1

blood,sweat & tears

For those of us who have worked hard and gone without to own a property we can call our home, the lack of Capital Gains Tax is one of the few remaining benefits available to middle income Jersey. With the cost of houses over here and the fact that teenagers are living longer with parents as they can’t afford their own home, it would be a travesty to introduce this to Jersey.

Report abuse

3

Mondieu

Simply not going to happen.

Furthermore, capital gains is a tax levied on the gain on disposal of a capital- not a sales tax as the article would have you believe.

Report abuse

5

Mark

Treasury Minister Philip Ozouf dismissed the claims as nonsense.

Sorry Philip Ozouf that is no argument, even if you have failed to acknowledge your own failings you too have been proved wrong many times.

Regardless of what Mr Murphy thinks, I think that you will find that many Jersey residents are unhappy with your tax rises, tax rises required to fund tax avoiders. In that respect I wish you would stop attacking my pocked to the benefit of the ‘super rich’.

Roll on the election. In the meantime less Ozouf spin please.

Report abuse

7

Judge Jeffries

One really does have to question the mentality of people like Richard Murphy who seemingly draw perverse pleasure from their unswerving crusade to bring our Island into disrepute and heap chaos on those of us who are simply trying to makes ends meet in these straitened times. Those that advocate that his strategy of throwing as much mud as possible and seeing how much sticks should reflect on the fact that such anti Jersey rhetoric is a slap in the face to the entire local community in as much as it threatens all our livelihoods. I would suggest that his quest is better suited to the multitude of overtly heinous jurisdictions elsewhere in the world.

Report abuse

9

Pip Clement

Phillip Ozouf;

1) GST is not inflationary.

All sales taxes are inflationary as they raise prices, not many economists would argue with that.

2) I will not raise GST

We all knew tax of one sort or another would have to go up to meet the deficit and as the rate of income tax and the nonimposition of capital gains tax are sacred GST was all that was left.

Really you are either a daftie or a serial teller of porkies!

Report abuse

11

Pete

I am weary of Richard Murphy and his perpetual doomsday approach to our finance industry. Its actually surprising people keep on giving him time when he has been proven wrong so many times to date.

Report abuse

13

Frank Le Dessgustid

If you don’t think Ozouf and Maclean don’t pander to ‘tax aeviders’ just ask a friendly politician to ask the question , as Ben Shenton did 18 months ago,’How many companies owned by 1,1 ks received grants from the 2011 Rural Development Initiative’. You may well be shocked.

Report abuse

15

Pip Clement

“On both these occasions we were surrounded by clowns with fingers in their ears telling us he is wrong.”

Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right, stuck in the middle with the do nothings!

Report abuse

17

Vicki

Here you go a bit of an insight we are already suffering the consequences

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15120522

Report abuse

19

Grateful Fool

I agree there should be CGT in Jersey, but only on certain assets. Like the UK, the main domestic residence should not be included.

It should include any car with a sale value over £20,000, 2nd/holiday homes, pleasure boats, stocks and shares for example.

Make the benchmark £20,000 before CGT kicks in through any financial year.

The average person wil thereore not be affected and some money will be clawed back from the more well off.

My only reservation would be if it would actually be cost affective in setting up a CGT gathering unit against the revenue that may wee be received.

That is my foolish thoughts on this subject.

Report abuse

21

Mark

Dave (14) sales taxes are deflationary because they take purchasing power from the economy.

An interesting philosophical point Dave, but I am not sure you are right. People will continue to spend even if prices go up, it is just they get less for their money. Sales taxes will only be deflationary if people stop spending.

Report abuse

23

The Jersey Bull

Jersey had absolutely no obligations under international law to adhere to the European code on corporate taxation. Most of the nation states within the union had little intention of ever following this code, which was solely designed to in Brussels to kill outside competition and force us into the EU’s bureaucratic pigpen via the back door.

People like Richard Murphy and Ted Vibert, along with those supporting Attac and the TJN, are no more than Traitors. I say Traitors because they have been hell bent upon using the politics of envy and the tired ‘fairness’ argument to undermine our Sovereignty, independence and common law freedoms.

Worse, the efforts of these people have and are continuing to help impose the worst form of outside collective totalitarian government upon us, namely the New World Order via progressive policies born in the corrupt bowels of the UN (e.g. Agenda21, Codex Allimetarius and many such programs)

By giving in to these illegitimate EU demands, some of our weak inbred politicians have unwittingly joined out of fear with the above mentioned traitors to weaken our economy and cause unnecessary financial damage to the people of this Island – especially upon those who can least afford it.

When challenged and asked to account, all these traitor puppets are able to do is hide their progressive common cause agendas behind a false façade of ‘fairness’, relying solely upon the tyranny of group think to enforce their program of moral diversity brainwashing – which means they have nothing to say.

As for the carpet bagging Richard Murphy, if he doesn’t like the ways in which we choose to guard our freedoms and independent in running our Island’s governmental financial affairs – then, I say, go back to the socialist slag-heap you came from Mister, where you can sell your own people down the river into the EU Dictatorship you love so much. In other words, go crap on your own doorstep – not on ours!

Report abuse

25

Bunny

Was Mr Murphy dropped on his head by a Jersey Nanny, turned down for a job in the Island or is he just a rather unpleasant man? I would love to know why he insists on ‘having a go’ at us all the time. Perhaps we could enact a unlilateral tax regime on Mr Murphy along the lines he suggest? We can tax him on his global income, and also charge capital gains on everything he does…..

Report abuse

27

Just

“…or is he just a rather unpleasant man?”
A bit below the belt, Bunny. Just because you don’t agree with what he says doesn’t make him an unpleasant man surely. He may be or he may not be, I don’t know him personally and I assume you don’t either. What is ‘unpleasant’ is being a piggy bank for unethical companies and individuals (most of whom are already super-rich) to hide the money they should be paying in tax where they earnt it, at the cost of their own country and its people. Those in Jersey with a vested interest refuse to accept the truth of that, of course (mainly the finance industry and your leading politicians), but I can assure you from personal experience that that’s how the rest of the world view your little island. The looming global depression will ultimately destroy your tax haven status. Certainly by the end of the decade. In fact, the demise began with the credit crunch in 2008. The island has been in a slow but noticeable decline ever since(the introduction of GST and its subsequent increase should be proof enough for most islanders). You need a Plan B and quick.

Report abuse

29

GM

You only have to look at the latest thread on Jersey on his blog. He gets into a debate with Deputy Dave Jones from Guernsey, digs himself into a hole by refusing to accept Guernsey facts straight from the horse’s mouth (a senior minister) and so resorts to style by closing the debate with no more comments permitted.

The man is pathetic.

Report abuse

31

bonkers

Just #27
Finally a commentator with a moral framework well said my friend . It’s good to know there are still some decent members of the human species walking the planet.

From what I’ve read on Mr Murphys blog and his daily newsletter his overriding concern is for the betterment of society as a whole. All the negative posters on here simply see him as a threat to our TAX avoidance industry. The fact that most of them believe our main source of income is an acceptable way for us as a community to get by in the world we live in says more about them than Mr Murphy.

Report abuse

33

Sage

Bonkers #31 and #27:

I have a significant difficulty with the notion that every tax levied constitutes an inherently “correct” and moral obligation and also with the view that the tax competition or neutrality provided by low/no tax centres is therefore inherently immoral.

This view ignores the possibility of spendthrift or, worse, corrupt governments or tax authorities levying inappropriate types or levels of tax on their populations.

This view ignores the possibility that some global citizens might feel morally justified in questioning how their governments tax and spend.

This view ignores the possibility that the world’s highly complex taxation environment can stymie the free flow of international trade and the manner in which the tax neutrality offered by low/no tax environments can prevent investors and assets in cross-border transactions becoming liable to punative double or even triple-taxation simply because those transactions involve assets and participants located in a number of different jurisdictions, each with their own, different tax regimes. In so doing, well-regulated finance centres can boost global, international trade at a time when increasing levels of damaging protectionism are looming.

By way of example, I for one question the morality of EU politicians/technicrats in Brussels spending the tax contributions of hard-pressed Europeans on novelty projects whilst feathering their own nests and dreaming up ill-conceived new EU-wide taxes and regulations which will subdue economic growth just when it’s most needed.

In short, taxation is not, de facto, an inherently good thing. Equally, evading well-conceived, fairly levied and well-spent taxes is not, de facto, an inherently good thing. The moral maze around taxation is complex and to condemn finance centres with attractive tax rates as immoral is overly simplistic and, I would argue, risky, unless we all live in a perfectly governed world.

We do not.

I see Jersey’s finance industry as offering a well-regulated and (in accordance with global norms) transparent route through that maze.

I sleep OK at night.

Report abuse

35

Arnald

Here’s how transparent Jersey’s OFC is

http://www.financialsecrecyindex.com/2011results.html

Compared to Guernsey, not very.

Report abuse

37

Sage

Bonkers, don’t worry, I know you’ll never live with it and you do seem to have ignored my statement that “evading well-conceived, fairly levied and well-spent taxes is not…a good thing.”

I’m afraid I think you’re wrong to say that tax laws are complicated by accountants and lawyers. The simpler the fiscal legislation created by governments, the harder it is for clever accountants and lawyers to pick any holes in it.

When global tax rates are harmonised, we (especially you) can all sleep easy on a level fiscal playing field. Until then (and don’t hold your breath) global trade benefits from low/no tax centres to help parties inter-connect productively.

Out of interest, do you have a problem with double taxation treaties?

Report abuse

39

Murphy's Law

Arnald

Not that I ever put much importance on what RM says, but it’s nice to see that many onshore centres are more secretive than offshore ones (according to RM’s criteria, goodness knows what that is).

Report abuse

41

Arnald

And here we have it @38
“…I can tell you with complete authority…”

No, you can’t. You can tell me from within an industry that says “i can tell you”, without knowing what the hell you’re talking about.

Without having the least bit of a notion what Jersey is being criticised for (Foote is an industry shill, backed up by Deloittes who are worse – hardly objective. IMF have increasingly been alarmed by capital outflow and the shadow finance industry that us CIs do so well, the OECD set their aims so low to incorporate as many members as possible that it’s TIEA structure is next to useless. Look at the stats. Look at the parameter for investigation).

Frankly, you are talking out of your blinkered hat (balaclava, you know like financial terrorism?).

Don’t kid yourself you know more about global financial flows, tax competition and legislative obfuscation that the guys that produce these reports. They are on the frontline, looking right at you.

Nothing to fear? Maybe. But outright lying won’t get you anywhere. Jersey is up amongst the worst of the bad boys for a reason.

I look forward to your well researched analysis to say why that isn’t the case. Bear in mind that FTI used criteria from orgs you have quoted.

Good luck.

Report abuse

43

Arnald

Oh, and 39. Murphy didn’t produce this report, and the criteria for scoring are quite clearly explained.

Report abuse

45

Sage

Arnald,

I’ve no idea what you do for a living but I work in the Channel Islands finance industry and have a hands-on understanding of the local tax and regulatory laws in the Islands.

As such I find the differentiation in the FSI index completely bewildering.

Perhaps you can explain the objective reasons why Guernsey scores better (or is it simply because, as you put it, “It’s been a while since there’s been a baseless polemic against anti poverty campaigners in the local press.”) If that subjective test has been applied, has it been weighed up against the very many “anti-finance” polemics printed in Jersey’s press and on boards like this? I’d say there’s a very open (political and media) debate in Jersey about the percieved rights or wrongs of our industry. Some misguided politicians even invited Richard Murphy in to re-invent our finance industry. Is Guernsey preferred because it briefly (and misguidely, in my view) flirted with a 10% corporate tax rate in response to the EU pressure on its centuries-old fiscal sovereignty?

Frankly I think you’re wearing something of a balaclava yourself, Arnald, always adopting a very hard-line and black/white stance and never giving any credit where its due.

As a small island state, Jersey still chooses to operate within internationally accepted parameters and opens itself up to independent international assessment by appropriate bodies – I’m afraid TJN has shown itself too extreme and subjective to represent any credible assessment as, I would argue, the FSI index demonstrates. Jersey can and should do no more. As the ground shifts, Jersey has shown itself willing to respond and change, but surely its people are entitled to protect their interests just as large nation states do?

I’ve always taken the view that the likes of Richard Murphy and TJN focus on Jersey because, perhaps more than other OFCs, it has striven to match or exceed global norms in areas of transparency and co-operation (hence its OECD, IMF and FATF acceptance). Embattling the likes of Jersey puts pressure on real offenders (as shown in the FSI and other indeces). It’s a highly cynical tactic when your action should really be focussed on those at the bottom of all the lists (whether OECD, FATF, IMF or FSI) where the illegal stuff really does take place.

You write about the “cause of justice”, but you never specify what international laws are being broken in Jersey?

We’re actually back to morality – and I refer you to my post at 33 above.

Report abuse

47

donald pond

bonkers,
you are living up to your name. advising is not the same as making. tax laws are made by the government. all manner of people advise and lobby them: big accountancy firms, industry bodies, trade unions, charities, ngos.
but once the laws are made there is nothing immoral with trying to minimise how much you pay. if, for example, you live in the UK, would you buy your CDs for £10 from a UK website or £8.50 from a CI one? people vote with their wallets and nobody wants to pay more tax than they have to.

Do you look at the price of petrol in France before deciding whether to fill up there or here? Do you buy stuff on duty free? Do you consider mortgage relief before deciding how much to borrow? All perfectly reasonable things to do. The crux is, the government makes the laws, people have to follow them but if they choose to modify their behaviour in a legal way, that is their right.

It is called the rule of law. It is the cornerstone of democracy and far more important that your personal idea of what is or is not moral or indefensible.

Report abuse