change the rest of us lose down the back of the sofa.
84

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/09/2008 08:55:03
84

In fact you cant produce a single instance of any company planning to pull out of Scotland due to LIT.
85

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/09/2008 08:56:49
84

Name one company in Scotland planning on pulling out due to LIT legislation?
86

Royster,

26/09/2008 08:57:20
#89. Corporation tax is set nationally. The bank will make the decision in the interest of the shareholders. Scotland has no advantage over London and it would place an extra financial burden on senior staff who move there. Also if an independent Scotland lowered corporation tax, what would happen if England abolished Corporation tax altogether?
87

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/09/2008 08:58:53
94

What if? What if a terrorist organisation planted a dirty H bomb in London?
What if?....................
88

Duncan in Edinburgh,

26/09/2008 09:00:53
Let's be clear about something. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with the notion of a local income tax to raise revenues for local spending on public services. There are increased risks of tax avoidance with a homogeneous personal tax system (i.e. one that is based entirely on one variable - income - rather than spread out across multiple variables - like income and property/land ownership) but this isn't necessarily a show stopper. And progressive tax is a good thing, as it takes from each according to their ability and gives to each according to their need.

So let's not allow the SNP to be the champions of "local income tax", and end up arguing against that broad concept. That is what they want, and it is an elephant trap for their opposition.

What we need to focus on, as Iain Gray rightly has, is the SNP's specific proposal. It is not a locally set or locally collected tax. It is a national tax, which will divorce local authorities from any sort of fiscal responsibility and allow them to simply point elsewhere if criticised for their budgeting.

It is also a tax cut for the rich. To generate the same revenue as council tax currently generates, the SNP's LIT would need to be set at approximately 4.5%. This would still ensure that the poor, pensioners and low earners - the people the SNP claims to want to help - would pay a fraction of what they pay today. But it would properly redistribute that cost to the rich.

What the SNP propose instead is to introduce the LIT, and then give the rich a tax cut by cutting the rate from 4.5% to 3%. Let's be clear, this tax cut has little effect on the poor, pensioners and low earners, who would already be paying nothing or little because of the progressive nature of the tax. This cut is for the rich, cutting thousands of pounds off what their bills should be if the SNP were honest and introduced a tax which was revenue equivalent to the Council Tax.

But even worse, reading John Swinney's consultation it is most
89

Duncan in Edinburgh,

26/09/2008 09:01:25
likely a public service cut for everyone. Here's what he says about the shortfall in income (my comments in brackets):

"The amount raised through local income tax will not be identical to that raised through the council tax. [What a lovely piece of spin - you mean it will be less! There's no chance whatever of it being more. Why not say so?] There would need to be an adjustment to local authority funding after the change to take account of the difference and ensure that public services are properly funded. [Note what this doesn't say - this adjustment will not make up the difference - it will "take account of" the difference. Again, there's only one way this can go.] This Government has pledged to work with local authorities to provide a stable funding environment to ensure that the people of Scotland can get the vital front-line services they need. [A stable funding environment - not the same amount of funding. This is carefully worded, carefully spun stuff. Be in no doubt as to what it actually means - less money for local services, from a tax pot which will now be totally controlled by central government.]"

There are other, serious problems with the proposal too, aside from the removal of fiscal accountability that local authorities have had for centuries, and the service cuts that will inevitably flow from the tax cuts for the rich.

To be effective, the new national tax increase needs to be applied to the higher rate of income tax as well as the basic rate. The Scottish Parliament currently, under the mandate it was given by the people of Scotland, does not have the right to amend the higher rate of tax.

And moving away from property or land tax does open some seriously large opportunities for tax avoidance (legal, but hugely detrimental to our country) for those able to adjust their financial affairs to put their income and assets into a company structure rather than a personal one. Many of the richest people in Scotland do not pay income tax at al
90

Duncan in Edinburgh,

26/09/2008 09:01:56
[#97 cont'd]

all, and will now fall through the personal taxation gap altogether. And when people do that, the burden of funding public services falls even more heavily on the less rich.

In summary, I know this has been a long post, the SNP's LIT proposal is not the only LIT proposal in town; it is deeply flawed with respect to revenues generated, local accountability, tax cutting for the rich, tax avoidance increasing, and public service cutting.

That is why I don't support it, and neither should anyone else who has the interests of Scotland at heart.
91

suchaparcelofrogues,

Scotland 26/09/2008 09:02:01
94

"Scotland has no advantage over London"

Scotland generates more income than it spends.
London spends more income than it generates.
92

bluehead,

edinburgh 26/09/2008 09:03:09
there is a grey area around Mr Grey,it would be best to take anything he says with a pinch of salt,any thing said by members of this labour lot,must be treated with suspicion,for we have already seen the diabolical mess they would get us into,
then there will be the inevitable toadying to Brown,who just happens to be the worse prime minister of all time,nothing will improve while the labour lot are around