|
A new opinion poll has found the public supports a wealth tax for people with assets over £750,000.
The 1,682 person YouGov poll reveals the public wants a different way of doing business once the corona epidemic is passed, it found:
Robert Palmer, Executive Director of Tax Justice UK, said: “The public are hungry for a new deal when we rebuild after this crisis. The government is under huge public pressure not to cave into supporting tax haven companies and it is clear that Brits want to see those who can afford it to shoulder a greater part of the burden to help pay for public services. The message is clear, no more business as usual.” Tax Justice UK is calling for any corporate bailouts to follow the conditions laid out by the Fair Tax Mark, including requiring companies to lift the lid on their tax affairs, disclose who ultimately profits from their activities, and not use tax havens and tax avoidance structures. All figures, unless otherwise stated, are from YouGov Plc. Total sample size was 1,682 adults. Fieldwork was undertaken between 7th - 11th May 2020. The survey was carried out online. The figures have been weighted and are representative of all GB adults (aged 18+). Moves in France, Denmark and Poland to ban tax haven companies from coronavirus bailouts are a start, but don't go far enough.
The UK should play hard ball with help only given as a priority to workers, not billionaire owners. Politicians should also insist companies stop using tax havens; lift the lid on clever accounting tricks; and end the mystery of who owns these businesses. Read a comment piece by our Executive Director, Robert Palmer, about this issue in the Independent. Responding to news that Denmark and Poland are to exclude companies based in tax havens from coronavirus related relief.
Tax Justice UK Executive Director, Robert Palmer, said: “The UK should follow Denmark and Poland’s lead and exclude tax haven companies from coronavirus relief. “Companies that seek to dodge their obligations to society by cutting their tax bills shouldn’t expect a bailout when things go wrong. The UK should ensure that all bailouts come with conditions to ensure good business behaviour. “After the crisis we need a new deal between business and government to ensure that all companies contribute properly, including by paying their fair share of tax. Bailouts should be accompanied by reassurances for workers on furlough that they'll still be supported." The High Pay Centre has published a briefing note setting out the conditions that could be part of a broader approach to corona related support for businesses. This comment piece by our Executive Director, Robert Palmer, first appeared in The Times.
The real heroes of our society are emerging: they are nurses, supermarket staff, delivery drivers and helpful neighbours. Many of these people are woefully underpaid. The coming months will see politicians urge the public to show solidarity normally reserved for wartime. When the worst is over, there will be a big debate about the role of the state and to what extent measures introduced to help get us through will be rolled back. After the 2008 financial crisis, the burden of spending cuts fell disproportionately on the disabled, sick and vulnerable. Even the NHS, despite record investment, failed to keep up with demand. The promise to the families who have lost loved ones to this epidemic must be “never again”. Politicians would be foolish to think that the public hasn’t noticed the deterioration of our public realm. One of the consistent messages I have heard in focus groups from Blyth Valley to Hastings since the election is that people feel insecure. Just about managing families are worried about their future amid pervasive resignation with the way things are. That was the temperature of the nation before coronavirus arrived. The health and economic emergency we’re facing has exposed even further the threadbare nature of our social safety net. This means that an austerity re-run is not an option. Instead, what we need is something closer to the spirit of 1945, when post-war rebuilding saw a new political consensus that included the founding of the NHS and an expansion in state support. The Prime Minister has already suggested that he gets this. Earlier this month he said that: “In 2008 everyone said we bailed out the banks and didn't look after the people who really suffered. This time we will look after the people who really suffer..." The government should be bold. Many of the changes introduced over the last few weeks, such as more generous sick pay and Universal Credit, must stay. But we should go further, for example by introducing a minimum income guarantee. As we start to rebuild after the immediate crisis has passed we need a new social contract to support increased spending. Tax loopholes exploited by the wealthy and companies should be closed for good. Serious consideration needs to be given to a tax on wealth. Some are suggesting an extra levy on companies making super-sized profits, as happened during WWII. We also need to properly resource HMRC and stop the current programme of layoffs of tax staff who have been designated key workers. These measures would ensure that those with the broadest shoulders are contributing to our recovery. Polling that my organisation - Tax Justice UK - carried out as we went into lockdown found that this would be popular. 74% of the public want to see the wealthy paying more tax. Only 24% of people rule out paying more tax themselves. Before the virus struck, there were signs that a cross-party space was opening up to address issues of inequality and public services, with the Conservatives championing a “levelling up” agenda. Once we’re through the worst of the crisis, these discussions will become even more acute. Progressive tax reform needs to be part of the mix if the public is going to be able to confidently say “never again”. New poll reveals concern about the state of public services and support for higher taxes on wealth5/4/2020
A poll carried out as the UK went into coronavirus lockdown found Brits already concerned about the state of the NHS, public services and poverty. The poll of 3,000 people by Survation for Tax Justice UK revealed significant support for higher taxes on wealth and companies. The detailed results are available here.
We’re all coming together to help get through the devastation caused by coronavirus, but the crisis has exposed how threadbare our public services have become. When we emerge from this, we need a response that’s along the lines of 1945, when we created the NHS, rather than a repeat of post-2008 austerity. Instead of looking for more cuts, the public favours policies that strengthen our precarious social safety net. The poll found more than three quarters (79%) believe that NHS, policing and education were either the same (25%) or have become worse (53%) in the last 10 years; 67% said homelessness was worse; 78% feel that poverty was either the same or worse; while people think that foodbank use (64%) and inequality (63%) have both got worse. The extra government spending introduced to deal with the crisis will largely be funded through borrowing and money creation. But as the crisis fades, a return to austerity would go down badly with the country. Higher taxes on wealth and companies would be a popular way to support more government spending and tackle rampant inequality. 74% of the public want to see the wealthy paying more tax - including 64% of Conservatives. Nearly two thirds of respondents (66%) believe that people who earn a living from their wealth should face the same tax rates as those who work. 69% support council tax reform to make it more closely reflect current house prices, so those with more expensive homes pay more. 63% support an annual wealth tax, including 57% of Conservatives. Only 24% don't want to pay more tax personally and a similar percentage (26%) of respondents want to see tax cuts for everyone. The poll also found people in an uncompromising mood about companies and individuals who avoid tax, 87% think that the government should close tax loopholes for corporations and individuals, meanwhile 74% agree it’s not right that wealthy people can pay for accountants to find ways to avoid paying their share. 84% say tax avoidance by companies is morally wrong, even if legal, and a similar proportion (80%) take the same view of tax avoidance by individuals. 67% support higher taxes on companies’ profits, including 61% of Conservative voters. People have had enough of the clever accounting that allows companies and wealthy individuals to pay less than they should. We need an economy that prioritises care. If we are to be resilient to future shocks, that means the strongest taking their fair share of the burden through higher taxes on wealth and companies. Post-crisis tax changes could include higher taxes on wealth and a tax on super-sized corporate profits. Any reform would have to be accompanied by more resources to HMRC to administer the scheme. This polling builds on our report “What’s wealth got to do with it", which was based on seven focus groups asking the public their attitudes on public spending, wealth and tax. It is available here. It is part of an ongoing project to understand public attitudes on tax. The survey took place 17-23 March via an online panel and consisted of 3,010 UK residents aged 18+. It is part of an ongoing project by TJ-UK to test attitudes on public services, inequality and tax. Download the full results tables here. This project was funded by the Friends Provident Foundation. As we come to the end of our second week in Coronavirus lockdown, the impact of this crisis is becoming stark with thousands sick, businesses struggling and the government taking unprecedented measures to intervene in the economy.
Our work at Tax Justice UK is part of a broader movement to achieve a fairer society so that we can all thrive. Over the last couple of weeks we’ve teamed up with other groups to push the government to take more decisive action. We joined over 100 economists calling for more support for the self-employed. Along with Greenpeace, and dozens of others, we argued that any bailout of the airline industry should come with stringent conditions on tax, workers rights and the environment. With 80 organisations we called for urgent action to stop millions of families falling into problematic debt, including from council tax. The government has already responded with a three-month payment freeze on credit cards and loans. We’re also starting to think about how politicians deal with what comes after the crisis. More austerity is simply not an option. Next week, we’re publishing a big opinion poll taken as the country went into lockdown. The public is in no mood for more cuts, and the vast majority of people support higher taxes. We’ll share the findings with you when they’re out. Letter in response to the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s announcement of support for businesses, Monday 22nd March, 2020.
A welcome change but more is needed We welcome the government’s new measures to support workers, particularly the introduction of grants for wage support. But despite the scale of these spending commitments, there is a real danger that millions of workers will not feel their benefit. The government must move decisively to get cash into the bank accounts of households and firms before the economic dominos start to fall. Substantial support has been announced, which will be welcomed by many workers -- but it will not reach all who need it. The government is certainly moving in the right direction, but the new measures will fail to reach all workers, and could take until the end of April to come into force. More clarity is also needed on the announcement that the government will provide grants to businesses, covering up to 80% wage costs to a limit of £2,500 per worker. If these grants reach the businesses that need them, they could prevent millions of redundancies. But there is no assurance that every business that needs support will receive it: the government needs to specify if the payment is more or less automatic, how it will get into firms’ accounts quickly and how it will ensure that this cash translates into wages at the end of the line. Stipulations against layoffs need to be in place A further problem with the announced plans is that no stipulations are placed on firms keeping workers on payroll. Financial support for firms must come with conditionality: at a minimum, no workers are to be laid off. People are losing their jobs right now - the government must act immediately to stem the flow. Without this stipulation put in place immediately, firms - and their payroll systems - will be shutting up shop in the intervening period, simply precluding the possibility of utilising the government’s ‘Job Retention Scheme’. The self-employed are left out in the cold and need urgent support The 5 million people who are self-employed will have taken little comfort from last Friday’s announcements. Greater support is needed. The expansion of an already overburdened Universal Credit system to cover the self-employed will make little difference. While a worker on PAYE could receive up to £2,500 per month, a self-employed worker might only receive statutory sick pay - £94.25 per week. It is our understanding that self-employed workers who have filed tax returns with HMRC in the past could be supported within days of a governmental decision. As HMRC already holds the bank account details of these workers, it would simply be a matter of paying cash into their accounts. Universal Credit will not be able to cope or deliver Universal Credit is going to wilt under the pressure of new unemployed applicants in the coming weeks and months. Other than a minor improvement in levels of income support, no support has been announced for those outside of formal employment, unemployed persons, those receiving personal independence payment, or others without a current employer such as university students. For these people, immediate removal of means-testing from current social security payments should be introduced as a matter of urgency. We applaud the government for taking advice from the TUC and CBI, and recent measures move very much in the right direction. But it must go further - time is of the essence. Economic collapses become increasingly difficult to arrest if they are allowed to continue unabated, and there is a real risk that this recession could turn into a major depression. We call on the government to convene a cross-party task force as a matter of urgency to strengthen the measures announced last Friday. Signatories Jo Michell (Associate Professor in Economics, UWE Bristol) Rob Calvert Jump (Research Fellow in Political Economy, Greenwich University) Diane Elson (Emeritus Professor , University of Essex) Danielle Guizzo (Senior Lecturer in Economics, UWE Bristol) Miatta Fahnbulleh (Chief Executive of the New Economics Foundation) Mary-Ann Stephenson (Director, Women's Budget Group) Prem Sikka (Emeritus Professor of Accounting, University of Essex) Sunil Mitra Kumar (Lecturer in Economics, King’s College London) Jonathan Portes (Professor of Economics and Public Policy, King College London) Daniela Gabor (Professor of Economics and Macrofinance, UWE Bristol) Fran Boait (Executive Director, Positive Money) Jane Lethbridge (Principal Lecturer, Department of International Business & Economics, Faculty of Business, University of Greenwich) Nick Srnicek (Lecturer in Digital Economy, King’s College London) Mat Lawrence (Director of the Common Wealth think tank) Robert Palmer (Director of Tax Justice UK) Neil Lawson (Director of Compass) Joe Guinan (Vice President, The Democracy Collaborative) Laurie Macfarlane (Fellow, UCL Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose) Jackie Jones (Former Professor of Feminist Legal Studies Former MEP) Sarah Jayne-Clifton (Director of the Jubilee Debt Campaign) Michael Jacobs (Professor of Political Economy, University of Sheffield) Ania Plomien (Assistant Professor, Gender Studies, LSE) David Adler (Fellow, European University Institute) Neil McInroy (Chief Executive, Centre for Local Economic Strategies) Will Stronge (Director of Autonomy) James Meadway (Associate fellow at IPPR) Rebecca Tunstall (Professor Emerita of Housing Policy, Centre for Housing Policy, University of York) Juvaria Jafri (Lecturer in International Political Economy, City, University of London) Bruno Bonizzi (Senior Lecturer in Finance, University of Hertfordshire Business School) Andy Denis (Fellow Emeritus in Economics, City, University of London) Anna Laycock (CEO, Finance Innovation Lab) Guglielmo Forges Davanzati (University of Salento) Steve Keen (Distinguished Research Fellow, Institute for Strategy, Resilience and Security, University College London) Constantinos Alexiou (Professor of Macroeconomics and Policy, Cranfield University) Simon Wren-Lewis (Professor of Economic Policy, University of Oxford) Jonathan Perraton (Senior Lecturer in Economics) Sophia Kühnlenz (Lecturer in Economics, Manchester Metropolitan University) Frank van Lerven (New Economics Foundation) Jan Toporowski SOAS University of London Cem Oyvat University of Greenwich Neville R Norman Universities of Melbourne and Cambrdge Pedro Mendes Loureiro University of Cambridge Mark Setterfield New School for Social Research Ewa Karwowski University of Hertfordshire Mary V. Wrenn U. of the West of England Carolina Alves University of Cambridge Ozlem Onaran Prof of Economics, University of Greenwich Ingrid Harvold Kvangraven University of York Engelbert Stockhammer Professor of International Political Economy, King’s College London Deborah Dean Associate Professor in Industrial Relations, Warwick Business School Emanuele Lobina Principal Lecturer, PSIRU, University of Greenwich Business Faculty Ulrich Volz Reader in Economics, SOAS University of London Andrew Fischer Associate Professor, Erasmus University Rotterdam Dany Lang Associate Professor, University Sorbonne Paris Nord Ania Plomien Assistant Professor, Gender Studies, LSE Janet Veitch OBE Chair, UK Women’s Budget Group Karl Petrick Associate Professor of Economics, Western New England University Nina Eichacker Assistant Professor of Economics University of Rhode Island Yannis Dafermos Lecturer in Economics, SOAS University of London Duncan Lindo Vrije Universiteit Brussel Leslie Huckfield Lecturer, Glasgow Caledonian University Frances Coppola Economist and author Radhika Desai Professor, University of Manitoba Imko Meyenburg Senior Lecturer, Anglia Ruskin University Tony Yates Resolution Foundation and Fathom Consulting Richard Murphy Professor of Practice in International Political Economy at City, University of London Thomas Palley Economist, Washington, DC Andrew Cumbers Professor of Regional Political Economy University of Glasgow Howard Reed Landman Economics Trevor Evans Professor of Economics, Berlin School of Economics and Law Prof Pritam Singh Visiting Scholar, Wolfson College, Oxford Dr Jerome De Henau Senior Lecturer in Economics, Open University Dan O’Neill Associate Professor in Ecological Economics, University of Leeds Giorgos Gouzoulis Research Fellow, University College London Maria Nikolaidi Senior Lecturer in Economics, University of Greenwich Emanuele Citera PhD Student, Economics Department, The New School for Social Research Antonia Jennings Rethinking Economics Sara Gorgoni Associate Professor in Economics, University of Greenwich Natalya Naqvi Assistant Professor in International Political Economy, London School of Economics Jamie Morgan Professor, Leeds Beckett University Adotey Bing-Pappoe Senior Lecturer, Economics, University of Greenwich Alfredo Saad Filho Professor of Political Economy and International Development, King’s College London Simon Mohun Emeritus Professor of Political Economy, Queen Mary University of London Andrew Simms, Co-director Centre for Global Political Economy, University of Sussex Giorgos Galanis Senior Lecturer in Economics, Goldsmiths, University of London Stefanos Ioannou Research Associate, University of Oxford Paul Mason Author and economics journalist Ha-Joon Chang Reader in Political Economy of Development at the University of Cambridge Frances Stewart Professor Emeritus, University of Oxford Ann Pettifor Economist Stephany Griffiths Economist Will Hutton Economist Michael Edwards Hon Prof, Bartlett, UCL Josh Ryan-Collins Senior Research Fellow, Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose, UCL Josè D. Villadeamigo Visiting Researcher, CEPED-FCE-UBA - Member of PIUBAD, Argentina Patrick Allen Chair of the Progressive Economy Forum. John Weeks Professor emeritus at SOAS Rishi Sunak’s first budget was dominated by coronavirus, but the Chancellor also ramped up spending. This will be funded by extra borrowing. Despite the leaks in advance of today’s speech, the Chancellor has ducked big questions about how to make the tax system fairer and more effective.
Robert Palmer, Executive Director of Tax Justice UK said: “After years of austerity the Chancellor has turned on the spending taps. The Conservatives have promised billions for infrastructure but this budget won’t provide the much needed increase to other areas including social care and local government.” The Chancellor announced a number of small tax changes that Tax Justice UK has called for, including reducing entrepreneurs relief, cancelling cuts to corporation tax and increasing funding to HMRC to tackle tax dodging. Mr Palmer added: “It’s good to see some modest measures to increase taxes on wealth and companies. But these are baby steps compared to what’s needed to help fund public services and tackle inequality. The more ambitious ideas floated in recent months, such as a mansion tax or higher fuel duty, fell amid backbench Tory rebellion. On tax, this budget is the dog that didn’t bark” Focus groups carried out after the election by Tax Justice UK and Survation found that people want to see much more investment in their local areas. No one called for tax cuts and there was support for some higher taxes on wealth. In 2016/17 the government handed out £800m in inheritance tax breaks for farmland and businesses. According to new figures released by Tax Justice UK today, almost 70% of this went to property worth over £1m. Reports in advance of the budget suggest that the Chancellor Rishi Sunak is looking to restrict inheritance tax breaks. This would help to fulfil the Conservative manifesto pledge to limit the “arbitrary tax advantages for the wealthiest in society”. Robert Palmer, Executive Director of Tax Justice UK said: “The Chancellor is desperately looking for money to help ‘level up’ left behind parts of the country. Restricting inheritance tax breaks to the most needy families would be a sensible way to do this.” In June 2019, we published the report In Stark Relief, which exposed how the current system of inheritance tax breaks favours very well off families. The current system of reliefs is on top of the tax free allowance of up to £950,000 that is available to married couples. Tax Justice UK is calling on the government to review inheritance tax reliefs and consider a cap on the amount that can be claimed. Agricultural property relief reduces inheritance tax on agricultural property at a rate of up to 100%, while business property relief reduces tax on business property and shares by between 50 and 100%. The special treatments for agricultural and business property are often justified as a means of protecting small family farms and businesses, but the reality is that most of this support goes to the wealthiest families. The new figures released are based on a Freedom of Information Act request to HMRC. Notes to editors Tax Justice UK asked HMRC to provide information on the distribution of Agricultural Property Relief and Business Property Relief. 2016/17 is the most recent year that figures are available for. HMRC provided this information split by the value of the property that relief was claimed on. The figures in the table below are for the total value of the property, as opposed to the amount of tax saved.  The Marmot Review's finding that life expectancy for poorer women has decreased in the last decade is a stark illustration of what deep and entrenched inequality means in the UK today.
The UK is one of the richest countries in the world but the report highlights how social, economic and wealth disparities have led to a situation where poorer women's life prospects have gone backwards. The Women’s Budget Group has launched the Commission on a Gender-Equal Economy in a bid to do something about this. They aim to develop an alternative economic approach so that that gender equality becomes a reality in the UK economy. You can read Tax Justice UK’s submission of evidence to the commission here. To submit evidence to the Commission on a Gender-Equal Economy, contact the Commission’s project manager, Marion Sharples: marion.sharples [at] wbg.org.uk. |
Posts
September 2020
Categories |
RSS Feed
|
Media enquiries: +44 (0)7413 729 505 (24hrs)
Phone: +44 (0)20 3637 9137 |
Email: mail AT taxjustice.uk
|
|
Tax Justice UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee in England & Wales (no. 10761736)
Registered Address: C/O Godfrey Wilson, Mariner House, 62 Prince St, Bristol BS1 4QD
Tax Justice UK is a partner of (but independent from) the Tax Justice Network
Privacy policy
Terms and conditions for using this website
Equality and Diversity Statement
This website is published under the Creative Commons Attribution Licence
Registered Address: C/O Godfrey Wilson, Mariner House, 62 Prince St, Bristol BS1 4QD
Tax Justice UK is a partner of (but independent from) the Tax Justice Network
Privacy policy
Terms and conditions for using this website
Equality and Diversity Statement
This website is published under the Creative Commons Attribution Licence
