Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


25 reasons why Alex should drop local income tax

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.

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: 04 September 2008
1
Local income tax (LIT) will leave a £750 million financial black hole in Scotland. Others have suggested it could be as high as £1.3 billion.

YVETTE COOPER, CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY

2

LIT will make Scotland the highest-taxed part of the UK and this might encourage businesses to leave.

INSTITUTE OF DIRECTORS

3

There will be serious service cuts at council level unless local income tax is set at 4.5p or higher.

THE LABOUR PARTY

4

LIT may be illegal under the provisions of the Scotland Act because it is unclear whether a local tax can be replaced by a national tax.

PROFESSOR RICHARD KERLEY, OF QUEEN MARGARET UNIVERSITY

5

Replacing an unfair tax with an unworkable tax will cause more misery than we can know.

PATRICK HARVIE, GREEN PARTY

6

There will be a 'damaging' impact on service personnel, who would have to pay the new tax in full, but currently have their council tax reduced. This could lower morale and cause yet more recruitment problems.

BOB AINSWORTH, ARMED FORCES MINISTER

7

There will be serious anomalies over people living in England but working in Scotland. There are also concerns that people may register as living in England to avoid paying.

THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS

8

Hard-pressed students, who are currently exempt from the council tax, would have to pay.

THE NATIONAL UNION OF STUDENTS

9

Scottish firms would be placed at a competitive disadvantage to companies in other parts of the UK because LIT additions to wage packets would be passed on to customers.

SCOTTISH CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE

10

LIT will take £70 million from vital city council services which will lead to severe cuts.

GLASGOW CITY COUNCIL

11

The PAYE system does not easily deal with taxpayers who receive income from different sources, including pensioners receiving pensions from different employers or those who have various part-time jobs – this will particularly affect those on low incomes who will be exposed to incorrect PAYE codes, and these practical issues should not be underestimated.

THE LAW SOCIETY OF SCOTLAND

12

Regardless of the rate of tax chosen, there will be uncertainty as to the yield that can be obtained, as revenues derived from income taxes can be more volatile.

SCOTTISH COUNCIL FOR DEVELOPMENT AND INDUSTRY

13

LIT would be technically complex and challenging to implement because of the complexities of tax law, and trying to sort out what would happen to the £400 million council tax benefit.

THE CHARTERED INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC FINANCE AND ACCOUNTANCY

14

Investors and businesses who are thinking of coming to Scotland will be scared away because of the extra income tax.

CBI SCOTLAND

15

LIT probably breaks European law by removing control of raising local finances from councils. It could break Article 9 of the European charter of local self-government, which guarantees the right of councils to raise a large part of their own finances.

PROFESSOR CHRIS HIMSWORTH, OF EDINBURGH UNIVERSITY

16

Wealthy people who have unearned income from sources like share dividends can avoid LIT whilst poorer people would have to pay.

THE SCOTTISH TRADES UNION CONGRESS

17

The UK tax system does not give across-the-board allowances for disability and, in the absence of such allowances, the burden of LIT will be higher on disabled people than on the general body of taxpayers.

LOW INCOMES TAX REFORM GROUP

18

LIT will be more intrusive into people's lives because it would require far greater knowledge of their personal circumstances than a property tax would.

THE INSTITUTE OF REVENUES, RATING AND VALUATION

19

At present, a cohort of carers are currently "disregarded" (treated as not living in the property) when calculating council tax. Households with multiple taxpayers will end up paying more and this has the potential to include more carers who are not currently liable for council tax.

CARERS SCOTLAND

20

The £281 million of savings that need to be made to create a 3p local income tax could be used instead to reduce the burden of the council tax.

THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY

21

LIT would bring unwelcome extra bureaucracy and cost to businesses because of all the extra paperwork created in sorting out employees' income tax. Lib Dem proposals for different rates for different areas would make it even worse.

THE FEDERATION OF SMALL BUSINESSES

22

Families will be worse off, or there will be cuts in public services, because the 3p rate will not be enough to fund current service levels.

UNISON

23

Water and sewerage charges are collected by local authorities on behalf of Scottish Water – the consultation did not present any proposals on how such charges will be set and collected under LIT.

SOCIETY OF LOCAL AUTHORITY CHIEF EXECUTIVES

24

LIT would be bad for the environment because it will take away the flexibility needed to bring in specific charges for rubbish collection.

THE POLICY INSTITUTE

25

The SNP's centralising LIT proposal reduces the lack of control that councils have over local finances.

SOUTH LANARKSHIRE COUNCIL

SALMOND'S VISION: MORE COVERAGE

Defiant Salmond ignores barrage of flak over tax

Every bill and what it means for you

Analysis: LIT could be the biggest gamble yet

Alex Salmond: My plans for a safer, stronger, greener, wealthier Scotland

Leader: Reach consensus before ditching council tax

The full article contains 891 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

Gregor Addison,

Glasgow 04/09/2008 00:14:42
Surely it should be 26 - "because David Maddox and the Scotsman don't like it". But as usual there's no investigation of the alternatives. It's put up and shut up from the Scotsman.
2

Peeablo,

UKSSR 04/09/2008 00:15:09
25 reasons ??? I noticed there were no quotes from pensioners or from 'hard working' families who will benefit from a very unjust taxation.

If it means my hard pressed pensioner mother paying nothing then I'm all for it !!!


Well done 'The Scotsman' the voice of New Labour (Old Tory).
3

Coileach an taobh Tuath,

04/09/2008 00:16:44

25 reasons, your having a laugh right.t

Where's the 26th

Where's the viewpoint of the ScottisT tax Payer?
4

muppetfinder,

04/09/2008 00:17:46
real bias here the rich journalists of the Scotsman pushing their own greedy case it won't be forgotten when JP is taken over. all the organisations against it are either part of unionist labour or run by the rich who would be worse off. To watch the Scotsman siding with them betrays its title. A fairer tax that would remove the madness of the government paying people benefit to pay tax back to the government. Of course it is all rumour if Alex wanted it to fail why bother introducing it. The SNP get more popular and the Scotsman circulation drops while it pushes unpopular labour unionist policies. Not a national paper and advertisers leaving it. It could be a real paper not any more.
5

The Strategist,

04/09/2008 00:18:20
I can think of 5m reasons why we need LIT... They are called the Scottish people.

6

Vivas,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 00:20:54
25 more reasons why The Northbritishman will become a media casualty in the next 12 months.
7

Blarney,

Carnoustie 04/09/2008 00:22:34
What a complete load of boll@£¤s. Let's disregard that the majority of people will be better off.
My house has a joint income of over 60K and I will pay slightly more but my mother and father will pay less, sounds fair enough to me.
The real objection here is that it is going to show major differences between Scotland and England and an already shaky union is about to start cracking apart.
And we all know that that must be preserved no matter what.
8

,

04/09/2008 00:26:27
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
9

Vivas,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 00:27:24
Will the last person to read The Scotsman please turn out the lights.
10

Daily user,

Queensferry 04/09/2008 00:27:58
What a load of ill-considered and unsubstantiated opinion the Johnston Press lackies have cobbled together here. In the interests of balanced reporting, are they going to publish 'PRO' LIT opinions in the next issue of this Unionist rag ?
11

,

04/09/2008 00:28:11
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
12

Resolutions,

04/09/2008 00:36:34
25 reasons against? And no 'fors'? Balanced reporting? Really?

Actually has anyone thought that although there may be more income tax, there is NO COUNCIL TAX.

Therefore a benefit!
13

Royster,

04/09/2008 00:44:14
Well, at least the LIT will push up property prices in Berwick and Carlisle. What a mess. The best quote is about PAYE from the Law Society of Scotland. As usual, the SNP just hasn't thought things through - a bit like the poll tax really. Looks good on paper but implementation is something else. The SNP is too 'top down'. It's basically just Alex Salmond and his willing acolytes.
14

KennethM,

Livingston 04/09/2008 00:44:39
This is one of the worst articles I have ever read in The Scotsman.

First of all, if we forget about the implementation technicalities and just concentrate on the principal... if property taxation is so good, then why don't we replace all income tax with it? Then the super-rich could pay virtually no tax in the UK by having only a small apartment here. Such a proposition would be considered ridiculous, but why draw the line arbitrarily between property and income-based taxation like we do at the moment? (It's not as if the majority of local government funding comes from local taxation right now in Scotland anyway.)

Then of course the argument comes, "Well, OK, it might be a worthy idea in principle but it will be a disaster to have a different method of taxation from that which prevails in England" . Please. Stop. Being. So. Utterly. Pathetic. People.

What about every other country in the world which has a different system of taxation from England? Do they not survive? What about the 26 other EU member states who, despite the existence of the European single market, still maintain totally separate tax regimes?

Then of course come the arguments about the administration costs, and the tax potentially being ultra vires, etc, etc, etc. Yes, some of these may be all very well and good, but then why are you not in the same breath also arguing for proper fiscal powers for Holyrood? Instead of having the poverty of ambition which many of you have, why don't you all wake up and realize that Scotland's devolved institutions have the lowest level of fiscal powers of any sub-national government anywhere in the world with as much power in other policy areas. This does not accountable government make.

Oh, and to the FSB, get a grip. Many other countries have taxation on income where the tax rate varies depending on the home address of the taxpayer. Most of the one-time implementation costs of such a system would be borne by the Scottish Government anyway, not direc
15

KennethM,

INVERNESS 04/09/2008 00:45:44
Oh, and to the FSB, get a grip. Many other countries have taxation on income where the tax rate varies depending on the home address of the taxpayer. Most of the one-time implementation costs of such a system would be borne by the Scottish Government anyway, not directly by your members, and, in any case, surely these members already know the address of all their employees, so it really isn't going to add much administrative overhead if a person - or, more likely, a computer program - has to withhold different levels of tax from different employees' salaries depending on their postcode.

Bear in mind that the overall administration cost of local government taxation is likely to actually go down once this system is implemented, as 32 different councils will not require to maintain the infrastructure and staff to send out council tax bills, council tax payment demands, and so on.
16

Tynietiger,

04/09/2008 00:50:18
There are 4 million reasons for the FAIRER local Income Tax based on ability to pay these are the Scottish citizens who will benefit and will for be ever be p*ssed off with Labour and those biased sections of the media which continue to support the hated council tax based on out of date property values.

That is about 1 million voters.

We are a hard working dual income family who will benefit greatly as will our pensioner parents.

Also students would have to earn £13,000 a year to be worse off under Local Income Tax. Their opposition and those of the Trade Unions, the majority of whose members will greatly benefit, are blinded by their political support for the Labour Party.
17

Vivas,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 00:50:40
The NorthBritishman has increasingly rebranded itself as an upmarket Sun. Just exactly what target demographic that represents in Scotland ... is borne out by their circulation figures...

It's absolutely inconcievable that anyone would walk into a newsagents shop and hand over money for it ! I always make a point when friends come back for a visit, that they should buy The Herald ... itself far from perfect ... but still a newspaper for all that.
But this ! THIS !
18

Royster,

04/09/2008 00:54:38
#16. The super-rich could buy property in Scotland and then pay nothing in taxes under LIT if they are not resident whereas, under council tax, they would pay. If you own a property in a place, you should pay something to that community for maintenance etc. Also, abolishing the council tax narrows the tax base and replaces it with over taxation on a different segment of the population - which, incidently, is probably the best qualified and can easily up sticks and go. With LIT, the government is putting on its revenue eggs in one basket - a bit like oil I suppose.
19

Richardinho,

04/09/2008 01:01:54
It is absolutely shameful of the Scotsman to publish such a one sided and biased piece. Of course there are criticisms that can be made of the SNP proposals for Local Income Tax. But on the other hand, there are many things that can be said for it.
Why has the Scotsman given up it's historic role as an impartial and fair reporter of the facts and instead degenerated into flagrant propaganda?
It is scandalous for those of us who have been loyal readers-and customers- of this once esteemed journalistic institution.
20

Richardinho,

04/09/2008 01:04:33
The basic and obvious lie propagated in this shameful article is that LIT will be a tax rise-yet somehow it will result in a shortfall of revenue.
Please explain how it is possible to raise taxes and end up taking less money in?
21

Royster,

04/09/2008 01:06:48
#22. Newspapers can have editorial policies you know. Nevertheless, this doesn't appear to be the Scotsman's views. It is simply stating the ground-swell of opposition to this ill-thought out tax.
22

,

04/09/2008 01:08:07
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
23

,

04/09/2008 01:08:54
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
24

,

04/09/2008 01:11:52
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
25

Richardinho,

04/09/2008 01:15:43
'Newspapers can have editorial policies you know.'

I remember a time when the editorial policy of the Scotsman was to try to present a balanced view of current affairs. The current policy would appear to be to aggressively push whatever the personal opinions of the people who own the Johnson press happen to be. It stinks.
26

,

04/09/2008 01:15:50
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
27

,

04/09/2008 01:20:42
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
28

somerferg,

perth 04/09/2008 01:22:58

Thats what I love about the Hootsman - such balanced, well thought out articles. Anyone would think that they don't like Alex Salmond and the SNP government - surely not??
29

somerferg,

perth 04/09/2008 01:24:50

Yes Jwil wee Joke mcFlannell pokes his head above the parapit and spouts off about the problem of sectarianism - now just remond me what did he and the other monkeys with red rosettes do about this problem over the 50 years they held Scotland in their sticky little mitts??
30

,

04/09/2008 01:32:48
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
31

Senga Jean,

04/09/2008 01:34:26
Dontcha just love the Skatchman? The most literate piece of illiteracy (or numeracy) since it reported from Mons!
32

Edward,

04/09/2008 01:38:05
This article is scrapping the proverbial barrel!
First name out the hat is Yvette Cooper aka Mrs Ed Balls, she who is a clueless twerp and friend of Gordon Brown. If she says its bad, it really means its very good!
Or what about the others such as Unison and South Lanarkshire Council - Is this a Joke piece by the Scotsman?
33

Brian Hill,

04/09/2008 01:50:13
An awful lot of 'might' and 'could' in those 25 reasons and even one 'probably'.

Some of the scares are reminiscent of the days before Parliament was set up:

Many companies will/might/could leave Scotland

or if the SNP ever took power:

Many companies will/might/could leave Scotland

and now if LIT is introduced:

Many companies will/might/could leave Scotland

The field of economics has always been a bit of a mystery to me but this I know:

1. The SNP have already proved that they have Scotland's interests at heart.

2. They have had almost 18 months of solid achievement in Government, achievement which is largely appreciated by the people as evidenced by the polls.

3. The SNP has a welter of intelligent, articulate politicians, especially Chancellor John Swinney (today Holyrood heard some excellent speeches from Alex Neil, Roseanna Cunningham and of course John Swinney himself) who, like the rest of the party is growing in confidence with each passing month.

They, along with Alex and Nicola head a very able bunch of MSPs and for that reason I am willing to accept their judgement on this matter, including any necessary changes to the Bill along the way.
34

AJ Fife,

04/09/2008 01:51:36
I'm sure Scotland's statesman-like First Minister wouldn't mind sharing today's headline with Scotland's No1.

Andy Murray's finest moment eclipses even Mr Salmond, but it's no coincidence that Andy's form coincides with the 'feelgood' factor, flowing through Scotland since the 3rd of May 2007!

Even the most hard boiled Onionists recognise that !!:)
35

Edward,

04/09/2008 01:53:20
I had to laugh when Tavish Scott was interveiwed and he came out with a classic 'now even Labour are against the Local income tax'. Had to do a double take!
Labour have never ever been in favour of LIT. Was it a case of Tavish Scott hadnt being paying mutch attention for the last year or was he just keeping to character as a complete idiot!
36

AJ Fife,

04/09/2008 01:54:38
SCOTTISH TENNIS STAR MAKES THE US OPEN SEMI-FINALS

A fantastic headline in honour of Scotland's No1!!

Andy has indeed made his mother, family, Dunblane and all of Scotland, extremely proud today! No doubt the 'British' media will struggle to recognise the achievement, but that's the evil we live with on a daily basis. The Scottish public and tennis fans all over the world recognise Andy Murray as a true global star.

The best bit is, there's potentially another two matches to enjoy and marvel at Scotland's finest sportsman!

37

Royster,

04/09/2008 03:14:21
I think the PAYE problem may be the greatest. Anyone out there familiar with PAYE?
38

Keir Hardie,

Inverness 04/09/2008 03:44:36
I'm not sure what I think of the proposals. But although I'm no nat The Scotsman's coverage seems very one-sided to me.
39

Wait a minute,

Town 04/09/2008 03:50:30
The Scotsman should just replace it's masthead with a red rose and be done with it.
40

tartangladbach,

edinburgh 04/09/2008 04:28:53
why not just get a picture of a noose on the front page! we have nothing to fear from LIT, only the fact that higher earners will have to contribute more! boo hoo! this includes me! and i do not have a problem with it?
41

Royster,

04/09/2008 04:51:19
So high earners pay more. How is that going to be good for business in Scotland? If the SNP - at some point in the future - is able to slash the corporate tax rate, you will have a situation where the bosses live in England and set up factories in Scotland. Scotland will lose revenue from the lower corporate tax rate. The people who pick up the tab will be anyone who isn't a chav on social security. This LIT is a recipe for less disposable income and a lower pension.
42

Rabbies Wee Bruthir,

04/09/2008 05:39:38
57 Royster,04/09/2008 04:51:19

What is a chav?

Do you mean someone who is unworthy?,such as yourself and your fellow onionista travellers?

Why do you senselessly and so pathetically attack recipients of Social Security?

Could it be, because you are an uncaring, money grubbing, whinging Unionist, who is concerned only with one thing your own pathetic little obnoxious world.After all with the current Onionist policies, you along with your fellow inebriates are about to become net recipients!!!


Begone dolt you are a carbuncle on the face of the world!!!

And even more to the point a numpty!!!

43

Pilrig.,

Livingston 04/09/2008 05:46:07
57 - lower pension ? You mean the SNP will do a Gordon Broon/Robert Maxwell ?
44

tartangladbach,

edinburgh 04/09/2008 05:46:52
in the words of the bard.

The man o' independent mind
He looks an' laughs at a' that.
45

Pilrig.,

Livingston 04/09/2008 05:50:29
53 - yep I've been paying it since 1970.
46

Pilrig.,

Livingston 04/09/2008 05:52:03
58 so winning the last Holyrood election was an accident ?
47

,

04/09/2008 06:32:54
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
48

,

04/09/2008 06:34:11
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
49

Boy Wonder,

04/09/2008 06:55:09
Doesn't anyone think that Eck and his party won't have actually thought out this tax system BEFORE announcing it? The FM and Co aren't complete idiots as the Hootsmon (amongst others) would have us believe, They will have worked it out and it will work ... or they know thay'll lose support, especially for next election.

I, for one, have faith the SNP can deliver. The other parties ... especially the ones who have been in power in Scotland before ... have caused the problem in the first place with unfair taxation systems!
50

Colkitto,

River Clyde 04/09/2008 07:01:29
And of course the REAL reason they don't want it is because Scotland will have a different Tax system to the rest of the UK.
It will add to the growing resentment in England that Scots are better off. "Why should the people of England pay the unfair Council Tax when the Scots don't ?" they will cry.
51

Royster,

04/09/2008 07:10:22
#69. I'm surprised you have have so much faith in the ability of politicians. Your remarks resemble the tosh spouted by party loyalists in communist countries. Politicians can easily ruin countries and managers can eaily ruin companies. Usually, when this happens they haven't been listening to the people below them because they have their own private agenda.
52

Royster,

04/09/2008 07:12:08
#59. A chav is someone who is idle for the sake of it or because it is is in his or her financial interest to be so. That's a chav.
53

Islandboy2,

Skye 04/09/2008 07:13:31
What a pile of stinking poo!
I always think this paper can't get any worse..A sinking ship of a newspaper for sure!
54

Royster,

04/09/2008 07:18:26
What about the problem with PAYE? What if you work some of the year in England and some of the year in Scotland?
55

The Tin Man,

04/09/2008 07:28:33
At least the Scotsman is publishing some of the results of the LIT consultation process - which is more than can be said of the Scottish government.

Have a look at their website.
56

,

04/09/2008 07:29:04
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
57

Hibby,

highlands 04/09/2008 07:36:42
Most of the Nationalists posting on here know and understand as much about the subject matter as their leader,and certainly a lot less than the 25 contributors listed.
I can't bring myself to refer to him as the First Minister. It's somehow just too embarassing that such a crass individual should represent our country in the international political arena.My toes curl at the very thought of it.
On the plus side, he is intelligent, but on the negative side the list is endless;lacks dignity,decorum,refinement,pronunciation,polish,style,elegence,taste and above all,CLASS.
I'm all in favour of being lead by "A Man of the People" but most of the people just have much more class than this man!
58

1745,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 07:37:53
Perhaps when we achieve INDEPENDENCE we can have a better class of journalism and a brand new Newspaper The Scottish Independent
GOODBYE Labour Hacks!
59

Royster,

04/09/2008 07:47:19
Let's hope Westminster reviews the Scotland Act and gets rid of the 3p either way taxation clause. It's clear devolution isn't working.
60

,

04/09/2008 07:48:07
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
61

Richardinho,

04/09/2008 07:48:32
elsewhere this ridiculous newspaper states;
"One way forward is to reform the council tax to take more account of the ability to pay. This can be done through rebates and by extending the system of property bands. Such a reform could be agreed by all parties while a longer-term solution is found."

People have had centuries to work out the tax system-what makes the Scotsman think that someone will somehow magically come up with a perfect solution that no one has been able to do before?
The Scotsman (and the other parties) solution is to fudge the issue. The complain about the 'complexity' of LIT yet their suggestions sound far more complex.
The great virtue of the LIT is that it is coherent and it is fair.
62

Royster,

04/09/2008 07:55:16
#83. What about PAYE?
63

South Ayrshire Sanny Hossack,

on the border 04/09/2008 07:55:30
How long will it be untill Salmon is hated as much as Thatcher? This piece of legislation is as welcome as a fert in a spacesuit, lets hope its yet another nail in the SNP coffin.
64

Am Balach,

Isle of Skye 04/09/2008 07:56:14
Under the SNP LIT plans pensioners in Scotland will no longer have to worry about paying their fuel bills.

Under SNP LIT plans many pensioners will live because they will no longer face a choice between paying for the council tax or putting on the heating.

I will pay more under LIT but unlike the shelfish, right-wing hacks who work for the Scotsman, I'm quite happy to do so if it helps people who face REAL hardship beacuse of the council tax.

This paper no longer represents traditional Scottish values. Like the Labour Party, it is heading for extinction.
65

Am Balach,

Isle of Skye 04/09/2008 07:59:55
Shelfish hacks! Meant to write selfish. Maybe I was right first time though? Limpets clinging to HMS Britannia as she slips below the waves.
66

Richardinho,

04/09/2008 08:01:06
'What about PAYE?'

what about it?
67

Freddy,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 08:02:55
JUST ANOTHER VERSION OF THE POLL TAX -

WELL DONE MAGGIE SALMOND

MAY YOU BE AS POPULAR AS SHE
68

,

04/09/2008 08:03:24
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
69

eric,

LOTHIAN 04/09/2008 08:04:27
25 unionist reasons.
70

Richardinho,

04/09/2008 08:05:41
'What is fair about taxing those of us who work hard more than the loaby dossers who sit on their jaxies all day?
'

Have to point out that there is not a direct relationship between how hard you work and how much you are paid. How much to cleaning ladies who have to get up at the crack of dawn to skivvy away in some hotel get paid?

The principle of paying according to your ability to pay is coherent and most people (not lunatic self professed 'anarchists') would regard it as being 'fair'.
71

Richardinho,

04/09/2008 08:07:00
#93 Feel free to make your point any time you like.
72

Royster,

04/09/2008 08:07:20
#90. If you work part of the year in England and part of the year in Scotland, for example, how is that going to work? How much bureacracy will that involve? At least with council tax, you tax where that person is resident. You can't do that so easily with income tax because residency would depend on where the company was based. To avoid LIT, a company could just set up a PO box office in Berwick and its employees then wouldn't have to pay LIT or council tax. It could then pay lower wages.
73

It's me!,

04/09/2008 08:07:28
The Scottish Parliament is already allowed to vary income tax by 3p in the pound so provision should already have been made by Revenue and Customs/Westminster/Yvette Cooper et al. They have failed in their duty by failing to make provision for this.

The bunch of self interest groups listed are worried because they see the possibility arising where the less well off subsidise the well off/rich coming to an end.

It should be the purpose of a newspaper to report news and not be a propaganda sheet for self interested parties. I do not care what the editor of the Scotsman feels. If it is their purpose to whip up an anti poll tax feeling they will fail.

If Westminster has any sense it will replace council tax with a tax collected alongside vat. If you buy it you will have to pay the additional tax just in the same way that you have no choice but to pay vat unless the trader is at the fiddle. I do no believe a tax must be 'local'. The majority of council funding come from central government anyway. Hundreds of local collection offices throughout the UK will have to close (except for those chasing arrears) leaving staff to provide services. This is what a council is supposed to do.

You have backed a loser, Scotsman.

74

FedUpTaxPayer,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 08:08:33
I think the comment by the green party "Replacing an unfair tax with an unworkable tax will cause more misery than we can know." is particularly good.

I'm no big fan of the council tax, but I'm not convinced the LIT is the answer.
75

,

04/09/2008 08:10:49
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
76

Richardinho,

04/09/2008 08:12:19
#98 'If you work part of the year in England and part of the year in Scotland, for example, how is that going to work? How much bureacracy will that involve? '

How does Income tax work? How does the European Union or the United states survive with different tax systems co-existing.
The tax system is already devilishly complicated yet somehow companies, local authorities and individuals are able to cope with it. Yours is a ridiculous scare-mongering chicken licken style argument which holds no water under serious scrutiny.
77

nabodican,

Rural Scotland 04/09/2008 08:13:00
Council tax is bad but LIT is a lot worse.
This is about paying for services provided by the council and should therefore be paid for by the people who use these services.
This nonsense about ability to pay is a stupid argument. If we carry that argument on we will end up paying different prices for a loaf of bread.
At least the old poll tax made the users pay.
78

The Honest Lad,

Musselburgh 04/09/2008 08:13:49
Sport and politics should be kept apart. What has Andy Murray got to do with any future taxation proposals.

SNP plonkers!
79

,

04/09/2008 08:17:31
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
80

Ken Mac,

Glasgow 04/09/2008 08:17:36
Another dreadful article from the Hootsman. There is no pretence at balanced reporting, no serious consideration of the issues. This garbage looks like it was lifted straight from the Sun or the Record. A new low. Note to the editor, start publishing with a red top.
81

Linda,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 08:18:00
Unlike The Scotsman the Independent's leading article this morning is much more balanced.

The main legislative achievements of the Holyrood executive have been in exempting Scottish students from the payment of tuition fees, the delivery of free personal care for the elderly and in scrapping prescription charges.

Whether any of this largesse is sustainable in the long term is another matter. For all of Alex Salmond's tactical brilliance in tweaking the tail of Westminster, one suspects that the Scottish First Minister's fiscal populism will hit the buffers of economic reality at some point. But, that said, some of the legislative proposals unveiled by Mr Salmond yesterday merit some serious attention because, if they prove successful, they could end up exerting influence much further afield.

Mr Salmond's big idea is to replace council tax in Scotland with a local income tax. The idea of charging rate-payers according to their ability to pay, as opposed to a flat-rate charge, has been knocking around Westminster for years. Numerous policy reviews and think-tank reports have recommended it as a solution to the disproportionate burden that council tax imposes on the elderly poor, and other vulnerable social groups. Indeed, a local income tax is potentially a fairer and more efficient way for local authorities to raise money than the council tax. The experience of several countries in northern Europe also suggests that it makes councils more directly accountable to voters and thus pressures them to improve the quality of their services.

But the reform has never been put into action because national politicians have been terrified by the very suggestion of reforming local taxation. The spectre of Margaret Thatcher's ill-fated experiment with the poll tax in 1990 has proved impossible to vanquish. A generation of ministers have been content to let the existing system, along with all its iniquities, fester. Yet now Mr Salmond is grasping the thistle. It is saf
82

,

04/09/2008 08:18:25
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
83

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 04/09/2008 08:19:17
Cheers Alex can't wait to pay double for less services. Oh no maybe I won't as my pay is processed in London, maybe I will pay nothing for less services. the undiputable fact is that 3p in the pound will lead to service cuts.
84

Royster,

04/09/2008 08:20:05
#104. It would be an administrative nightmare then. Do you know how complicated it is to deal with 2 EU tax authorities or those of US states? Companies can normally find a way around these things by hiring tax lawyers and investment bankers. Your average Joe, though, ends up picking up the tab. The only people who 'benefit' from this are the unemployed.
85

,

04/09/2008 08:20:14
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
86

Richardinho,

04/09/2008 08:21:13
'This nonsense about ability to pay is a stupid argument. If we carry that argument on we will end up paying different prices for a loaf of bread.'

What an utterly bizarre argument. The council tax and the rates before it reflected ability to pay to the extent that presumably the value of your house reflected the size of your income.
Even the Scotsman and the other parties concede that the Council tax should be reformed to take more into account ability to pay.
It seems that only you and your topsy-turvy anarchist friend think that tax should be based on inability to pay.
87

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 04/09/2008 08:24:03
#115

What about living within your means, why should I pay an extra £1500 pound to sub the pensioner living in a 4 bedroom home just because it has been in the family for generations.
88

Linda,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 08:25:01
Richardinho.

I assume you wish to abolish Income Tax because Gordon Brown has allowed thousands of Non Domociled millionaires escape from paying their share of Income Tax to the UK Treasury.

That is more than 1bn Ms Cooper..
89

,

04/09/2008 08:25:24
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
90

vorlic,

edinburgh 04/09/2008 08:25:47
at the momentmy council tax is approx 8%of my total income,a small pension giving me an income of less than 10000 a year.so what pence in the pound am i paying at the moment.
91

Sparky,

Hamilton 04/09/2008 08:26:33
I am of no political persuasion but I think the SNP gov have done more for the people of Scotland in 1 year than Labour have done in 5 years.
92

Liberal for life,

Dunblane 04/09/2008 08:26:54
For LIT to work properly and be succesful in Scotland it really needs to be applicable to the wider UK. The SNP can't deliver on that but the LibDems can. This will be explained to people at the next election and will win the wider support of the majority of the voting public at that time - rest assured.
93

Richardinho,

04/09/2008 08:27:53
#113 you are pursuing a classic logical fallacy. You think that because you can't think of an answer to a problem, it follows that there isn't one. Of course it is in the interests of your argument that you don't find an answer, therefore you're not going to try and find one.

The fact that tax is devilishly complex is not something new. But somehow human civilization has managed to live with the complexity of tax throughout time. The ancient Babylonians are said to have invented book keeping for the purposes of tax collection.
I've never heard of a civilization that collapsed because the government couldn't collect taxes. somehow they always manage to find a way!
94

The Tin Man,

04/09/2008 08:27:57
#110 Linda

"Mr Salmond's big idea is to replace council tax in Scotland with a local income tax."

You would be more accurate in saying that the plan, as it stands, is to abolish almost all local taxation, and to increase income tax, instead.

Maybe a local income tax is a good idea. But. so far, this isn't a local income tax, it is central government tax.

95

,

04/09/2008 08:28:26
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
96

Richardinho,

04/09/2008 08:31:18
#117
'What about living within your means, why should I pay an extra £1500 pound to sub the pensioner living in a 4 bedroom home just because it has been in the family for generations.'

So you are advocating a tax which forces a pensioner to sell their family home to pay for a tax they can't afford, whilst you who can afford it, doesn't pay? You seriously call that 'fair'?
97

MNS,

SCOTLAND 04/09/2008 08:33:16
Rt Hon Alex Salmond MSP
Career History:
1978- 1980: Assistant Economist, Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland
1980-1982: Assistant Economist, Royal Bank of Scotland
1982-1984: Oil Economist, Royal Bank of Scotland
1984- 1987: Oil Economist and Bank Economist, Royal Bank of Scotland - Visiting professor of economics at Strathclyde University

http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/msp/membersPages/alex_salmond/index.htm

'GOOGLE' TO YOUR HEARTS CONTENT...
Steve Freer, chief executive of Cipfa, former finance director of a large authority, and a member of the review group, will say: "A system that sees individual local authorities setting the tax with the Inland Revenue responsible for collecting it looks to be the most promising model."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2004/mar/04/economicpolicy.localgovernment?commentpage=1

ENOUGH SAID. INDEPENDENCE FOR SCOTLAND NOW!




98

Auld Twa,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 08:35:15
If Income Tax is such a bad idea why is it still being used by the UK Government ?
99

,

04/09/2008 08:35:16
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
100

Royster,

04/09/2008 08:35:17
#123. Save your ancient Babylonian nonsense for the pub. It would be terribly complicated for someone who worked in both England and Scotland regularly or for someone who moved from England to Scotland and vice versa. It's fantastic for companies because they can process pay in England and shift HQs to England. How can the Scottish government chase up a request for details about someone's Local Income Tax situation to a company south of the border? Its remit doesn't extend that far. All pay rolls will move to England and Scots will be paid less as they won't have to pay LIT.
101

The Tin Man,

04/09/2008 08:36:42
#125 Joe-Kerr

What on earth does 'unionism', and 'nationalism' have to do with tax systems?
102

,

04/09/2008 08:37:06
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
103

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 04/09/2008 08:37:20
#126

i already pay a lot of income tax and national insurance, as well as the council tax on my house. Now i am going to be paying another £1500 to pay for services for someone elses house. great, unfortunately in the real world I beleive in a fair days pay for a fair days work and living witin your means. If that means pensioners downgrading then yes.
104

The Tin Man,

04/09/2008 08:38:30
#127 MNS

"A system that sees individual local authorities setting the tax with the Inland Revenue responsible for collecting it looks to be the most promising model."

So you don't support abolishing local taxes and increaseing income tax?
105

First Minister,

Gibraltar Tax Office 04/09/2008 08:39:10
25 reasons the North British Sales are falling faster than the ice cap is melting. Shameful reporting, but it is what we have come to expect?
Mr Editor- Why are you alienating 75% of your potential customers? Doesnt seem good business sense to me, and having been involved in selling media advertising, i cannot see much positives from advertising in your paper. You are the weakest link.
106

,

04/09/2008 08:39:47
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
107

Hamish Simpson,

04/09/2008 08:40:11

25 reasons - They all start with "He's a do" and end with "bber"
108

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 04/09/2008 08:41:05
#130

Not to mention all the public sector workers such as the MOD who process pay in England. Ill thought out, unworkable and possibly illegal, wee eck should have stayed in Linlithgow Ladbrokes and gambled with his own money.
109

First Minister,

Monaco 04/09/2008 08:41:39
Hibby Highland
Sad man, please change your team to Hearts Or Rangers please, i am embarassed that you are a Hibby. Get a Life.
110

Royster,

04/09/2008 08:43:11
It will result in cash flowing to England at the expense of the Scottish government coffers. Company A moves HQ to Berwick. Company B keeps HQ in Edinburgh. Company B pays 10 quid an hour but workers have to pay 3p extra in income tax. Company A pays less but workers won't have to pay the LIT as it is an English company. The Scottish government can do nothing about this because the tax is not based on property so people can avoid paying LIT and still live in Scotland. In 1 year, you will have a huge hole in local government coffers. The English aren't going to collect tax on behalf of the Scots unless the Scots pay them to take on the extra staff and make it worth their while.
111

thinking,

Scotland 04/09/2008 08:46:14
As I understand it this tax would be levied on all in employment. So, if there are three earners in one household, all three would pay tax and not just the householder as with the council tax as it is now.
Wasn't that the aim of the poll tax?
112

scottish person,

paisley 04/09/2008 08:47:36
The Tin Man AKA 8/10 Cats
This is no more than a flyer for the liebour party. The hootsmon will be no more very soon.
113

Xena - Warrior Princess,

04/09/2008 08:49:56
#145 Yes that would be the case. What about apprentices earning £2.45 an hour? Will they have to pay 3p as well? Poll Tax by another name.
114

Calum Crubag,

04/09/2008 08:50:48
Disgraceful article. No word on the poorer who will benefit.
115

Royster,

04/09/2008 08:51:37
Unless they tag you with an electronic chip and place electronic sensors at the border and in all airports etc, how can the Scottish government tell whether or not you have to pay Scottish LIT if your company chooses to base itself in England? All Scottish staff could have their contracts rewritten to specify that they work for English companies on a piecemeal basis. To save 3p in income it would be worth it from both an employer and employye point of view. The Scottish government couldn't crack down on this because of competition laws.
116

First Minister,

Jersey 04/09/2008 08:52:16
Surely a public test of Council Tax versus LIT will be in Glenrothes? Why not make it the issue- Tory/New Labour Policies V LIT? Personally i think LIT should be a progressive tax, if you earn less than £10k you pay no tax, £20k you pay 2.5%, £30 you pay 5% and so on up the ladder, much fairer. I'm sure Tommy Sheridans bill was a progressive LIT.
117

Alastair the First,

04/09/2008 08:52:31
This article is just a load of f***king b0ll0cks. For a start, let me pick out the comments attributed to the FSB. i am a member of that organisation and they didn't ask my views - the view expressed is, to put it bluntly, only the vie of the individual who issued the statement, and possibly shared by some other members of some small committee of the FSB. It is not the view of the members in general.

Furthermore, why will LIT payments be added to pay packets? That's like saying if Alastair Darling puts up national insurance rates (again!), everyome would get paid more.

This article is nothing more than propaganda.
118

Richardinho,

04/09/2008 08:52:53
#130 I've got to go now. Sorry that the topic of human history is too highbrow for you. Just keep on running around shouting how the sky is going to fall on our heads-that's probably more your level.
119

Royster,

04/09/2008 08:53:06
#145. It can't be levied in England though. So if that's where your company chooses to base itself, that's where you get paid from.
120

,

04/09/2008 08:54:23
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
121

,

04/09/2008 08:55:30
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
122

Royster,

04/09/2008 08:56:32
You could even do some kind of swap arrangement. An unemployed Englishman could arrange to register his home in Scotland whilst letting a working Scot use his address for work purposes. They could then pay the the English council tax between them and pay nothing to the Scottish government.
123

,

04/09/2008 08:57:39
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
124

Alastair the First,

04/09/2008 08:57:40
As for this "working in Scotland but living in England" (or the reverse) business - you can live in France and work in Germany and no-one gets worked up about the tax differences.

Once you acknowledge that Scotland and England are separate nations, the argument becomes irrelevant, and it is pretty trivial even if you don't.
125

Bikefast,

Edin 04/09/2008 08:58:54
#104.
Yes, Income Tax is fiedishly complicated. A great part of this is caused by the rich people dreamimg up ideas to pay less tax than they are due hence the reason for further legislation to circumvent "the loopholes" and so the roundabout goes on. As far as "residence" in Scotland is concerned for qualification to pay LIT, you can bet your bottom dollar that ways will be found to avoid paying LIT leading to more legislation etc etc. I totally agree that tax based on property values or property letting values should have been kicked out with the ark. Just because one owns a property worth £x,000,000 does not mean that one can afford to pay the levied tax.
126

commonsense,

Looking Forward 04/09/2008 08:59:33
#145
#147
The Poll tax was different in that it was a set payment levied on all whether you earned £10000 or £10 million a year.
We presently pay for all our national health through tax,that way everyone benefits from the scheme, and those who earn the most contribute the most. The tax proposed would be the same,except collected in Scotland only for the benefit of all the Scottish people.
127

,

04/09/2008 09:00:15
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
128

bluehead,

edinburgh 04/09/2008 09:00:47
that is twenty five reasons why Scotland would never move forward if it was left to people who are fully aware that this council tax is totally unfair,but do not produce their alternative
If all these people put forward their idea what would be a fair form of taxation,I'm sure everyone would be delighted to read it
one thing is crystal clear,and that is the council tax is an abomination to the people of Edinburgh,and must go.
129

4thbridge,

fife 04/09/2008 09:02:53
This is a low in terms of reporting and journalistic responsibility. JP get your act together. Many of the bloggers have better analytical skills- send them the copy before going to press and print their responses rather than this dross.
130

gus1940,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 09:04:01
I have been a Scotsman reader since 1965.

I used to be proud of this fact until Andrew Neil tipped the paper over the edge of the slippery slope where the descent to the rubbish tip of journalism was accelerated by the arrival of Johnston Press on the scene.

The paper is now a disgrace and it is doubtful if it even complies with the definition of newspaper.

Being of a certain age the contents of the death notices are unfortunately of interest to me and unfortunately as The Scotsman has a monopoly of these announcements I have no option other than to purchase the rag.

I am sure I am not alone in having this as the sole remaining reason for buying the paper and it would be interesting to find out how much lower the circulation would go if death notices were included in the on-line edition.

I dare the editor to do this.

Is there no individual or group of individuals prepared to take the paper off JP's hands and restore it to its former position of being a newspaper of record instead of a propaganda sheet.

I don't want a paper that will slavishly support independence but a paper that will report news without blatant political bias.

131

Royster,

04/09/2008 09:04:14
#158. Nothing trivial about dealing with 2 tax jurisdictions whether they be part of the same country or not. It's very complicated and open to abuse especially by wealthy people.
132

Royster,

04/09/2008 09:06:32
#144. Very good point.
133

Andra, Dundee,

04/09/2008 09:06:35
SNP's main objective is to divide the Union. They care not for what is right or wrong. Civil war is their objective.
They have gone out of their way to design proposals that are not compatible with the currect devolution settlement.
They could avoid all the argument by simply making use of the current 3p increase allowed on the basic rate and cut council tax by a good percentage - that would suffice but it would not have their desired effect on the Union.
134

thinking,

Scotland 04/09/2008 09:10:34
#160
I agree, the main premise was for all to pay the same under the poll tax, except, there were various reductions for different circumstances such as unemployment etc.
135

Non 4x4 driver,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 09:17:07
Fantastic. Under LIT my girlfriend and me will pay approximately 2.5x our current council tax rate for our one bedroom flat.
It's hard enough saving to move to a bigger place without giving more of it to the government.

We've now decided to buy the bigger place now even though we can't afford it. We'll then both go on the dole so everything is paid for us by the state then have a dozen or so kids to bump up the income!
136

Mr. Lachie Todd,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 09:20:34
In essence, LIT is a reasonable proposal but all the vested interests opposed to its implementation will ensure it does not become law.

The Labour Party in Scotland knows it is a threat to its power base, and high earning Tory and Lib-Dem supporters who are owners of large properties do not believe in paying more direct taxes.

Unlike the previous majority Labour/Lib-Dem Executives, the Nationalist minority government has a majority of ONE at Holyrood? Yet, it still continues to set a radical agenda.

The job of any Opposition is to hold the government to account and, on this occasion, the Nationalist government is bound to fail with LIT. It is a bill
to far!

However, just wait until after the next General Election when the new UK Conservative Government cuts the Scottish Block, and Holyrood squeezes the Scots Councils support? Council Tax, with the proposed additional increases in Scottish Water, will spiral upwards?

137

Royster,

04/09/2008 09:21:36
#171. Do you have an answer for the company's switching the pay rolls to England?
138

Shaken,

04/09/2008 09:21:50
~167

Quite right this union doesn't work anymore. maybe it never did but there is realisation on both sides that Scotland must run it's own affairs, as should England.

The days of colonialism are past.

On this article - I don't think this bill will get passed at Holyrood but Jeez would you look at how rotten this article is?

Vive la SNP
139

Royster,

04/09/2008 09:21:55
Typo, I mean companies...
140

Tonto43,

Midlothian 04/09/2008 09:22:05
I don't know what all the fuss is about

All overtime will now be claimed as time of in Lieu.
Time to buy that house in Berwick....
And i intend immigrating when i retire anyway.........

Introduce this tax and quite simply businesses will move south of the border, people will move south or immigrate and there will be mass unemployment as there will be no businesses left. It will certainly be a green tax thats for sure.......

But as one person did say in these letters the work shy and lay abouts will score a plenty....

Think again Mr Salmond
141

,

04/09/2008 09:22:12
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
142

commonsense,

Beginning to wonder 04/09/2008 09:22:55
#169
If the people you are referring to are in receipt of benefit then they may as you say pay no lit in the future ,however,chances are they pay no council tax at the moment,so that would make no difference to the economy.
143

Shaken,

04/09/2008 09:25:29
~170

You are the reason everyone thinks people from Edinburgh are wedged up their own sphincter.

I know how expensive even small properties are in the city so don't think you are exactly on the breadline.
144

Shaken,

04/09/2008 09:30:06
175

The workshy and layabouts don't pay council tax foolish one.

Old people and those on low incomes will benfit most.

Businesses will move South? Businesses doesn't pay council tax inviducals do..
145

commonsense,

At Library,Swimming pool,park,tip,school,community 04/09/2008 09:31:43
Remember
The purpose is to raise money locally for everyone who has the chance to benefit from the above services,it is the individual who gains regardless of his house.
146

Cam3,

04/09/2008 09:31:56
What utter garbage!

It's official - the NorthBritisher is the newest TABLOID! Congrats Johnston Press! What does it feel like? Writing for an ill-informed, Pravdaesque TABLOID?

Not a SINGLE comment from the people on the street who'll be better off.

Labour fanzine - little else.
147

voltaire's janny,

04/09/2008 09:32:03
I paid rates. Unfair they said; lets have poll tax. I paid more. Boo! Can't pay won't pay they said. Council tax is the answer. I paid more. Still not fair, they shout. Let's have LIT. Then I will pay more.

Must be because I am rich? Aye right. Employed and raising four kids with no savings and an overdraft.

Alex. Your thirty year stewardship of ny vote is in jeaopardy!
148

MNS,

04/09/2008 09:34:51
Response to #131 You said "bring them on, #127
Match that with Brown's CV, and make a fool of yourself.
MY Response - Gordon Brown is the MP for the area in which I live. I don't doubt his 'academic' performance. Gordon Brown is Not my MSP and I didn't vote for him either way. I don't vote Labour. I have voted SNP since age 18, (34 years ago). So, #131 I have no interest in 'comparing' people's academic aptitude. I was merely highlighting Alex Salmond's cv. Make your own mind up, #131.

149

rab rats,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 09:36:59
#174
And what exactly does "typo" mean.
150

Allan Retentive,

04/09/2008 09:37:54
That this is the lead story in The Scotsman shows how far it's fallen since Magnus Linklater was editor. There's no attempt at balanced, coherent analysis. It's just embarrassing.
151

Miss H,

04/09/2008 09:38:54
The problem with this article - and indeed with all the attacks on LIT - is that it is completely contradictory. The Scotsman has got to train its journalists in the meaning of 'either' and 'or'.

For example either point 2 is true that LIT will make Scotland the most highly taxed part of the UK OR point is true and there will be serious service cuts because of the reduction in income that will result from LIT.

But they cannot both be true.

The SNP are going to end up winning this debate simply because the opposing voices are too stupid to get their act together.
152

Alan B,

04/09/2008 09:39:25
#Royster

Royster is not about switching payroles to England. That is daft. You pay income tax on where you are resident. If you are living between the 2 countries then you will still have a primary address. It is similar to council tax in that regard. Where you can get a council tax discount on second property.

For those that do work betwee 2 countries this will happen general in a few ways. Mostly this will be someon in scotland working in london during the week and commuting back to scotland at weekends. In this case there will be a few options. 1)the company is putting the employee/consultant up in a hotel. 2)the company rents a flat (both which show primary address would be family home in scotland) 3)where worker is renting(or buy) his own property in london. (where does he pay full council tax on the property at the moment?). The family home in scotland or the rented flat in london.

153

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

04/09/2008 09:39:46
Many people are now waking up to the fact that this so-called "Local Income Tax" is anything but a local income tax - it is a NATIONAL Income Tax.

To pretend otherwise as the First Minister and the Executive continue to do is obscurantism of the worst kind. It is political grandstanding - gesture politics with all the detail of a postage stamp. It does not take a genius to work out that the Nats know that this joke of a proposal will be rejected not only by Labour but also by the Lib dems because it is NOT a Local Income Tax. They will then play their usual "it's the bad opoposition parties who are to balme " act for all its worth - I just hope that the electorate are not dumb enough to fall for this.
154

,

04/09/2008 09:41:16
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
155

Jacqueline Hyde ,

On the shelf 04/09/2008 09:41:32
Income tax was an emergency measure introduced by William Pitt the Younger (I always preferred plain William Younger!) in the days when money was an exchange medium rather than the sacred commodity it has since become.

Today, it has become incredibly complex and expensive to administer and has itself become a huge and unnecessry financial burden on both government and employers. It is a disincentive for employment and, in a benefits oriented society, a disincentive to be employed. It has also become a disproportionately weighted factor in a community's economy.

The whole concept of a separate Scottish income tax is fraught with further cost and complexity. Up to 20% of Scottish residents are actually paid by companies that operate their payrolls south of the border with tax offices also in England and Wales. As a result, it could struggle to collect more money than it takes costs to administer and I, for one, already object to so much of my tax disappearing in administration costs.

Far better that people are taxed on what they spend rather than what they earn. This encourages people to work, encourages savings (eg in pension schemes etc) and, importantly, encourages re-investment of earnings in company and government stocks and bonds. It would also release hundreds of thousands of Inland Revenue staff into productive employment! There is already a humungous benefits system in place to ensure that the less well off are not penalised and the savings to be made will provide higher levels of state pension and benefits.
156

Miss H,

04/09/2008 09:44:31
Jacque;ine - do you have any idea how much it costs at the moment to collect and administer council tax and council tax benefit. I suggest you find out.
157

morris,

edinburgh 04/09/2008 09:48:03
To change a computer program to collect a different rate of tax(based upon post code) is no more demanding than the adjustments which are made annually anyway,by budget changes. The only minor problem is resentment that Wullie who lives in Eyemouth appears to pay more PAYE tax, but no council tax and therefore less than William who lives in Berwick.They live in similar houses,and work in the same premises.That will soon spread throughout the UK and demand will become universal in a UK sense.

That is one of the minor problems.
Westminster surrenders absolute control over pre election tax bribes ,but their real objection is you cannot tax the poor .The wealthy will have to cough up their fair share of the tax burden.
At the moment unfair council tax eases the burden upon the wealthy by financing local government from two sources(which is obviously by design since simplicity would demand a single collection as being administratively speaking efficient).
This could be adopted UK wide and Labour should be the architect of such a move,but they like the other Tory party court the wealthy through their wallets.
Most of local government finance is raised via national taxation (to Westminster government) anyway and given to local authorities.This is not a radical change but an amendment to what we already do !
Those who oppose this are transparent and don't want to pay SIMPLE AS THAT!


80% approx will contribute less 20% will contribute more .

THAT is what this is really about.

Individual FAIRNESS Versus INDIVIDUAL GREED!

Council Tax is unwanted and must be removed.
Alternatively we can remove Westminster government completely and set our taxation for ourselves.
I've just listened to people on Radio Scotland and most objections came from wealthy people who think that they will pay higher PAYE.

They were quite open about why they objected.
Anybody who thinks that you can formulate a countries taxation policy according to individual requirements i
158

Alan B,

04/09/2008 09:48:42
I am not convinced by LIT but this article is alot of rubbish and offers few of the real arguments against LIT but silly political statements.

For instance Cooper of labour says it will "leave a £750 million financial black hole". However we all know that is if labour stop scotland getting its fair share of the council tax benefit money. It was interesting on newsnight last night that all the other parties lib dem and tories both backed the snp call that the money should come to scotland. Only labour think it is right to punish scotland for using a power given to it via the devolution settlement. The tories actually saying this was back tactical error by labour. This says it all as devolution is a constitutional settlement not an issue that can be used for polical party tactical advantage by allowing westminsters labour government to abuse power.

On the other hand the tories said " £281 million of savings that need to be made to create a 3p local income tax could be used instead to reduce the burden of the council tax. "

So labour are saying the difference between what council tax would raise and lit at 3p is 750 million and the tories saying 281 million.

They both cannot be proper critisms and simply make labour look silly.

The reason there is a difference is that this lit proposal is a tax cut. So some of labour arguments against this proposal is just that they want a higher level of taxation. This other arguments that LIT will make scotland the most highest tax area of scotland nonsense. If an LIT which taxes less overall than current council tax then the tax burden is actually falling.
159

tommy M,

04/09/2008 09:51:45
25 "reasons"- is that all this outdated, scaremongering Labour propaganda mouthpiece rag could come up with? You have to laugh... talk about DESPERATE!

Will we now have a piece on reasons why we SHOULD have lit - just to keep things balanced? Didn't think so...
160

Fraz 0810,

Dunfermline 04/09/2008 09:51:52
A number of points: 1. If the SNP luddites permeating this forum despise the scotsman and its editors and its journalists so much, then why do I see nothing but their posts on the forum - if you don't like what you read, then don't read it. 2. neither pro, nor anti LIT posts on this site have come close to explaining the net impact this will have on the average working person and/or family. It is all very laudible to talk about a fairer tax system in principle, but the realities are often very different. I certainly can't figure out which way this will fall, and as such, will try not to get my knickers in a twist, until the detail is in place. 3. Income tax covers national government spending and is calculated to provide large, national and critical capital spending priorities e.g. NHS, police, education etc. Because of the way in which these services are delivered, it is neither advisable nor possible to differentiate the level of contribution on anything other than income. However, local income tax is attributable directly to the services provided by a local authority in a specific locale. If I live in area where the council has a lower budget or a poorer service, why should I have to put money into the pot of a high spending and inefficient council in another area? It's not like I can vote in other council elections. Forgetting for a moment the financial arguments on LIT, the political and social implications of extracting a national tax for specific local spending, in my view, make it unworkable.
161

morris,

edinburgh 04/09/2008 09:52:24
195 cont

They were quite open about why they objected.
Anybody who thinks that you can formulate a countries taxation policy according to individual requirements is correct,but ability to pay is the sensible formula.Tax the poor and you create more problems than you solve, and that is a price we should never agree to pay to suit some fat cats sat on their rears.
If PAYE was inneficient WHY DO WE USE IT?

162

LEAL,

04/09/2008 09:55:35
LIT is a fairer way to tax people for local services.It means the more you earn,the more you pay.Simple.
163

Alan B,

04/09/2008 09:58:04
#Jacqueline Hyde

What does it matter where a payrole is operated. Income tax is paid on residency?

Also if you are proposing that income tax is abolished and everying loaded onto vat you would really have to go into more detail of any advantages and disadvantages.

VAT is for instance regressive.

VAT is dependent on consumption, so if it slows the governments revenue stream slows. You could agrue that vat only type taxation would be far to unreliable.

Most government have realised that it is silly to over burden on method of taxation, particularly now they take so much tax.

There are alot of indirect sales taxes. Look at the 40billion raised from petrol taxation. The amount raised on alcohol and tobbacco.

So are you promoting that vat is not charged on food and other exempt items that will hit the poorest more and end up with more tax to try to offset this issue.

To much tax on incomes is a disincentive to employment but there is little evidence the amount we have at the moment is a disincentive. You could argue it would be better to cut corporation tax to encourage growth and hence more and better jobs rather than specifically targeting income tax.
164

Embra Don,

04/09/2008 09:58:07
If I am not mistaken, Labour, as the architects of the current devolution settlement, built into it the right of the Scottish Parliament to vary the rate of income tax by up to 3p in the pound either up or down.
Are they and their supporters now saying that this is unworkable?
165

morris,

edinburgh 04/09/2008 09:59:18
201 YES!
166

The Tin Man,

04/09/2008 10:01:22
#132 Joe-Kerr
"- because the only people seeming to be doing it down for the sake of it are you lot."

Oh dear, you seem to be confusing nationalism with a policital party. When it comes to independence, there is no 'you lot', there is only 'us lot'.

In the event of independence, I am sure you would still be zealously defending your party's policies as orders that must be followed at all times without question.
167

Alan B,

04/09/2008 10:01:53
#LEAL

Problem with that definition of fairness is like looking at equality. Whether you support equality of opportunity or equality of outcome.
168

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

04/09/2008 10:05:04
#195 I agree that some comments are spurious - that goes for some of those in favour.

I have serious problems with the proposals as they stand. I believe it could be an administrative nightmare - not only for the government but also for businesses especially those SMEs who are already struggling under a mountain of paperwork and bureaucracy. That is bound to happen as, many have pointed out, there are loopholes galore that could be exploited particulalrly by the megarich to avoid the tax not to mention those who will evade it through being paid cash-in-hand in the black economy.

Even if these problems could be resolved my biggest objection to the proposals is that there is absolutely no link between taxation, representation and expenditure.
169

,

04/09/2008 10:05:54
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
170

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

04/09/2008 10:06:42
#197 You've cottoned on to the fact that under these proposals inefficient behemoths will be subsidised by the more efficient councils.
171

Stop buy Scotsman,

04/09/2008 10:07:13
It is amazing to see how hard work made by the Scotsman. They will think of anything to undermine Alex Salmond and the SNP. It make me feel proud of SNP who stood up for people of Scotland and hopefully the public will stop buying the Scotsman.

172

gus1940,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 10:07:42
#172

Does this mean that under the current Income Tax System - anybody resident in Scotland who works for an employer whose payroll is processed in England (think about it - this means a lot of people) does not have their Income Tax (and NI) credited as tax paid in Scotland?

If that is the case it must be time to re-jig the GERS figures.
173

Embra Don,

04/09/2008 10:11:48
197 Fraz 0810,
You make some good points but include a couple of inconsistencies.
Education is by far the biggest expenditure by local authorities but it is one of the areas for which you seem to acknowledge that centralised taxation is appropriate.
Your argument that the taxing authority should be accountable to their voters rather than raising taxation from other constituencies, is exactly the parallel for requiring complete fiscal autonomy for Scotland.
174

donald,

glasgow 04/09/2008 10:13:59
One good reason for supporting it is that the Hootsmon is against it.
175

donald,

glasgow 04/09/2008 10:15:48
25 reasons for not buying the Northbritishperson.
176

JG,

Fife 04/09/2008 10:16:27
And what do the 25 people quoted above know, when compared to Alex "I have a vision" Salmond, eh?
177

Doh,

04/09/2008 10:22:23


Most of these "observations" are either unfounded or simply from political opponents - several labour party hacks, tories and even the greens.

They could ask a 100 Labour MPs and have 100 "reasons" to opposse fari taxation.
178

,

04/09/2008 10:25:26
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
179

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

04/09/2008 10:26:50
How can a tax that will be set nationally, collected nationally and distributed nationally be described as a Local Income Tax?
180

Mantelbrucke,

Switzerland 04/09/2008 10:28:37
Funnily enough, I live in a country that already has a local income tax, and it works absolutely fine. We also pay federal tax. In fact we pay three taxes. One to the Commune, one to the Kanton, and one to the central government. The Commune sets its own tax rate, so each village has a different income depending on what tax rate IT set. Note the IT. Its up to the people of the Commune to decide. Funny other thing is that the majority of the tax I pay goes to the Commune and to the Kanton, not to the central government. And funnily enough not one of those 25 pathetic excuses could be applied. Get on it Alex. Anybody not believe me? Just come to Switzerland and have a look.
181

Bruce wn,

Midlothian 04/09/2008 10:29:51
We have income tax what is the difference?
The difference is that everybody pays it, unlike council tax.
It astounds me that what we still have the position of taxation without representation.
How about only council tax payers have the vote for the councilors who spend our money, I'll bet you Labour would soon get rid of council tax.
I am ashamed of the Scotsman publishing a negative article for one of the best reforms ever to come out of Politics.If the Scotsman had its way then why not scrap income tax and put that on every householder in the country now theres a idea for Labour.
182

Rosscobhoy,

04/09/2008 10:30:13
From the list above, there are a few reasons that should be discussed and explained by the government before the discussion on this goes any further, but the vast majority listed are pretty blatant attempts at scaremongering, and some of them are totally contradictory. 1 and 2 for a start make no sense if used together. How could Scotland end up the highest taxed part of the UK but at the same time end up with a massive deficit due to income raised by tax? Makes no sense.
183

morris,

edinburgh 04/09/2008 10:30:32
215 Only if you make the mistake of confusing it with a newspaper!

This is a fish and chip wrapper and even that is past its sell by date, and obsolete.
Perhaps it could be upgraded to a bog roll.Now that is useful,(provided it does not already have sh (you know what) on it,Looks like it will have to be a Fish and chip wrapper then !
184

The Master,

04/09/2008 10:31:12
#219 Spookie

Loved the pic of your girl – give her a kiss from me. Meant to send you in return link to picture of my girl celebrating Chris Hoy's triumph as part of the success story that is the British Team(whatever Salmond's sour grapes!). Look for the boot of the car behind the bus then she's the black girl about 5 along from there – she's talking to a red haired woman. I wasn't there (honest!), so you'll still be in the dark as to my boat race.

http://www.hellomagazine.com/photo-galleries.html?imagen=/celebrities/2008/08/28/hoy-scotland-welcome/imgs/olympic-scots-2-a.jpg
185

Alan B,

04/09/2008 10:33:06
#The Federalist

My issue with this paper dumbing down so much with so many silly reasons against LIT is it does not really inform the reader of the main issues.

I am against LIT but by providing so many silly and non reasons against LIT you find yourself critising the arguments against the proposals rather than the proposals themselves.
186

Ananurhing,

04/09/2008 10:33:46
Interesting to see how yesterday we had Hamish MacDonnell and his Labour chums singing from exactly the same songsheet word for word, in readiness for this assault on LIT.

Is this not the very " Unblushing subservience " the Scotsman was founded to rail against?

Scotsman's founding mission statement?
"Impartiality, Firmness, INDEPENDENCE!"

Too lofty for you Hamish, is it?
187

Suomi,

Salo,Finland 04/09/2008 10:34:03
What is fair, is taxation based on an ability to pay.That is social justice,a concept that Labour constantly talk about but somehow their rhetoric never manages to match their actions.Many of the 25 points in this list have been dealt with adequately already by the SNP government and some of them are not real issues.

My concern about Labour and a large section of our media is that they are so focused on scoring political points that they have lost sight of why politicians are elected.It is Labour politicians who are not listening to public opinion,not the SNP.By contrast the SNP have extensively consulted with the public about the current tax system and the proposed change to LIT.I recall Alec Salmond saying that the hardship caused by the current taxation system was a major issue raised by constituents at his surgeries.In co ntrast to some of the disgusting comments about Alec Salmond, made on these sites,people who seek his help,view him as a good listerner and a passionate constituency politician who cares about their concerns.I guess his success and popularity as First Minister is the cause of the personal abuse.I just wish that Labour would move away from negative politics and consider what people actually need.Of course their are problems with all forms of taxation,but there are always solutions,if their is a will.Constructive opposition involves finding solutions to barriers that prevent necessary change.
188

Bigwull,

edinburgh 04/09/2008 10:38:20
If these people are against it then I'm all for it.
189

Embra Don,

04/09/2008 10:41:11
# 172 and # 175 The location or address of the payroll operator is irrelevant. The address of the individual is the determining factor. The administrative "burden" will not fall on the business but on HMCR. The business simply applies a different tax code for each individual as they already do.
True you could move house to Berwick as suggested and commute. Enjoy paying the council tax on your new home, your personal care when you become incapacitated, the tuition fees for your student offspring, your prescription charges, parking fees at hospitals etc.
190

morris,

edinburgh 04/09/2008 10:43:15
221

Thank you for that reassurance.
That destroys the objectors claim that this is unworkable !
ITS ALREADY DONE ALL OVER THE PLACE!

I was tempted to suggest that many other countries have such arrangements,but that would only result in demands that I list them with details,and I do not have that information readily to hand nor the time to look it up.
Nor do I have any inclination to waste time responding to people whose agenda is hidden,and the cupid stunts think they are intelligent and have fooled anybody!
Any one else know of countries who successfully operate similar systems?
Weapons are so much more effective when you have the factual ammunition also, to fire at the opposition.

So far we have Switzerland and that is a VERY useful contribution

THANK YOU!
191

Embra Don,

04/09/2008 10:43:47
#230 Bigwull,
LOL - spot on
192

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

04/09/2008 10:46:11
#219 Implementing a tax because happens to "benefit" a majority of the population may be good policitcs but it is bad economics. Apart from the fact that that in it self is not a measure of equitability & fairness, it completely ignore the other 9 principles of a good taxation system.
193

The Tin Man,

04/09/2008 10:46:41
#221 Mantlebrukke

The Swiss tax system is admriable, and bears a resemblance to the LibDem's idea. But it bears no resemblance to the proposed LIT - think of your Kanton and Commune tax abandoned, and lumped into your Fedral tax.

194

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

04/09/2008 10:47:27
#221 But that is not what is being offered - what is being offered is a Scottish Income Tax not an LIT.
195

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

04/09/2008 10:49:29
#222 I don't particularly support the retention of Council Tax either.

It at the very least needs reforming if not replaced.

Certainly an argument could be made to bring in more directed assistance for groups such as pensioners who have been worst affected by Council Tax. A case could also be made for more frequent, independent revaluations. It would be far better than the nonsense of basing bands on notional 1991 values.

Personally though I would rather have a complete rethink over local taxation and there are definitely more radical alternatives out there such a local sales tax or a local wealth tax.

Whatever system is put in place must, in my opinion, strengthen not lessen the accountability role of local taxation. However it is because the financial and functional relationship between central, Scottish and local government is so intertwined that accountability is a real problem.

In truth, since and before devolution, Scottish and central government has habitually managed its own expenditure by forcing local government to take on Scottish and central government responsibilities. Consequently, many Scottish Councils have had to raise Council tax year after year to cope with these increased financial pressures.

It is this deep-seated dilemma that must be dealt with if any logical system for local government finances is to be created. The functions and finances of local government must be divorced from those of the Scottish and central Governments.

One could argue that the problem is not Council Tax per se but much more fundamental and deep-rooted problems.
196

Publius,

London 04/09/2008 10:50:28
Couple of technical points

#201 Embra Don; #202 Morris
The Scotland Act gives Holyrood the power to vary the standard rate of income tax throughout Scotland up or down by 3p in the pound (the 'tartan tax'). The proposal is to increase the upper rate to 43p as well as the standard rate to 23p. Hence the question of whether the proposal is allowable under the Scotland Act.

#189 Alan B; #210 gus1940
The location of your tax office depends on who you work for. I work in England for a Scottish bank and my tax office is in Scotland. I also receive an English teacher's pension from my time working at a University in London -: English teachers' pensions are run by a privatised outfit called Capita in Darlington and its pension office is in South Wales! So I work in England deal with two tax offices - one in Scotland one in Wales.
197

paulr,

edinburgh 04/09/2008 10:51:14
Lets cut the B**S here.
All those who will benefit are in favour and all those who will not benefit are against.
Thats all there is to it.
But letting a bunch of power mad numpties like lothian region or edinburgh council decide what the tax rate will be is absolute lunacy, they would bankrupt us all.
198

Calum10,

04/09/2008 10:54:15
It looks like the Scotsman journalists are beginning to believe in their own headlines. There lies madness.
199

Yada,

04/09/2008 10:54:37
#223
How about a bit of no representation without taxation? You're absolutely right that only those who pay the Council Tax should get a vote for local Councils and the Councils should raise *all* their money locally.
Then we could see what Councils were really costing to run and we might get them back to doing what needed doing around the place instead of spending the day pushing paper and writing reports and pretending they were all serious politicians instead of the local numpties that they actually are.
(Nothing against numpties, except when they get ideas above their station and the rest of us have to pay for it!)
200

,

04/09/2008 11:00:18
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
201

Calvinist,

04/09/2008 11:01:05
This is not a proposal for LIT; it is an increase in income tax full stop. Salmond is approaching his nemesis like a demented lemming (even worse than GB and that's saying something).
202

Buspass,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 11:02:19
Presumably every earner has a tax coding as a starting point, including multiple earners in one household who all use public services.
A quick survey of the responses to this article will give an idea of the public's view on LIT instead of Council Tax.
Finally, perhaps today's Scotman journalists should go back and read some of the work of former editor Alistair Dunnet.
203

shivago8,

livingston 04/09/2008 11:07:52
poor pensioners paying double what five head family wage earners pay.
£17 MILLION OWED BY TAX DODGERS IN EDINBURGH

Thats why we need a change,it is an unfair tax
204

Embra Don,

04/09/2008 11:09:11
226 The Master
Its bad enough that we have to put up with the occasional Daily Mail type on here - but Hello magazine? Gie us a break.
205

Calvinist,

04/09/2008 11:10:21
80% approx will contribute less 20% will contribute more

Not true: Salmond said that 8 out of 10 FAMILIES will be better OR NO WORSE OFF. The usual weasel words from a leader who does not have the gravitas or humility to unite Scotland but is only interested in pursuing his own narrow agenda (no wonder he likes Thatcher; he has a lot in common with her). Certainly not the 'Father of the Nation' Figure to lead Scotland into javascript:__doPostBack('wctlAddComment1$ctl00$btnPost','')independence.
206

Publius,

London 04/09/2008 11:10:38
Alex Salmond counts a political profit as the estimated number of households that will be better off. But there is also a political cost - the number of individuals who will be worse off, that is everyone is earns more than £6k a year and is not personally liable to pay council tax.
207

Embra Don,

04/09/2008 11:12:12
# 245 Calvinist,
You seem to have forgotten to mention the abolition of the Council tax.
208

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

04/09/2008 11:14:07
#247 You are obviously not an econmist - I am by degree - I said economics not economy.

The principles of a good taxation system are not only equitability and fairness but other issues including transparceny & visibility, collectability, easy of payment and so on. The point I was making was that some like yourself place sole emphasis on the equitability & fairness aspect and completely ignore the other 9 key principles of a good taxation system - that is bad economics.

In any case, as Alan B has already pointed out, even on the principle of equitability & fairness their is an argument as to what that actually means in practice.
209

ACS,

St Andrews 04/09/2008 11:16:25
As I understand it, at the moment someone paying income tax of around £6000, would in future be paying £6180 with the extra 3p in the £. If the same person under LIT in future would no longer be paying around £1200 council tax, I think he/she would relish the net saving of £1020.

210

The Master,

04/09/2008 11:17:16
#243 Spook: the Saltire is an integral part of the Union Flag and every bit as acceptable as an expression of Britishness. I shan't pass on your remark that she looks "not bad", as she's used to far higher compliments.

Sounds like the Nats have got themselves into a helluva mess over poll tax 2, but this goes without saying from a party that sticks doggedly to the equally foolhardy and convoluted separation agenda. Anyway, I haven't got the inclination to trawl through this dog's breakfast just now, so shall let you all have my words of wisdom somewhat later in the day.
211

Embra Don,

04/09/2008 11:18:50
# 253 Publius
Yep someone on £7,000 a year would pay £2.50 a month.
Mostly students, I would guess, with part time jobs. It would however mean that a student would be able to share a flat with others who weren't students thus removing the ridiculous anomaly that currently exists, improving flexibility of accommodation and avoiding the creation of student ghettos.
212

Ghengis McCann,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 11:21:09
I see that once again the Scotsman has committed the cardinal sin of daring to question the Gnat orthodoxy, thus bringing down upon its head the full fury of King Smug's army of arrogant zealots.

260-odd posts already, the majority of which have substituted strident cliche and abuse for rational argument. The longstanding practice of the Gnats and their apologists is to assume that anyone who disagrees with the Gnat point of view is simply a Unionist/Labour stooge and thus too stupid to get the point. That is not a particularly clever way to convert what remains a substantial anti-separatist majority of Scots to the separatist point of view. There may even be some merit in some of your policies but we are not going to pay any attention while you are so consumed with pouring hate on our heads for the crime of daring to remain unconvinced by your slogans.

I dare say it won't be a problem in the Utopia which will be your separatist Scotland, though. The Gnat overlords will just close down the free press and exile all their critics to some northern gulag. MacPravda will be the new voice of the nation. If Stalin was living today, he'd likely be a Salmondist.
213

Alan B,

04/09/2008 11:25:36
#Publius

My point was you pay income tax where you are resident. If for instance you go to work in Ireland for 5months you do not pay income tax there. You pay it here. However if you go for more than 6months then you would be liable for tax there.
214

Morbo,

04/09/2008 11:26:08
Every anti-nat story on this website makes this paper money through advertising page hits. You people flock here to defend your party and insult the paper (and each other) and all the time you're making them money. Ignore it, let it die, they aren't listening to you anyway.
215

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

04/09/2008 11:28:02
#263 My mum's the History teacher!! And I can spell - I just can't type sometimes!! Or rather my brain is ahead of my fingers!!

I actually have no problem with the general principle Local Income Tax per se - what I do have a problem is a tax that is being dressed up as a Local Income Tax when it is not.
216

Publius,

London 04/09/2008 11:28:47
#261 Embra Don

Not only students on £7k, but all full time students, apprentices, working spouses/partners, adult offspring who have not fled the nest, aupairs/nannies, carers (see #19 on the list in the article), people in work who receive 100 per cent council tax relief and probably others too.
The main winners will be pensioners in large houses. If pensioners don't like high council tax bills, they can always move to smaller houses. Under the LIT proposal workers in smaller houses will subsidise capital gains for pensioners in larger houses, gains that will be handed on to the heirs of the pensioners.
217

Alan B,

04/09/2008 11:31:01
#Hawkeye

An issue with LIT is that at what point do you over load taxes on income. The uk has move to a high tax country by having a variety of taxation. VAT has gone up from 8% in the early 80s to 17.5% etc.

Taxation on income currently is 20% income tax, another 11% (i think) National Insurance, 10%(ish) employer NI. Making on basic earning the taxation on income over 40%. Then if you take account of pension contributions say 7% (could be lower or higher, be a percentage paid on salary by employer or employee) but would take us to nearly 50% of income taxed.

#Spook , as an accountancy wizz, at what point do you think taxation on income is overloaded and will start being detrimental to the economy.
218

morris,

edinburgh 04/09/2008 11:34:40
237

Of course what is being proposed in Scotland is not identical to our Swiss friends arrangements,but there are many countries operating broadly similar type arrangements and the fact that no two are identical proves just how possible many system variations are.
It adds to flexibility claims if anything!
Where the tax is even more locally variable and accountable, confirms that even the Lib Dems proposal of a separate rate for individual councils could possibly work in theory ,but of course post codes are unlikely to coincide with council boundaries without exceptions, neccesitating individual post codes being used.The Post Office have many POST CODES which encompass numerous council areas.eg EH takes in East Lothian Edinburgh West Lothian and there are possibly some Borders Region wards involved also.There are bound to be post codes which involve two different councils all over the place. Most of EH14 for instance is for Postal purposes Edinburgh but part is considered to be Midlothian, when they are in EDINBURGH DISTRICT and Edinburgh West.The problem is the Post office have never updated their post codes to stay in line with Local Government and Parliamentary constituencies changes,most of which were gerrymandered anyway to try and save some MP's scrawny neck.

Im sure other areas are also areas of potential conflict.

Its the LIB DEMS proposal which may be harder to sort out before it can work.The SNP model is simpler by intention!Both can be made to work however,if the will to do so exists and I believe it does.All measures of public opinion on this show only around 30% in favour of retention of the unfair COUNCIL TAX.
That is the bottom line. IT HAS TO GO!

A straight division where only TD(Berwick upon Tweed area)with DG(Dumfries & Galloway)on the Scottish side ...................................................... and CA(Carlisle Area) and NE(Newcastle)are involved asthe only likely areas of any confusion is far easier and their fou
219

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

04/09/2008 11:34:49
#270 As an accountancy wizz he's too busy trying to work out the different wheezes to avoid the tax . .

;)
220

Alan B,

04/09/2008 11:35:40
#Publius

While i disagree with LIT the worst part of council tax (other than being too high) is the fact it hits pensioners badly.

Making pensioner exempt or atleast cutting council tax in half for them would be a good idea. One of the main benefits of LIT is the fact council tax under labour does hit pensioners far too hard.

Pensioners at the end of the day cannot work their way out of problems. Pensions are now a mess and that is problably the most difficult thing that we will ever have to save for.

Personally i would rather pay my tax contributions when i am earning and then be exempt as a pensioner. Rather than being hit when i can least do anything about it.

I think it immoral to try to force someone out their home by taxation after they have worked all their lives to have that home and paid taxes throughout that working life.
221

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

04/09/2008 11:38:20
#260 I said earlier that more directed assistance for pensioners would be a reasonable stop gap solution until a better alternative to CT comes in.
222

morris,

edinburgh 04/09/2008 11:40:09
258 cont



A straight division where only TD(Berwick upon Tweed area)with DG(Dumfries & Galloway)on the Scottish side ...................................................... and CA(Carlisle Area) and NE(Newcastle)are involved asthe only likely areas of any confusion is far easier and their four postal divisions bears an uncanny resemblance to the current borderline between Scotland and England and exceptions will be comparitively few indeed.

The simplicity of a uniform rate of taxation exists throughout the UK in PAYE and is the source of most of councils finances anyway.How can you object to doing at a Scottish level that which nobody objects to at a UK level?
Your objections appear to be born of personal desire rather than necessity.
If you can prove otherwise I would be glad to know why!

So far I am far from convinced.
223

Morbo,

04/09/2008 11:41:56
# 269

Tax is to pay for council services. A pensioner in a large house does not use more council services just because they have a nice house. They are therefore not being subsidised by 4 people in a smaller house. Tax is not a form of socialism. When that pensioner dies in the big house inheritance tax will get 40% of the sale price and no, the family can only live on there if they can afford to pay the state the 40% value without having to sell.
224

Alan B,

04/09/2008 11:43:26
#Morbo

or avoid inheritence tax by passing the ownership of that house over 7yrs before they die.
225

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

04/09/2008 11:44:28
#258 I don't believe that many actually support the retention of Council Tax. However, what I don't want to see a new tax rushed in (and that's not just LIT) without serious consideration and reasoned debate.

Unfortuantely, as it stands, we are not getting either serious consideration nor raesoned debate from any of our political parties.
226

morris,

edinburgh 04/09/2008 11:44:29
258 AGAIN!

I should add that when I say a uniform rate I am excluding banding for simplicity,before any bright Tory spark comes in with that crud or am I already too late,I wonder?
227

Alan B,

04/09/2008 11:45:40
#Morbo

It is not actually 40% of the estate that is taxed but 40% over the allowance level. About 300,000 think labour were going to lift it to 700,000. (tories are saying 2million)
228

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

04/09/2008 11:48:02
Morris "The simplicity of a uniform rate of taxation exists throughout the UK in PAYE and is the source of most of councils finances anyway.How can you object to doing at a Scottish level that which nobody objects to at a UK level?2

Quite easily - because there is no direct link between taxation, representation and expenditure. Make the rates variable locally and set by local councils and I'd be far more inclined to support an LIT proposal.
229

morris,

edinburgh 04/09/2008 11:48:36
267

I think you mean
There would appear to be a discrepancy in the numbering sequence due to undisclosed reasons perhaps? LOL
230

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

04/09/2008 11:50:39
#269 (In Private Eye fashion) . . . Shurely shome mishtake . . . er . . who was that directed at Hawk?
231

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

04/09/2008 11:51:24
Got you now.
232

morris,

edinburgh 04/09/2008 11:52:37
271 Thanks for pointing that out (as Spook has already done and in no uncertain terms either hahaahah)
I am actually in agony laughing here !
233

Alan B,

04/09/2008 12:06:12
#Scallywag

The otherside of that is income tax avoidance. The more you push taxation onto income tax the more that people start avoiding it.

1)all cash in hand like plumbers, tradesmen etc will already not declare all income for taxation.
2)dito for small businesses where cash it used
3)taking income in ways other than salary. (which is excempt from these proposals).

Spook the accountancy wizz will know all the dodges (tax management strategies).
234

Linda,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 12:06:43
Students, Trade Unionists and Pensioners should do the sums.
Edinburgh Council Tax Income Tax @ 3p

Band A £ 779 £10,000 £ 137
Band B £ 909 £15,000 £ 278
Band C £1039 £20,000 £ 437
Band D £1169 £25,000 £ 587
Band E £1428 £30,000 £ 737
Band F £1688
Band G £1948
Band H £2338

Even Sun Readers if not Scotsman Journalists know that any descrepanicies with LIT can be ironed out with Independence or even full fiscal autonomy.
235

Alan B,

04/09/2008 12:12:25
#Spook :)
236

tartan army 2222,

04/09/2008 12:16:47
What a disgraceful article. As someone has already mentioned - they seem to have forgotten to ask the most important group, the people. The people want it.

I listened to Ian Hamilton on the radio this morning and caller after caller was for a LIT. Finally they found someone vehemently against. He lost me when he said he paid £60,000 tax a year and started quoting Ayn Rand.
237

morris,

edinburgh 04/09/2008 12:17:48
284

You and Spook should get together.

You don't beat about the bush either I can see LOL.
238

SilverShred,

in the jamjar 04/09/2008 12:31:02
Pathetic article. Yvette Drooper from the 10p Treasury, a Professor from a Mickey Mouse University, and a drone from the Loser party who said we were all going to pay an extra £5000 a year if the SNP won.

What a joke the Scotsman has become!

239

Mallet,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 12:31:24
Agree a one sided argument by the journalists, even though I will be disadvantaged by this. I'm happy to pay the additional and fairer tax as long as we get value for the tax money paid and there is much more accountability at the local council level for their expenditure. I think we also need to look at ways in which those supported by tax - long-term unemployed etc can support the local councils through work to reduce the overall burden on everyone else, particularly those on low incomes, single parent workers etc.
240

bobbyballingry,

fife 04/09/2008 12:32:55
Er, excuse me for asking, but wasn't the Local Income Tax idea part of something called a manifesto, you know one of these things politicians always tell us (only at election time usually) that they'll try to adhere to. In any event, the list of people against it-Institute of Directors, Accountants and Yvette Cooper- probably confirms its likely to benefit ordinary working people and be of disadvantage to the rich dudes...Bring it on, Alex. Lets make the rich dudes squeal.......
241

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

04/09/2008 12:36:18
#282 There are two issues here - those who use good accountants to avoid tax (which is legal) and those who use cash-in-hand to evade the tax (which is illegal).

Tax avoidance can be limited by trying to creat good legislation - ensuring that there are no loopholes in the first place. But, and Spook could probably confirm this, accountants are very "creative" at finding ways to circumvent taxation. But then that would be a problem for any tax that was brought in. What is important is that any legislation is considered and examined throroughly to avoid the most obvious problems.

The issue of tax evasion is much more problematic - as you say - many occupations, particularly the trades, will prefer to pay cash in hand. Some would argue that there are possibilities that the tax will not be neutral as it will change people's behaviour - shifting more into the already sizeable black economy.
242

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

04/09/2008 12:39:17
#291 "Lets make the rich dudes squeal......."

The rich dudes won't squeal though - they'll just pay their accountants to avoid the tax. Those most likely to lose out will be families with two middle-earners - those who are earning a comfortable living but who could never be classed as being megarich.
243

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

04/09/2008 12:43:24
For those of you who are interested in your own situation Glasgow have a calculator to work out how the tax would affect your household:

http://www.glasgow.gov.uk/AF3int/an/default.aspx/RenderForm/?F.Name=EVYys4iyhHj
244

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

04/09/2008 12:54:57
#295 Our household actually gains under the proposals but I am still opposed to it as it stands.

Just because I benefit does not necessarily mean I should support it.

Did the calculations on Glasgow's calculator - a band D household in Dundee, for example, would need to earn around £64,000 before they started to lose out - that is not the megarich that some seem to think this targets but the reasonably comfortable working professional couple.
245

Willie S,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 12:58:16
One suspects that Alex is a clever man, and he is banking on this not going through. Thus he can give us the hairdryer treatment about the Unionists stopping the settled will of Scotland.

Only a fool meddles with local taxation, as Margaret Thatcher will testify. Taxing property is straightforward, taxing people is tricky. People move round, come off the electoral roll, find addresses in England to register as their home address. Not a problem where Income tax is the same accross the UK. becomes a problem if it varies upon where you live.

All this talk of 'taxing the super rich'. These people already off shore most of their income, now you will save them monet in property taxes, again only fools believe that the rich will meekly pay up.

I think this could be the issue that bursts the SNP bubble in about three/four years when the mayhem and the protests kick in. But only if Alex has miscalculated and actually has to do it!
246

PoI2,

04/09/2008 13:02:30
The "reasons" contradict each other. How can taxes be higher (#2) at the same time as leaving a "financial black hole" in the accounts (#1) and leading to service cuts (#3 & #10)?
247

Zedd,

Fife 04/09/2008 13:02:43
As everyone seems to have also noted - A very one sided piece. Surely there are savings from taking collections functions from each council.
248

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 04/09/2008 13:06:35
How many of the 25 reasons would be left if we stripped out the "interested" parties (Labour, TUC etc), the ones that simply say it will be difficult, the ones where the head of an organisation is not accurately reflecting the views of its members (ie the Institute of Chartered Accountants) and the "you're not allowed to" brigade.

Not many by my count.

249

Boydie,

Scotland 04/09/2008 13:08:37
Surely the fairest method would be for people to pay for the services they actually receive or choose to use?
250

Vivas,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 13:12:45
#230 Joe-kerr,04/09/2008 11:00:18 has pointed out the Scotsmans increasing descent into the newspaper abyss.

ABC Circulation 30-Jun-2008 to 27-Jul-2008
Scotsman 48,236 (down from 61000 last year).

I (used to) buy newspapers to read balanced and informed debate from journalists and commentators. Is there any reason why The Scotsman is unable to hold that debate ? Any reason why its chooses instead to editorialise and harangue whats left of it's readership as if they haven't got a single brain cell ?

It's a shame to see The Scotsman undergoing this terminal illness, but not yet too late to return to fairness, even-handedness and balance. Hopefully the owners will wake up to that before it's way way too late, but I'm not betting on it :-((
251

E D Musem,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 13:17:10
The tax is ridiclous

1) Increasing tax burden on Working population
2) There are rich pensioners who do not work. Are they now Tax exempt. Instead of abolishing it why no make low earners exempt.
3) A barefaced attempt by the SNP to secure more funds to persist in their agenda. I guess we can use it open embassies in Malawi and fund the Scottish olympic team
4) Independence is far more important than allievating poverty in the West coast of Scotland.
5) So much for our low tax 'Celtic Tiger' economy.
6) Beware Salmond is Scotland's Mugabe.

Independence if the tories get in, not with the SNP.
252

Alan B,

04/09/2008 13:18:17
#Boydie

So how do you charge people for the police? Do you only pay when you report a crime? Should the criminal be charged to pay for the police cost involved?

What about social work? Charge the person being abused? Who do you charge if it is only suspected?

Education. Are you saying parents should pay or tution fees that children can pay on leaving school.

Much of council expenditure is not direct services and many are really national services provided via the council.

You could take your line for libraries etc but that could very easily mean closing them all. Maybe not a bad thing.
253

Ananurhing,

04/09/2008 13:20:31
So everyone apart from the tories (who cares) think that the council tax is unfair.

The Libdems could have been in govt to influence LIT, but chose not to. Put up or shut up!

Scottish Labour want to replace CT with another property based tax. The very thing that makes CT unfair.
Scotlab are eagerly willing to collude with with westminster to rob Scotland of £400m, just to pick another fight with the ELECTED Scottish govt. That's devolution for you!

I'm now convinced the unionist establishment are prepared to lay waste to Scotland, just to get her back on the unionist track.
And they wonder how they've become unelectable!

The Scottish labour group are masquerading as the Labour party!!!! They've been found out, and have nothing to say. No vision, no message, nothing progressive to offer. Same old trough snuffling.

Cairns and Browne are self serving comprador scum!! Quite willing to see the dirty done in Scotland to please their masters.

Prepare to be scraped off Scotland's shoe! And we'll not forget the smell for a long time!

254

Alan B,

04/09/2008 13:20:35
#E D Musem

Pensioners are not exempt. They will pay LIT on income like the rest of us. Pensions are liable for income tax at the moment.

The only way a pensioner would avoid LIT would to live of investment income.
255

,

04/09/2008 13:21:13
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
256

E D Musem,

04/09/2008 13:23:25
Yes they pay tax on the pension, but they live in a £500,000 mansion living of accumlated savings and pay nothing for the roads, rubbish collection etc

While I work 5 days a week and subsidise them.
I think we may have a free rider problem here.
257

Alan B,

04/09/2008 13:26:29
#E D Musem

You post make little sense.
1)"Increasing tax burden on Working population"

it is tax cut so you are wrong.

2)rubbish as I posted above

3)"A barefaced attempt by the SNP to secure more funds to persist in their agenda"

How? If you are talking about council tax rebate, all they want is for the same money to come to scotland if the sp uses the power of devolution settlement to change the method of taxation for local government.

4)"Independence is far more important than allievating poverty in the West coast of Scotland."

The point of independence is to improve the economy which has suffered with the union. Your own comment admits the west of scotland has economic issues but then seems to want to continue with the situation that got us into that situation in the first place.

5)"So much for our low tax 'Celtic Tiger' economy"

The snp have a policy to have a 20% corporation tax to help us achive that. Ireland has a 12.5%. With the dumb settlement we have we cannot even change corporation tax.
258

Alan B,

04/09/2008 13:29:56
#317 E D Musem

You stated they were excempt they are not.

"pay nothing for the roads"

The chancellor takes 40billion on petrol taxes with only a fraction being spent on roads.

If a pensioner drives and uses the roads they will be paying massive road related taxation anyway.

259

E D Musem,

04/09/2008 13:30:19
It is not a tax cut for me.
I pay £60 a month council tax.

I am not sure how much a 3p rise in tax is exactly.
However, I am quite sure it is more than £60.
260

Alan B,

04/09/2008 13:33:32
#E D Musem

The point about pensions is serious.

Council tax has been pushed up very quick to high levels. Pensioner poverty is now a real issue.

Brown has completely ruined pensions in this country.

Personally i would rather pay more tax during my working life that have to pay high taxation when i can least do anything about it when i have retired. Have you actually sat down and tried to work out how much we have to save to have a income when we retire.

If you retire at 60 and want 20,000 a yr to live on and need money till 80 you would need to save 400,000 and that assumes the government does not make a mess of inflation.



261

Boydie,

Scotland 04/09/2008 13:33:58
Alan B point taken, I was only trying to get my head around the whole issue. I have no problem with taxation God knows I pay enough, however I fundamentally do not see why I should pay more for the same services as the man next door simply because I have worked 7 days a week for the last 10 years trying to ensure a good future life for my family when the man next door may have opted not to. The costs to supply these services to both of us cost the same.
262

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

04/09/2008 13:34:24
Out of interest I looked at all the bands to see at which point the household would lose out. Figures are for Dundee (one of the higher CTs in the country) - other councils have lower CTs so there would be a shifting downwards of the level that you would lose out. Also, the figures assume full CT is being paid, those receiving CT discount would find that this also reduces the level:

Band A - £46,200
Band B - £52,150
Band C - £58,000
Band D - £63,900
Band E - £75,655
Band F - £87,450
Band G - £99,255
Band H - £116,900
263

Alan B,

04/09/2008 13:36:38
#E D Musem

It is an overall tax cut. Like with any new tax there will be winners and losers. This tax which i do not support aims to be fairer for lower incomed people. But could hit youngsters when they stay at home but are earning. But then why should the other youngster who has left home and equally working be effectively subsidising the other person.
264

E D Musem,

04/09/2008 13:38:16
#323

Read my original post.

Keep council tax. Allow for exemptions for the poorest pensioners.

#322

So they can afford it better than I can. What are they doing with there money. Giving it to charity? Buying modern art? Organising shooting parties? Eating fine food and drinking fine wine?

Is it better to steal my wages from me to pay to recover some part of our feudal tribal heritage.

J
265

john z,

edinburgh 04/09/2008 13:38:28
I personally would pay more under the local income tax. BUT, as someone who took a stand against the unfair poll tax, I completely agree with the introduction of local income tax based upon earnings.

The notion that Labour oppose LIT just baffles me. Is it not abundantly clear that the rich will pay more, and the poor will pay a lot less. Is that not what the Labour party stand for?

Most ordinary people in Scotland can see the benefits of Local income tax, it is only unionists and the rich (directors, lawyers, journalists) who are against it.

Considering the history of the Tory poll tax in Scotland, perhaps Labour would do well to have a re-think on their negative attitude to LIT. The world and Scotland are moving on, and Labour in Scotland are getting left behind.
266

Alan B,

04/09/2008 13:39:45
#324 Boydie

Agree.

I made that point earlier in relation to fairness. Is it about equality of outcome or opportunity.

Most people earn more because of the choices they make and the effort they put in. If you choose a job that you like more and pays less why should you be subsidised by someone who chooses a job to earn more money.
267

Alan B,

04/09/2008 13:43:45
#Scallywag

Do not really see how pretending to live in england would help with tax avoidance. You would pay full whack for your property there and have to pay council tax on 2nd property here.

You would have to be earning really serious money to even make it worth thinking about.

There are alot of much easier ways to avoid it.
268

E D Musem,

04/09/2008 13:50:17
If they do this I am going to start my own Boston Tea Party
269

Kenny,,

Glasgow 04/09/2008 13:52:26
25 reasons from vested interests and the politically motivated. We the people can safely ignore this rubbish.
270

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 04/09/2008 13:52:27
All of the Scottish Dailies are lambasting LIT.

An attempt to brainwash the electorate.
271

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 04/09/2008 13:55:05
#312 Nonsense, every word.
272

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

04/09/2008 13:58:54
#331 Correct - especially if you are self-employed - amazing what you can claim as being tax-deductible not to mention the different capital allowances available.
273

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

04/09/2008 14:04:35
Jeez - all these Labour-supporting newspapers . . . perhaps the issue is that the proposals as they stand have more holes in them than my grandpa's string vest.

That being said - I honestly wish the opposition would not just snipe about the proposals but tell us what they would do instead. It seems to me that only the Lib Dems (and I am no fan of them) are the only opposition party stating explicitly what they would do instead.
274

Alan B,

04/09/2008 14:16:32
#337 Fed

I was thinking of things like taking income in ways that are not salaried like dividends or other investment income.

We have seen mps pay their children, what is to prevent small businessmen doing the same thing and using their allowances.

Not sure exactly how LIT proposals would work. But what happens if company pays employee in shares. Would they be subject to LIT. From the little i know they would not.

Would it make it worth a company loading more into a 50yr olds pension fund to avoid LIT.

It is better never overloading one method of taxation.


275

A Clamper,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 14:18:19
Most people will be better off with a LIT, including myself, so you can stick your objections.
276

Alan B,

04/09/2008 14:19:18
#338 The Federalist

I think it is only labour that do not have any proposals. And with their leadership election we will probably have to wait a while before knowing what they will come up with now. (Grey have appeared to uturn already).

All the other parties support scotland retaining the money from council tax benefit.

I personally do not see much wrong with some sort of property based tax as long as we take care of the pensioner issue and do not have it too high. Would like to understand more about land tax.
277

Club Player,

Aberdeen 04/09/2008 14:20:38
This new tax proposal is unweildy, unworkable and unfair. No one wants it and this could become the SNP's poll tax.

If the SNP keep pushing this tax it may well finish their short tenure as a credible political force.
278

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

04/09/2008 14:26:12
Labouyr and the Tories present policy is to retain and amend Council tax - what they actually plan to do remains somewhat vague. Only the Lib Dems of the opposition parties have explicitly made clear their plans gor local government finances.

By the way I have no problem with a property tax either - what matters to me is that whatever tax is brought strikes the right balance in terms of the guiding principles of what makes a good tax.
279

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 04/09/2008 14:30:29
#342 CP

I have yet to hear how LIT is "unfair".

Please elaborate.
280

Reiver,

London 04/09/2008 14:34:59
What about the highly paid workers living in Scotland but working in England, we won't have to pay any Council tax when we 'move' to England where we maintain a flat/bed-sit ... the removal of the Scottish council tax will simply cover the English Council tax (with lots of change in our pocket) and no funds going to the services our family home's will still enjoy on the Scottish side of the Border.

Time for another change ... put the Tories into power in Scotland, at least then there might be some common sense applied to the wee pretendie parliament.
281

Ananurhing,

04/09/2008 14:41:16
Certainly in the recent past, there have been many people from elsewhere in the UK, who have second homes in Scotland declared as their primary residence. Presumably for preferential 2nd home discounts on their main home. Rural electoral registers are quite revealing this way.

The reservation I have with LIT, is that it looks as if you wouldn't need to own property elsewhere to avoid it. You would simply have to register outside Scotland as your main residence.
Home in Scotland could then be registered to family member who lives off investments, or has no income.

Forgive me if this has been covered. I've not read all posts.
282

Bob M,

Paisley 04/09/2008 14:47:44
#325 - The Federalist.
Cheers for those figures, we currently live in a Band E house with a combined income of less than half that threshold amount.

LIT for me :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
283

Club Player,

Aberdeen 04/09/2008 14:51:27
With every passing day the SNP's real intention of goading Westminster rather than coming up with strong, useful and practible policies for Scotland becomes more apparent.

The failure of this approach must be telling because also with every day Alec Salmond seems to look chubbier, sweatier and more bug eyed. So much so that that all he needs is Nicola Sturgeon in a gold bikini and his Jabba costume will be complete.
284

Ghengis McCann,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 14:53:02
#273 Hawkeye the Noo - your sour, insulting and inaccurate post, which is a string of cliches most of which have little relevance to what I said in my post or indeed suggest that I said things in my post which I did not, or hold views which I do not, is a perfect illustration of the accuracy of my post as regards the mindset of the Gnat zealots. Your only response to criticism is to insult and abuse the critics rather than address the questions raised.

And as usual, we get the usual taunts that somehow we are less Scottish or care less for our country because we happen to dare to disagree with your orthodoxy.

"...you ought to understand, if it's not too difficult for you...". How patronising. How arrogant. There is nothing in your post to suggest either that you have any answers or that you are smart and those who disagree with you are dumb.

The opinion of the majority of Scots who did not vote SNP is no less valid than yours. Nor can we simply be dismissed as imbeciles. In case you hadn't noticed, the Gnat minority needs our votes if it is to progress. So perhaps rather than spouting bile, you would be better advised to engage in meaningful debate. Because the imbecilic attitude which you displayed in your posts is certainly not going to win any hearts and minds.
285

Ananurhing,

04/09/2008 14:55:58
With every passing day Labour's real intention of goading the Scottish govt rather than coming up with strong, useful and practible policies for Scotland becomes more apparent.
286

Alan B,

04/09/2008 14:58:41
#346 Reiver

Do not understand where you are coming from. You will pay LIT in scotland if that is your primary residence. A second home will be hit by council tax so if you rellocate to london and maintain your family home as a 2nd residence you will still pay council tax on it.

And lets face it you would have to earn considerably more in London that £100,000 a yr, to make it worth even trying to do something to avoid lit.

Anyway if it is due to low bedsit accomodation (not many earning that money will really want a bedsit), you could argue that if that is your main residence then you could be paying lower council tax anyway.

Dont think you have really worked it out.
287

Brian S,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 15:02:36
I wonder what planet the Scotsman is one.

I am fortunate enough to earn over 60k a year and I'm happy to pay more tax. The basic reason being I can see it benefiting those close to me. My grandmother was a domestic help and has only her state pension as her main source of income. Having no council tax to pay would be a great benefit to her. Why shouldn't we try to help those in society who genuinely need our help? And no I don't mean the job dodgers and benefits cheats. I mean hard working folk who have been less fortune in life than others.

Well done the SNP!
288

Ghengis McCann,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 15:04:06
Hawkeye the Noo - "...it's also intended for all of these blockhead unionists with their daily doses of anti-Scottish negativity, their schoolboy ridicule and self-righteous bluster, the nursery fascists with their heads full of stupidity and their selfish wish to deny a country its right to be independent if that's what it chooses or argues to do..."

What a load of hate-filled garbage. No-one is denying Scotland the right to be independent if that's what Scots voters choose. All the SNP have to do is call that promised referendum, and then win that promised referendum. And if, as on present form seems likely, the SNP loses that referendum, presumably the separatists like you will graciously accept the settled will of the Scottish people to choose to remain part of the UK, and shut up.

You're certainly doing a good job persuading the undecided over to your cause though. Nothing like insulting the voters, calling them imbeciles and Unionist traitors and accusing them of being unScottish to win waverers over to your point of view.

Even if I supported separatism I wouldn't vote for it if it meant narrow-minded bigots like you in charge of the country. You scare me. I listen the tone of your posts and those like you and I hear shades of Milosevic and Mugabe. No place for those who dare to disagree in your intolerant Scotland, I fear.
289

Brian S,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 15:09:43
354

Have you read your own post? I suggest you tone it down a bit before you start spouting your own venom.

If you're going to have a debate please try to be level headed about it. You come across just as militant as those you are trying to talk down.

I thank you.
290

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

04/09/2008 15:24:58
#356 Just like there was no fuss about the 10p rate?

When any tax change takes place it is always those who lose out that kick up the most fuss - often to a level (as with the 10p change) that is disproportionate to the numbers losing out.

There is no certainty that the same could not happen here - much depends on how motivated those who lose out are. As with the Poll Tax it took a long simmer for things to blow up into a full scale rebellion - it was only when it hit those who lost out that the Poll tax was dead.

The one difference here - and something I suspect the SNP are banking on - is that the numbers of losers will be proportionately less than that under the Poll tax - less chance of there being an uproar.

As I have said before though my main objection to the tax is not on grounds of equitability or fairness but because of the complete lack of a direct link between local representation, taxation and expenditure.
291

Ghengis McCann,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 15:33:22
#355 - sure have, I read it while I was writing it. And having re-read it, I still reckon it is pretty temperate compared with the Hawkeye the Noo's bile in his/her various posts.

Part of the problem seems to be that the separatists feel they should somehow be exempt from analysis or criticism. Any sign of disagreement is contemptuously dismissed as a betrayal of Scotland by people too stupid to see their point. That simply won't pass muster, I am afraid.

And given there is no majority at present in favour of separation, the uncommitted vote requires to be wooed rather than castigated if separation is ever to happen. Less than 1 in 6 of the Scottish electorate voted for the SNP in May 2007 - that is nowhere near the level of support needed to win a referendum, so the separatists have a lot of work to do, and it is more sophisticated work than dismissing non-SNP supporters with contempt.

No need to thank me.
292

Mr A Roy,

04/09/2008 16:15:26
Amazing the well to do have to pay a little more and oh boy does it hurt !
On the other hand its ok to rip off the poor !
Says a lot doesnt it !
293

Suomi,

Salo,Finland 04/09/2008 16:44:46
#342,no tax based on an ability to pay is u nfair.Most certainly the current taxation is unfair.How do we change it?
294

Nic83,

04/09/2008 17:04:50
OUTRAGEOUS reporting!! What an utterly unbalanced and shamefully inflammatory article! I sincerely hope the paper plans to run '25 reasons for' tomorrow or it just lost that last scrap of journalistic integrity it possessed. There's no excuse for publishing this without at least offering SNP (or anyone not pro-Labour for that matter) a chance to respond.

Arrgh!
295

Mikey,

04/09/2008 17:14:21
Genghis, let's just assume that the National Party wins a majority of seats at the Westmonster election, shall we? Will you then agree that the majority has spoken (as every Brit politician has agreed since the rise of the Scottish people)?

Or will you just refuse to accept the outcome?

We are democrats. We only have to win once. You have to win EVERY time!
296

R.Soles,

04/09/2008 17:59:08
Yvette Cooper and Ed Balls – London Evening Standard 23/07/07
Haven't they done well:
Cabinet husband-and-wife team Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper have been accused of exploiting Commons expenses rules to buy a £655,000 home and get their children into a top state school. The pair, who were both promoted by Gordon Brown, have registered their four-bedroom North London house as a 'second home' under parliamentary rules, which entitles them to allowances of up to £44,000 a year to subsidise their £438,000 mortgage.
They also have a 'weekend' property in Yorkshire, which they used to call their second home. But by instead declaring their more expensive London house to be their secondary residence, they can claim more money from taxpayers. The couple fairly recently moved from inner-city Lambeth to a smart Edwardian townhouse in a more fashionable area of London, close to better schools.
The move, five months ago, came just 16 days after Mr Balls, the Children's Secretary, and his Housing Minister wife raised £45,000 by re-mortgaging their Yorkshire home, which had been paid for by their Commons expenses. They moved from Lambeth, whose schools are notorious for poor standards, to Stoke Newington, a neighbourhood fashionable with young, middle-class families. Their children now attend a sought-after primary school praised for its 'strong leadership'.
The expenses come on top of generous salaries. Mr Balls, 40, earns £137,579 a year while Ms Cooper, 38, is paid £100,578. It is yet another issue in the latest in a string of controversies over the way MPs benefit from the Commons Additional Costs Allowance, designed to assist members in carrying out their parliamentary duties by subsidising overnight stays away from their main home either in their constituency or near Westminster. Criticism of Mr Balls and Ms Cooper centres on their decision to change the property registered with Commons authorities as their 'secondary residence' on which they claim expenses.
The Commons
297

R.Soles,

04/09/2008 18:01:01
Continued from 365

The Commons Green Book governing allowances gives the following guidelines: 'The location of your main home will normally be a matter of fact. If you have more than one home, your main home will normally be the one where you spend more nights than any other.'
According to the Scotsman’s sister paper –Scotland on Sunday February 24th 2008 The Cabinet’s golden couple claimed £300.000 between them during the last financial year including £30.000 for their second home.

Enough said…..
298

Highland Mighty©,

04/09/2008 18:06:55
LOL! Look at all the nats flap away!

Brilliant!
299

Kimg Arthur,

04/09/2008 18:23:03
LOL - The scotsman only has 12 readers left!!!!! LOL!
300

Kimg Arthur,

04/09/2008 18:55:55
I was visiting a friend of mine over in Stockton and he was telling me about some of the depraved things that happen there. Now, you Scottish people calm down, but, there was talk of a Scottish bloke who was...well, he was father of a lass and he used to....."do stuff" with her....and her over 18 and all, so she was consenting. Quite filthy. Sorry Scotland, but you have bad eggs as well. As my old dad used to say, "some of those people in the Tees Valley are total freaks". And he was right.
301

Tris,

04/09/2008 19:20:50
As this is a balanced and serious newspaper, I'm sure that tomorrow's edition with run with an article on the 25 reasons to vote FOR LIT.

What's that you say, it won't?

Oh dear. 25 reasons to go on reading the Scotsman.

Hum......

Nope, can't think of one.

302

fritigern,

Inverness 04/09/2008 19:21:29
Professor Hinsworth is talking rubbish. In both Ireland and Italy very little of the money used in Local (mis)Government is raised locally.
303

Tris,

04/09/2008 19:24:29
LOL.... actually the first reason is pretty funny....

Mrs Balls, who is some bigwig in the Treasury says....

God, she's in the Treasury, that should tell you all you need to know. That's probably why we're the only G8 country heading for resession.

Mrs Balls is far too busy fiddling her housing expenses to know anything about Scotland's finances. Silly old woman.
304

RightTurn,

Scotland 04/09/2008 19:24:55
We should all refuse to pay this absurd Nat Tax and encourage non-payment (just as the SNP told people to do regarding the Poll Tax).

Hopefully this ill-considered 'local' income tax won't see the light of day.

Council tax needs to be reduced, not scrapped.
305

Tris,

04/09/2008 19:25:49
374. The money spent by the Scottish Government isn't raised locally!!

If it's good enough for the country, why is it not good enough for councils?
306

Tris,

04/09/2008 19:27:42
376. You can't, you numpty; it's INcome Tax.... it's deducted at source.

Otherwise I would long ago have stopped paying the part that goes to killing foreigners in Iraq and Afghanistan
307

Florence,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 20:05:12
33 EDWARD: Mr. & Mrs. Ed Balls - abusers of the parliamentary housing allowance!
308

Rebel,

SC USA 04/09/2008 20:07:23
The main reason for government opposition to the LIT is their loss of control over taxpayers. If taxes stayed closer to home and the spending was controlled locally then the English would lose their control over the Scottish.
309

Islay Herald,

04/09/2008 20:12:07
Well, I've done my sums and I'm better off under LIT, so I'm for it. The CBI can whistle.
310

Florence,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 20:15:31
64 HIBBY: You must have been delighted, then, with the articulate orator Jack McConnell as (dare I say it) First Minister. And certainly no "toe curling" at his pin-striped kilt! Ha, ha, ha.
311

Florence,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 20:21:41
90 NABODICAN: You really just don't get it, do you? Your comment shows a complete misunderstanding of the issue.
312

Florence,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 20:22:43
Sorry, NABODICAN SHOULD BE COMMENT 91.
313

Bzzzz,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 20:40:00
More ridiculous one sided unionist scaremongering.
The SNP are doing a great job and particularly when the media is financed and run by unionists hellbent on embelishing everything the SNP does with negativity. These idiots are only interested in keeping the union through bloody mindedness and a desire to line their own pockets with "blood money".. money earned whilst holding back and punishing Scotland and Scots.
314

Dileas_sean,

Near Hawick 04/09/2008 21:02:12
Alex Salmond is right> Two years ago in St Andrews, I had to pay £1320 a year from my pensions for the let of a two bedroomed flat, and that was with the 25% reduction for living alone. That was monstrous. Most of the objectors are thinking only of themselves and not considering how much a burden is a council tax not related to income. Of course I remember the time before the 2nd War when the councils raised their own cash. We won't go back to that, sad to say. Ronald
315

Buckfastleigh,

England 04/09/2008 21:14:00
We are burning with envy here. Alex is absolutely right and if Labour had any sense they would have put this into practice here instead of parking that paricular proposal into the long grass of Wasteminister. You seem to have all the best policies in Scotland! Labour will insit on carrying on the policies of Mrs Thatcher and is it really surprising that they are heading for political disaster? Please Mr Salmond do come and take over in London; you are needed.
316

Wee Pal Joe,

04/09/2008 21:21:34
Seems the SNP want Revenue & Customs to collect this tax. Will they have to ask nicely? Pay Revenue & Customs a large fee? Both?
317

Conan the Librarian™,

04/09/2008 22:13:50
396
Peynoan

Dae I ken ye frae somewhere? Fit lick?
318

Alan Reid,

NZ 04/09/2008 22:14:29
So Bendy Wendy got off with taking a back hander. Meanwhile the Pro Unionists Orc's go on the attack against Salmond's attempt to help the poorest paid in Scotland. Pathetic, but what would you expect from people who have nothing but comtempt for Scotland and it's people.
Keep it up Alex, they don't like it up 'em!
319

Edinburgh Noddy,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 22:26:42
"Andy has indeed made his mother, family, Dunblane and all of Scotland, extremely proud today! No doubt the 'British' media will struggle to recognise the achievement, but that's the evil we live with on a daily basis."

#37 AJ Fife. Are you mad? As well as having nothing to do with LIT, most people in the British Isles aren't really that bothered about tennis. Get this, it really doesn't matter - it's only a game.

LIT is a bad idea, but it's got nothing to do with devolution, secession or union.

It will be more expensive to collect, easier to evade, has no bearing on use of services, will discourage honesty and hard work, will reward people who don't work, and will focus taxation even more on income, where it already mostly lies.

Will there be a common rate throughout Scotland? Wont that raise more money in Edinburgh than Glasgow? Will Edinburgh have to subsidise Glasgow? Or will there be different rates across Scotland? Will people be taxed on where they work or where they live? Will J K Rowling really want to pay millions more to 'live' in Edinburgh? Why should she? How many bins does she need emptied? Doesn't she already pay enough tax? What about Russian millionaires living in Edinburgh - why shouldn't they make a contribution? Wont intake fluctuate much more than with the council tax? What about people staying in a hotel or BnB in Scotland in the week while they work, but going back to Germany at the weekend?

"Income tax collection rates are around 96.17%"

#241 Spook, don't know where you got that from. That's a very precise, and high, figure for a 'unknown known' as Donald Rumsfeld would say. This study http://www.res.org.uk/society/mediabriefings/pdfs/2004/july04/lyssiotou.pdf suggests that self-employed people declare about half their income. A property tax is harder to evade. I think you mean collection as a percentage of assessments, not as a percentage of what's being earned.

Most Local authority spending is already covered by central
320

Edinburgh Noddy,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 22:28:24
... you do know that Sir Sean will never want to live here under an LIT.
321

Edinburgh Noddy,

Edinburgh 04/09/2008 22:29:36
Most Local authority spending is already covered by central government anyway - including from income tax. Council tax only raises about 20% http://www.unison-scotland.org.uk/briefings/counciltax.html , so already tax payers are subsidising non working home owners.

LIT is a populist measure. The hope is that as most voters will benefit they will support it. The minority who will pay more, like low paid shop workers who already can't hope to ever afford to own even a Band A property can just whistle, while people in Band G, enjoying comfortable surroundings, and sitting on a valuable asset can have their bins emptied for free.
322

Huntly loon,

Aberdeenshire 04/09/2008 22:33:52
LIT will result in anomalies and even complications but I find some of the 25 objections from some rather worthy institutions a bit disconterting. I will quote onlt one - No9 "Scottish firms would be placed at a competitive disadvantage to companies in other parts of the UK because LIT additions to wage packets would be passed on to customers." SCOTTISH CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE. Surely LIT is a deduction not an addition to a paypacket. The wage cost remains unchanged to an employer.

The income tax system is exceedingly complex and payroll systems have to deal with a myriad of complexities, Tax, National Insurance, Sickness pay, Maternity etc, Court judgments, student loans, L, N T K codes ..... Scottish Local Income Tax will hardly make a whit of difference.

What really might be a problem is people mis-stating their main residence. But let them be cautious. Should they lie to HMRC (who will no doubt have to implement the system) about where they live, they may well fall foul to having where they do live fall within the ambit of Capital Gains Tax legislation if they are not honest about their homes' status. Another thing is the LIT will have to be dealt with throughout the UK as their are many major employers whose tax offices are in England. Some oil companies in Aberdeen have their PAYE tax offices at Salford which also deals with their employees P45s and P60s
323

muppetfinder,

04/09/2008 22:37:11
" you do know that Sir Sean will never want to live here under an LIT." another good reason
324

Pro Libertate,

Labour Free Zone 04/09/2008 22:46:26
The flat earth society strikes again, aided by the Hootsmans political pygmies.
The existing system is unfair - I think everyone (regardless or political hue) agrees with that.
However, the FES are against doing anything about it in the off chance they fall of the earth!

325

AndyMac10,

stirling 04/09/2008 22:56:47
I agree that the Scotsman article was badly written and researched.

However, I am adamantly against LIT. My household earns around 70k and will see an increased bill of around £500 a year. Don't give me 'you can afford it'. This level of income has been worked hard for. Wheres the incentive for me to get on when every extra penny I earn would be taxed at 43% for services I use much less than the low-paid/unemployed!

As usual the middle income earners foot the bill
326

morris,

edinburgh 04/09/2008 23:26:11

401

You said

LIT is a populist measure. The hope is that as most voters will benefit they will support it. The minority who will pay more, like low paid shop workers who already can't hope to ever afford to own even a Band A property can just whistle, while people in Band G, enjoying comfortable surroundings, and sitting on a valuable asset can have their bins emptied for free.

The people who benefit are the low paid !

The people who pay more are the wealthy multiple income families and the council tax no longer exists. In fact low paid people will contribute very little indeed and its nowhere near what they will save from not paying council tax!

327

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 04/09/2008 23:29:19
Newsnight Scotland tonight. A disaster for Labour! All three candidates made fools of themselves.
328

Gtj,

04/09/2008 23:39:24
The only people and organisations who are against the LIT are the ones who earn far too much money or are on the Gravy Train.

No wonder they are panicing - Cause it's gonna happen and millions of hard pressed families are going to be better off.

No amount of lying or biased propaganda manure that is being pedled by the papers and media is going to change a thing.

I can almost feel their pain - not.
329

morris,

edinburgh 04/09/2008 23:47:42
376

How do you propose refusing to pay a tax taken at source then? Do you even know what that means?

330

Alan Reid,

NZ 04/09/2008 23:55:46
404 danielrober,I have paid tax to the UK for the last three years ( still trying to get a rebate) however I do look forward to the day when i'll come back to live. There's nothing wrong in wanting to see more of the world.
As for picking fights:

I kept this post from a while back, it struck a cord with me. And just who was picking the fight?

1)it was brown that said on tv that he would not work with the scottish government.
2)it was brown who the media say will not return Salmonds calls
3)it was brown that did not congratulate Salmond on his vicotry last yr until embarrassed by the media. Blair did not at all.
4)it is brown who has tried to scupper the LIT policy of the snp, rather than leaving it to be argued out in holyrood.
a) disgracefully trying to withhold scotlands money through the council tax rebate.
b)and used the treasury to declare the policy illegal when it is the remit of the preciding officer to do so.
5) it brown who would not compensate our farmers while compensating english farmers
6)it was brown who delivered the lowest increase in the scottish block grant since the start of the parliament (many think as a punishment for voting snp)
7)it was brown who is try to not pass on the consequentials to the scottish parliament as a result of spending on english prisions.

Serious where exactly has Salmond tried to pick a fight. We should expect politicians of different parties to have different views and policies. We should expect them to let the people decide. And we expect them to work together to this end. As such it is clear that brown is a disgrace.

331

Alan Reid,

NZ 05/09/2008 00:02:42
404 danielrober, Sorry forgot do not have a NZ passport, I have a Britsh passport and I look forward to the day i'll swap it for a Scottish one!
332

funkiestmunky,

Leeds 05/09/2008 00:13:38
Whilst the article may be biased against the LIT the comments included are fair.

I'm astounded there is so much support for LIT in the comments.

The council tax would be scrapped in Scotland in favour of utilising the national 3% income tax variation allowed by the Scotland Act which won't cover funding currently supplied by council tax and certainly won't if we enter a recession or the Westminster Government cuts income tax. Why do so many Scottish taxpyers commenting appear to be happy with the cut in services which would surely result?

To offer clarity on who would be eligible for the tax under the Scotland Act:
Scottish MSPs, MPs and MEPs

Pays tax in the UK and resides in Scotland at the end of each day for more than half the year per tax period (Commuters from England working in Scotland would not pay. Scottish residents working for English companies would I'm afraid)

Principal UK residence is in Scotland for more time than principal residence is in the rest of the UK (creates a loophole for those who have homes in Scotland and elsewhere).
333

argonaut,

east lothian 05/09/2008 00:20:05
How low can the Scotsman go ???
Good the see this once decent paper yet again showing the media world how to produce sensible balanced reporting - I recall a so called newspaper just before the election splashing its front page with something like ' 50 influential people 'whom tell us that the union is great for us scots and we should reject at all costs the SNP . the SNP of course won ! This is just the same...
Does the media/ scotsman truly believe that the average jock in scotland will look at that front page and think that those 25 points make any difference at all????
What we care about is? Will the pensioners get a better deal - yes! Is the local tax fairer - its simply based on earnings - ability to pay !
We like to read the news etc in newspapers but we dont like them dictating to us what we should and should not do without giving all sides of the story. More like media manipulators !
334

Oldnat,

05/09/2008 01:26:05
The Labour Home website reprints this article but precedes it with "The Scotsman, so pro-SNP that its Associate Editor is the SNP PPC for Edinburgh East, has today published a list of reasons why their local income tax should be dropped"

A clear demonstration that Labour are living in LA-La land.
335

Edinburgh Noddy,

05/09/2008 07:28:13
#408 "The people who benefit are the low paid ! The people who pay more are the wealthy multiple income families and the council tax no longer exists. In fact low paid people will contribute very little indeed and its nowhere near what they will save from not paying council tax!"

Morris, you can't know that. This will be a tax on income, even the low paid. They will face the same percentage tax increase, and have less to spare. They will have every incentive to try and evade it. If at the present they share occupation of a small house, they will pay very little council tax. Wealthy people, who own a big house and may have lots of money in the bank, but don't pay income tax are already subsidised by income tax payers as most council money comes from general taxation, under LIT they wont have to contribute.

Do you think car tax should be based on ability to pay? What about duty on alcohol?

LIT will be an administrative nightmare and a ghastly expense, especially if it gets regionalised.

Will any LIT supporter explain to me why J K Rowling should then stay in Edinburgh? And why a Russian millionaire with a million pound house in the New Town wont have to pay a penny towards local services?
336

Reiver,

London 05/09/2008 11:58:36
Alan B,04/09/2008 14:58:41 from #346 Reiver

Someone with a primary family home in Scotland and a small room or bedsit type flat in London or anywhere outside Scotland will be able to register as not living in Scotland.

The council tax on the new or existing ("English") property will be much smaller on a council tax bill due to its reduced property size so you effectively save on the full amount of council tax paid in Scotland and still pay the amount you already did on the English bedsit you use when working in England.

I agree that those professional people living between London and Edinburgh earn considerably more in London than £100,000 a year and it is not that they would have to change what they currently do, only to define that they are English residents rather than Scottish ones.

It is surprising how many commuters have fallen into the "Willie" category (Works In London Lives In Edinburgh) these days.

At any rate, the £2,500 or so that I save in Scottish Council tax is enough evidence for me that I will save from this crazy SNP policy and that I've not really had to think too hard about it.
337

grannie,

Glasgow 05/09/2008 16:34:04
My state pension plus works pension gives me an annual income of around £8500. from this I pay £110 per month Council tax, (single occupier) I am not liable to Income tax therefore would benefit. I find things a struggle, because I receive no BENEFITS other things which are advertised as being free to pensioners are not free to me. There is a two tiered pension system in this country and the pensioners who worked for a living are on the bottom tier.
338

morris,

edinburgh 05/09/2008 17:48:37
418
Edinburgh Noddy,
Anybody who can do arithmetic can work out what happens!

Everybody will pay a 3% increase but thats less in real money terms for low paid workers .Thats why they are called LOW PAID!
Glasgow Council have an on line calculator.

80% of the people will save money,and thats a fact.
The removal of council tax gives people MORE because they gain whatever they were paying in COUNCIL TAX which is abolished.

YOU CANNOT POSSIBLY NOT KNOW IT !
PAYE guarantees this happens or you do not understand how that works either?

Actually car tax is based upon ability to pay in a sense.If you cant afford a car then you dont pay anything!If you cant afford the road tax then you are in deep doo dah for having a vehicle on a public highway with no road fund licence.
You are looking increasingly transparent and just dont want to cough up your fair share,which means your household must have a reasonable income to be disadvantaged by this.
Either that or you just cant count!

I live in a very affluent area and even here most people agree that the LIT is an excellent proposal and heaven help the Tories and Labour parties if they dont
let it happen.
Gordon has already signalled that he has had enough of playing silly bu**ers,and we may find out what his concessions announced last night in GLASGOW actually mean but probably after Glenrothes.He wants the Labour vote maximised,but dare not detail what it is he has actually agreed to.What it contains will depend upon whether it saves Labours Glenrothes bacon or not,I suspect. Of course if Labour are not re-elected at the GE then presumably it disappears along with Mr Bean?

We shall see,but it speaks volumes that he makes an announcement and even his own party don't know what's in it!
339

Buckfastleigh,

at sea 06/09/2008 20:36:42
This response furore is almost at an end and the ayes have it! Well done Alex it was a brilliant move and "Auld slow worm" has decided to go along with the Scot for the Scot by the Scot.
340

Edinburgh Noddy,

07/09/2008 21:22:50
422 Morris
"Everybody will pay a 3% increase but thats less in real money terms for low paid workers .Thats why they are called LOW PAID!"

But the point you've missed which I made, is that what matters is if they'll pay more! Poor paid people sharing a small house may pay more. How reliable are present estimates of what the tax will raise net of the expense of collecting it?

The estimates claim that I personally will be better off under LIT, but I don't believe them. I think that LIT will be expensive to collect, evaded by the higher tax payers, and leave a shortfall compared with council tax.

You say that car tax is based on ability to pay, as if you can't afford a car you don't pay it. Well, isn't house tax based on ability to pay then?

Still no answer to my questions from anyone I see, "Will any LIT supporter explain to me why J K Rowling should then stay in Edinburgh? And why a Russian millionaire with a million pound house in the New Town wont have to pay a penny towards local services?"

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.