Citywire for Financial Professionals
Stay connected:

Citywire printed articles sponsored by:


View the article online at http://citywire.co.uk/money/article/a415899

Morning Line: 'Bonfire of the taxes' or just a fatter bill?

An Office of Tax Simplification looks good on paper. But a taxpayer friendly result is unlikely.

Morning Line: 'Bonfire of the taxes' or just a fatter bill?

Simplifying the way we pay taxes now stands at the core of the new government’s agenda. The 'bonfire of the taxes', it is being called.

Today the government announced details of its new Office of Tax Simplification. This independent office of the Treasury – in as much as its latest creation, the Office for Budget Responsibility, is ‘independent’ -  will provide expert advice to chancellor George Osborne on how to simplify the tax system.

This worthy effort has two aims: to save taxpayers from getting swallowed up in our convoluted tax system and to prevent foreign investors being deterred from coming to the UK.

Former Conservative Treasury minister Michael Jack and tax policy director at the Institute of Directors, John Whiting, have been appointed to lead the office on an interim basis. The team they lead will review  400 tax reliefs in its first year of consultation; for the less mathematically gifted among you, that’s more than one a day. Let’s hope they take their lunch at their desks when reviewing the important reliefs, such as those from the taxation of pensions. Jack and Whiting will after all work on a part time, voluntary basis.

Pensions simplification has been tried before and failed by the previous Labour government. Commentators point to the doubling of the size of accountants’ bible, Tolley’s Tax Guide, to 11,520 pages duing Labour's tenure in power. Worryingly this is despite the masses of money spent on a regime of tax simplification, most notably pensions 'A-Day'.

The basic problem is that tinkering with any tax regime unnecessarily means that taxpayers have to adapt to new rules and governments have an uncanny habit of underestimating the knock on effects of their meddling. Simplification can quickly morph into complification.

There are also concerns that the new body won’t have teeth and will be ignored by ministers. What, after all, will be Osborne’s priority over the next few years – using the tax system in the most efficient way possible to help his task of slashing the deficit while boosting the economy, or simplifying it to please voters?

How will the office, led by volunteers, tackle its first task of reviewing 400 tax reliefs without a) speeding through them in a cursory review of the system or b) sucking up cash to pay for the increasing numbers of staff that will be needed? Critics say that in order for the OTS to have teeth ministers must be required to respond in detail to all its proposals, with precise economic or technical reasons why each rejected proposal is being rejected. This risks duplication of the office’s work in the Treasury.

Something’s got to give here. Simplification may be in the name, but in the coalition’s austerity Britain, isn’t this office more likely to justify its existence by steering the Treasury towards tax cuts and cash-raising by the elimination of reliefs?

7 comments so far. Why not have your say?

derek farman

Jul 20, 2010 at 12:40

About time too . Trying to work through my tax calculation is annoyingly complicated and unnecessarily so too . Pages of calculations when to check the result all I need to do is work it all out on the back of an envelope .

So if it's stupidly complicated for me as an individual I cannot imagine what it's like for companies .

report this

James O'Donnell

Jul 20, 2010 at 12:55

This is a Tory government.

The Lib. Dems. are helpless bystanders.

Make no mistake, 'simplification of taxes' is Tory speak for tax reductions for the rich and tax increases for the rest of us. The very poorest will, of course, be 'protected' provided that they can jump through all the means-tested hoops.

report this

Keith Snell

Jul 20, 2010 at 13:20

James O Donnell is clearly a labour party supporter. If the Tories manage to simply the tax system it is not before time. The present system was clearly designed by a labour party as one of their many work provision schemes to employ as many civil servants as possible. This also means thousands of otherwise unecessary accoutants are also employed.

report this

DNA

Jul 20, 2010 at 13:57

Love the idea but we need to be sure it actually makes financial sense to implement them.

I liked the Latvia style of a flat rate of taxation to make collection and calculation simple but it seems as the economy has gone down hill, tax receipts have dropped off even more dramatically giving them little room to manoeuvre.

It's a great ambition and I hope they achieve. I just hope it doesn't become a Labour style bodge.

report this

Anonymous 1 needed this 'off the record'

Jul 20, 2010 at 14:00

Here's a simple tax plan:

No tax on incomes up to £10,000.

10% on next £10,000

20% on next £10,000

30% on next £10,000 and so on up to

90%. No tax reliefs.

A wealth tax of 1% pa on net worth of over 1m (inc. first homes).

Local income tax of 1% in addition to council taxes..

Council tax bands revised to favour low cost homes and higher bands for more expensive houses.

Tax breaks for major foreign investors for limited periods and penalties for withdrawal of funds.

Higher VAT on luxury goods.

All corporation tax loopholes to be closed.

Capital gains tax to be levied at income tax rates, with spiral relief over 10 years.

If you wish to work abroad..no problem but your capital and other assets will remain in UK and will be taxed at UK rates, as will your worldwide income.

Too harsh? We are in an economic crises, or so we are told, and we must all make sacrifices but the less well off must be protected. As Cameron says we are all in the same boat.

report this

William Bishop

Jul 20, 2010 at 14:56

I wouldn't be too cynical about this initiative, because the last Chancellor interested in tax simplification (even if he eventually screwed up in some other directions) was Nigel Lawson. Ever since then, especially under the obsessive micro-management of Gordon Brown, complexity has burgeoned in a most undesirable way.

So, all in all, more power to the elbow of the proposed Office.

report this

Brian Meek

Jul 21, 2010 at 09:07

Tax simplification can too easily result in unfairness. The reliefs are usually there for a reason and removing them often means that the burden of tax falls on those who can least afford it. Is this an exercise that will benefit the rich at the expense of the poorer sections of society? That said, no one can argue against simplificaton. It's an admirable idea. But beware, the tax rules for pensions were simplified. This resulted in unforeseen problems in application and unworkable rules for some and it has even been said to be just as complicated as the previous system. A tax simplification exercise needs extreme care and much consideration of consequences. It cannot be rushed.

report this

leave a comment

Please sign in here or register here to comment. It is free to register and only takes a minute or two.

Sorry, this link is not
quite ready yet