Britain's Labour plans 'Robin Hood Tax', tax avoidance crackdown

Actually, putting the UK dysfunctional essential services and utilities companies under the political spotlight in this 8th June general election, is paramount.

UK transport infrastructure (rail/roads) are a national embarrassment. Theresa Mays conservative government should hang their heads in shame. The NHS is in a state of crisis, government minsters and senior health trust managers have no long term strategic plan to reverse a worrying decline in the performance of major hospitals.

In all regions, delays in life saving cancer treatment is appalling, one health trust has an 80 day delay to start treatment.

This election has focused on political insults and character assassinations instead of producing sound coherent consultation processes so the electorate can assess before planned implementation. Worst of all Theresa Mays government is not being held accountable for failure to address the lack of social mobility in the countries education system.

UK political elite, in government and those faceless unaccountable civil servants/mandarins, a cohort of shoo-in gold plated pension honours list entitlement have no wish or understanding for a inclusive decision making process. It is a anathema to them for the public at large to be able to clearly see how and why decisions that effect their lives are made.

Jeremy Corbyn, John McDonnell propose and present a political/economic paradox from a past that should, for good reason, remain long forgotten. Consigned quite right to the dustbin of history. It is extraordinary that the leader of an opposition cannot convince his own parliamentary party to support or back his election manifesto.

The UK has spent far too much time concentrating on the forthcoming EU - UK negotiation process, when present critical economic challenges are far closer to home.

@Itsonlyrockandroll

You quite rightly pointed out the disgusting state of our NHS and our long ridiculed transportation system.

I find the idea of a 'Robin Hood' tax very appealing and I definetly support the idea of closing loopholes exploited by tax avoiders/evaders ( money in the billions ).

Do you object to these ideas in principle?

I still think there is a place for the Labour Party. Blair disgraced the movement with the Iraq bloodbath ( the reason I stopped my membership ) but there must be a party of the left in a healthy democracy. It'll take a long time for the party to regain the trust of the less well off, but it isn't impossible.

Corbyn is a poor leader but many of the policies he put forward have support among many, To take one, well over half the electorate want to see the railways taken back into public ownership - including 40% of Tory voters. Closing tax loopholes is another.

Many wrote off the Tories in 1997 as a political party but they crawled back out of the swamp.

Corbyn is a poor leader but many of the policies he put forward have support among many

That seems to be the case. Polls on policies, without reference to the parties, have showed more support for Labor's polices. Example here:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/jeremy-corbyn-media-policies-labour_uk_57fe651be4b0010a7f3da76b

Hi Jimizo, The tax contribution from the UK financial services sector 2016 was around 11% of the UK's total tax receipt. some £70bn. A financial transaction tax across the equities and bonds markets would certainly raise additional revenue to the exchequer.

However there is a number of work abounds, an example, I set up my UK banking operation in Hong Kong converting my sterling/euro to yen then selling to a US hedge through my off shore trust in the Grand Cayman.

For a transaction tax to be effective there needs to be a global regulatory body backed up by consensus. A more direct route for additional taxes could be levied on tangible assets. A more efficient way to collect on banks' profits.  I do think that indirect taxes in the UK are grossly unequal, especially VAT, and the way national insurance contributions are levied.      

Mr. Angel Gurría, Secretary-General of the OECD, presented a clear agenda on how consensus can be reached on taxation. This is where I would agree that financial transaction tax could be implemented effectively.    

http://www.italy24.ilsole24ore.com/art/government-policies/2017-05-12/g7-meeting-bari-padoan-111938.php?uuid=AELBSBLB

Hi zichi, One senior family member was a Post Office strowger engineer spent all his working life with the company.

Privatisation of UK utility companies was a political act of recklessness. It was never intended to improve services or start a public share owning democratic revolution.

The Post Office (GPO) was sold off by a Conservative Government through incompetence, never undertaking a process to realise the GPO auditable assets, before embarking on a investment programme to implement a new national digital telephone exchange system.

When a research assistant, in my first year at college early 2007, I wrote a  dissertation summery into the costing/auditing for AXE10 switch migration from documents dating back to 1981.

Margaret Thatcher government privatized the GPO because they foolishly failed to realize it full value and potential. One valuable asset was a fledgling company called Cellnet. Some of the mobile phone technology developed by BT Martlesham laboratories was revolutionary. The civil servants had no idea of its commercial value.

I am dreading the outcome of this election. No country should be lumbered with a ruling government that cynically called an election to smother democratic accountability.

@itsonlyrocknroll

It seems you are in agreement with what Labour is proposing in principle, although you gave a very good explanation of the practical problems. I'm sure you'd agree with closing tax loopholes - tax evasion/avoidance is a moral issue in my book. The wealthy having the ability to do something which the less well-off could be prosecuted for is an outrage.

I'm not sure exactly what you want to see thrown into the dustbin of history.

I admire JC because he refuses to play by the media's rules. He is a genuinely passionate person who wants a Britain that works for everyone, rather than just the elite.

Will he win? Hell, no. The odds are stacked mightily against him, no thanks to the Blairite backstabbers and a complicit media which gives them a free pass to air their treachery.

Hi Jimizo, The UK has a lopsided taxation system of direct and indirect taxes. Some are capture all blunt instruments. But it is the behaviour of local government that I find intolerable and again has not been an issue debated at this election at all. Local authorities are serial wasters and hide failure behind a blame game at their contractors door. Policies on waste collection is an example to a culture of denial, unclear roles and responsibilities, and refusal to change. Brighton & Hove council fails constantly to carry out its basic statutory duties.

I agree with labour policies on the Gig economy and zero hours contracts. However without any semblance of unity within the party and a leadership team that fails to maintain discipline. Diane Abbot is excruciatingly hapless.

My dustbin of history referral was to Labours spending commitments, they have to be clearly costed out. John McDonnell cannot rely on tax, spend, and borrow. Real growth in the economy needs to be sustained especially when the UK is running a large budget deficit.

One demographic that vote is the over sixties, the bungalow Meg and Bill types. They are fiercely protective on their triple lock state pensions guarantee. In the local elections they wasted no time in staging a protest vote in Labour natural heartland.   

Another issue is EU membership?  

Hi zichi, I listen to his stories, there was a bar in his exchange building. They used to drive at lunchtime and climb into a van. He spend two days a week on gardening leave. But there could have been change with the right management and a new culture. Sometime confrontation is the only way.

How the heck would a tax on financial derivatives which are used to hedge risks, be applied?

At a glance it strikes me as incoherent.

Does one get to basically, pay more tax no matter the outcome of the derivatives transaction outcome?

Has spending on the failed services in the U.K. Been increased? Did that fail anyway?

If so the answer is to privatize those services, introduce competition and choice for the consumer, and the government should cut taxes, but ensure that those in low incomes have them topped up by the government to ensure they can afford to choose their services too like everyone else.

It will not happen though because politicians rarely are eager to do what will work for the people. Keeping failed, cash sucking monopoly service providers under their direct control is attractive for gutless politicians.

Hi fxgai, That has been the issue within the Euro-zone. It is simple to work around. German bank just needs to set up a office in Singapore, or Hong Kong. All the EU member states have welfare states, social costs. They have regulatory authority to match and bludgeoning sovereign debt. Without G20 agreement or consensus it is a non starter, as the EU commission has found.

http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/taxation-financial-sector_en

I cannot vote for Labour as long as Corbyn supports leaving the EU. That's the deal breaker for me, no matter what else they propose to do.

itsonlyr&r,

So it seems the idea is to just tax engagement in financial transactions.

It's kind of like a consumption tax. Anyone who consumes, pay consumption tax (unless there are tax breaks for certain types of consumption, which is silly).

But people who use financial services also consume things. 

Why not just raise the consumption tax. People can move their financial consumption overseas, but not their food consumption etc.

I get the impression that the idea here is not to efficiently collect tax revenues, but to bludgeon specific parts of the economy for politicial purposes. Very bad policy by the EU and bad proposal by this U.K. political party.

Hi fxgai, the UK privatization of the utility companies did not result in service improvement or competition.

Rail, telecommunications, energy, etc etc, has been a bitter disappointment for investment and customer service. I could moan about British Telecom until I turn purple with anger. Our business had to lay and commission our own fiber/switch network to the local exchange because BT made preposterous financial demands. Then tried to prevent the business from selling our excess capacity to local technology companies.

Raising taxes will never solve underlining flaws in economic policy. Government spending has not provided long term value. The countries road infrastructure is woefully inadequate and freight services unreliable and costly.

The UK government will not invest in accredited IT programs in schools relining on importing the skills from overseas. This is a incredibly short sighted policy. However it is within the NHS that failure to provide investment to train the next generation of clinicians is the most concerning.

The United States has a totally different approach to innovation and enterprise. The EU and UK at this moment just cannot compete, as has been the case in social media, and tech start ups.

the UK privatization of the utility companies did not result in service improvement or competition.

It sounds like although some utilities were privatized, for some reason there is no competition in each space. Why is there no competition?

For example is there no alternative to British Telecom?

Although Japan has a lot of faults, they have been successful in introducing competition here in some areas. Internet for example has been pretty competitive for many years now I feel, and more recently changes were made to increase comeptition in the smart phone communications space. (I have been able to slash my personal mobile phone bill as a result.)

Privatization does have the benefit of producing a lot of money for government to pay down debts, and also prevents further tax payer money going to waste, but privatization alone is not enough. Government must also ensure the environment facilitates competition too, or else there will be service improvement - I think this is a lesson.

The UK government will not invest in accredited IT programs in schools relining on importing the skills from overseas. 

it is within the NHS that failure to provide investment to train the next generation of clinicians is the most concerning.

I think it should be up to people (parents and children) to decide what their allotment of education funding gets spent on. Important thing is that they have information. When I got my education, I remember that considering the likely salary level I could expect was a key factor. I had been interested in architecture, but gave up on it once I learnt that the market was already full of architects, and got myself educated in another more lucrative looking field instead. 

IT and medical care jobs seem like they should be able to attract students, from a salary perspective. If British telecom and the NHS are forced to compete to keep customers, I would expect jobs in both IT and medical fields would increase.