The Sheriff of Nottingham couldn’t have done better
Monday 25th October 2010, 3:00PM BST.
From Keith Harris
WELL, the finance industry, the super rich, and everyone earning more than £150,000 a year can certainly breathe a huge sigh of relief now they have learned that, despite the rumours, unpleasant income tax hikes were never on the Treasury Minister’s agenda in the run up to his latest farce of a Budget, which is supposed to correct the deficit ‘we’ve all been hearing about of late’ by 2013.
For those who will now be able to afford it for perpetuity, expensive champagne corks will be popped and truffles will be eaten by the barrow load while rank and file public sector workers lose their jobs, and those who don’t will suffer pay freezes and the prospect of paying higher social security contributions.
Well, why raise the tax rates of those earning more than £150,000 a year to 30% when you can spread the load a bit to ensure their continued prosperity by bumping up the Social Security payments made by anyone earning in excess of a more modest, though still comfortable £40,000?
Yes, the budget was all too predictable really in an island with a dictatorial power structure which will do almost anything at all to protect the financial interests of the wealthiest and their dodgy ‘tax neutral’ deposits here, even if that means getting the subdued and well tamed masses to subsidise them and their ultra low tax rates by increasing good old GST to 5%.
To put that into perspective, that’s a more than 60% rise in GST isn’t it?
I appreciate the fact that with few exceptions we all have to pay GST, but what is a mere inconvenience for the rich when they buy their luxury goods is hardship and misery for many who have to buy food and other utilitarian essentials within a tight budget.
But that doesn’t matter, so long as the wealthy of the island are OK at the expense of those who are less fortunate. I assume that visiting super yachts are to remain exempt from GST on fuel and provisions for up to 18 months, even in the current climate. And I assume also that some 1(i)k tax exiles will continue to enjoy paying less than £10,000 a year income tax as they have done since the 1970s.
I think Robin Hood’s Sheriff of Nottingham would be proud of the lot running our island.
Travel
To, from and around the Island
Airport Arrivals/Departures
Harbours Arrivals/Departures
Bus Information/Timetables
JOIN US ON...
Facebook and Twitter
Follow us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Got a story? Get in touch
KIT 4 CLUBS
Win a share of £10,000
2012 is the year of the London Olympics and to celebrate this great event the Jersey Evening Post, in association with sponsors Ogier is giving all sporting clubs a chance to win a share of £10,000.
This is Jersey
Jersey Evening Post
Useful links
Well, said. Typical Jersey mentality but while hardly anyone bothers to vote nothing will change, not until its too late and that moment is getting close by the looks of things.
Report abuse
I really don’t get the concept that just because a person is richer they have to make a bigger percentage contribution. I earn over £100,000 and pay 20% tax on my salary. Therefore I am contributing at least £20,000 – about the same as 4 people earning £25,000 per year, or more than likely more – due to the fact they are paying about 15% of their salary (in many cases). I don’t get the logic of me have to contribute the same as 6 people earning £25,000. Why tax success?
Report abuse
@ #2
Becuase you can afford it! You live in a society with lots of people in it, some more fotunate than others.
During the good economic times, the rich are taxed less, of course. But duting the harder times, high earners’ taxes should be increased as you have more of it at your disposal. Why on earth should pensioners, people on disability benefit and those out of work be forced to live in the breadline while you’re still pulling in 80 grand a year?
That is not what society is about and it shows just how selfish some people can be.
Report abuse
GST, VAT are quite simplly the most unfair tax of all. Why? Simply if you earn the average income of just over 30k per annum it stands to reason that the huge cost of living in Jersey is already making life difficult and just to make ends meet requires a lot of sacrifices and few if any luxuries. The essentials in life are therefore your main and only focus and this tax on essentials i.e. food,clothing etc is totally unjustifiable. Those with large incomes and high levels of disposable income are not really affected by this tax hike and carry on as normal. In harsh economic conditions it is simply morally indefensable to tax the least well off just when they need added support. Remove GST off food, clothing and heating fuels now. Mr Ozouf is just plain wrong and does not understand social jusitce. Then again his masters are the finance bosses in the island and he his blackmailed by them and he does thier bidding. Show some leadership Phillip, defy them and watch just how few leave. Its the elecotrate who you need to listen too. Beware the next election when you will see real justice by those you have forgotten. The people of Jersey.
Report abuse
No 2, its called a progressive tax system. Flat rate tax systems, as we have here, are at the whackier end of the spectrum. Your basic, and sound, economic concept of utility is also relevant here. The marginal £1,000 earned by you means a lot less than a £1,000 earned by someone (or kept due to a lower tax rate) on £25,000. What’s the problem with a progressive tax system provided the higher rates are not excessive? Its also part of the social contract which is no bad thing provided there aren’t mickey takers defrauding social security benefits and the govt is throwing away the money (which I accept is probably an issue in Jersey). Come on the comparatively well off ( your figures put you in the top 10% of earners if not 5%) have it pretty goood. We don’t even have capital gains tax or inheritence tax which is a benefit that means nothing to the more modestly paid who won’t be benefiting from either of those two tax breaks.
Report abuse
I take it you don’t earn that much Jay? – hence why you and your ilk are so keen to pass on a bigger shouldering of the responsibility to those that do. Ironically it is people like you who are the selfish ones. So quick to dip into the success of others. I neglected to say that I also work a 50+ hour week and have done so for the past 20 years. As I said before higher earners do pay more tax – but why should they have to pay a higher percentage?
Report abuse
@6
Obviously your well paid job involves judging others and not reading too much.
I answered your question in your original post. The reason why the wealthy should pay more is becuase they have more dispos….. actually, I’m not writing it again. Read my post above.
How you can call me selfish when you are happy to sit on your fat wallet while plenty of children and pensioners are going to be further disadvantaged by the tax hike is beyond me.
Report abuse
I did read your response – hence my reply that I thought your answer re me having higher disposable income and thus having to contribute more (ie paying a higher percentage) was selfish. Next time I’ll spell it out (possibly use the same words you did) to make it easier for you understand.
Report abuse
Odd that. I can see you asking the same question twice.
Asking the rich to pay more is the opposite of selfish. Think about it, taking from one fat cat and giving to the poorer masses. Hardly selfish is it.
Old Ebenezer wanting to hold on a small proportion of his spare cash instead of helping out those in need that share a society with him… now that is selfish.
Or maybe you’ve lost sight of the difinition os these words sitting ni that tall dark tower.
Report abuse
Gods Mentor – If you have time… the Sabbath might be convenient… grab a large piece of graph paper and plot the incomes of the various strata of Jersey society over time.
Take an income of,say, £12k, £25k and your own £100k+ and project these figures over 10 years, 25years, 50 years, even 100 years – applying an annual ‘cost of living’ rise of, say, 4% [lots of free calculators on line to help with maths]. Join all the dots and I think you will have your answer.
Hope this helps.
Report abuse
Peter Jones,No4.
Excellent comments, if GST. was not applied to food, people wuold be greatly relieved,and you are right about Senator Ozouf has no idea of Social Justice.
Report abuse