Clegg: The rich should pay emergency tax

Deputy prime minister Nick Clegg has suggested in an interview with the Guardian that the wealthiest people in the country could be asked to pay more tax for a limited period.

He said fairness was essential to making austerity measures a success and that to remain cohesive and prosperous as a society those of considerable wealth should contribute more as the country fights an "economic war".

The proposed time-limited contribution from the richest in society moves beyond his party's current policy for a “mansion tax”.

Continued...

» Register now

The full article is available to registered AccountingWEB members only. To read the rest of this article you’ll need to login or register.

Registration is FREE and allows you to view all content, ask questions, comment and much more.

Comments

Pages

Clegg...    3 thanks

holywood | | Permalink

...has finally lost it altogether.

.    3 thanks

ireallyshouldkn... | | Permalink

Are you trying to suggest he had it in the first place?

How about we save a ministerial salary and he resigns?

 

 

johnjenkins's picture

The rich already    1 thanks

johnjenkins | | Permalink

contribute more. How much do they give to other organisations (charities) the Tory party etc. etc.

The good thing is that the coalition won't last too much longer.

How does...    8 thanks

exceljockey | | Permalink

Clegg equate fairness with paying more tax?

I don't understand the choice of words - requiring someone to pay a greater portion of their income as tax than another is not fair. Apartheid was unfair (amongst other things) because people were not treated equally. So why in politicians minds is unequal treatment fair? 

Would Mr Clegg consider it fair if his child had less of its teachers time simply because it was brighter and could pick things up quicker than another pupil? (I am NOT suggesting that there is a link between higher tax payers and intelligence or that lower tax payers are idiots - I am a lower rate tax payer).

This country is devoid of any type of leadership. I am so sick and tired of pithy popularist politicking - and they are all guilty of it. 

 

the rich giving

oldersimon | | Permalink

The rich giving to the Tory party is a contribution to society ?  Surely a wind up here, John Jenkins ?

johnjenkins's picture

I was hoping

johnjenkins | | Permalink

somebody would like that.

Then again if more money had been given to the Tories in order for them to have had a better chance of winning a majority (I'm not saying that more money would've given them a majority) perhaps things would have been different? Certainly worse to start with but maybe not so prolonged.

Still next time we are looking at an all party coalition and that ain't a wind up.

Clegg’s comments...    2 thanks

Trevor Scott | | Permalink

 .... will initiate a lot of asset protection, also tax evasion, especially as even Labour is gearing up for a coalition with them after the next election.

 

Income tax was said to be for a limited period also, so do we just have to expect a wealth tax to be for the period of say.... until the national debt is paid off.

 

Q: Mr Clegg's hint of a change on 'Diversity' and 'Immigration'?

dstickl | | Permalink

QUOTE "If we want to remain cohesive and prosperous as a society,    ...   " Clegg told the Guardian. ENDQUOTE raises IMHO interesting questions about 'Diversity' and 'Immigration' for the so-called Liberal Democrats:

For example, IF Mr Clegg truly wants a "cohesive and prosperous ... society", THEN surely he is arguing for a society that is less diverse than that now, perhaps brought about by a reduction or even a sending back of some immigrants and/or economic migrants, isn't he?

This would seem to me to be a U-turn of practices under Mr Paddy Ashdown, etc!

diversity immigration and taxing the rich

david5541 | | Permalink

 

""If we want to remain cohesive and prosperous as a society, raises interesting questions about 'Diversity' and 'Immigration' for the so-called Liberal Democrats:"

 

as far as I can see on one side we have a coaltion thats pro-european-pro immigration-pro diversity(i.e. gay marraige and single parents) but anti rich anti taxation.

 

on the otherside of the coaliton we have a party which is eurosceptic, anti immigration(but with no clout) anti taxation; anti richard branson and pro banking.

 

perhaps nick clegg knows that an emergency tax code will mean all the rich can claim back their PAYE tax at the end of the tax year-such is the limit of his tax knowledge.

 

time for our young to have a compulsory voluntary/army service for 3 years after leaving school unless they get a job within 6 months eh? never mind the extra vat and NIC already  being paid by the economically challenged/poor who drive smoke and drink. 

 

@david5541:Has Nick got a leg on both Ur sides of the coalition?

dstickl | | Permalink

Hi david5541!    Are you perhaps hinting, given Nick's assertion about a "cohesive society" in paragraph 13 of The Guardian story, here's a link:- 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/aug/28/nick-clegg-emergency-tax-...

that you perceive that Nick has got a leg on both your sides of the coalition?

billgilcom's picture

Post recession tax credits

billgilcom | | Permalink

Is this the prelude to reintroducing "Post War Credits" but call them Post Recession Tax credits so that any additional Wealth tax paid is credited to the payers post recession tax bills with interest added.

 

No doubt Mr Clegg will be able to say that You saw it first in Accountingweb

 

More taxes from the higher paid?    4 thanks

lordburnside | | Permalink

May I suggest that the government stop over-spending rather than raise taxes.

There is over £36000 of national debt for each working person which arose from overspending by government in order to get re-elected. I pay enough tax. I want to buy things for my family not others families.

 

 

IF ONLY

The Black Knight | | Permalink

If only he/they had the slightest idea how to fix the problem...trouble is you would have to listen to how it works from a minority that know.

It is not usual to stop your ship from sinking by knocking more holes in the side.

The only way you fix this in the short term is deal with the easy cases of evasion of which you have a mountain to harvest and HMRC are turning a blind eye to!!

YES YOU NEED TO DIVERT RESOURCES FROM NON URGENT TASKS!!!

Then you need to fix all of the other politically created underlying problems.

If only we could vote for no leaders the ship might have a chance of righting itself ??

Not off his rocker.

Robynreine | | Permalink

Yes they should. Clegg isnt saying higher rate tax payers should pay more tax he is talking about the super rich elite. It's nice for a change to see a Tory making the rich poorer, I wouldnt be as naiive to think it will go anywhere near the lower income population but it's a step in the right direction. If he could lower the tax for lower income families that would be a better start. 

 

TomMcClelland's picture

Let's encourage the super-rich to emigrate    5 thanks

TomMcClelland | | Permalink

That should solve the problem nicely.

UK's problem is not too little taxation; it is too much spending.

should_be_working's picture

Ask or Tax?

should_be_working | | Permalink

"is there a time-limited contribution you can ask in some way or another from people of considerable wealth"

"Ask" or "tax"? It's one or the other, Nick, not both.

Well, OK, the mugger might 'ask' before taking your wallet, but c'mon....

cecilgorwyn's picture

emergency tax for the rich    3 thanks

cecilgorwyn | | Permalink

How on earth does a man with such daft Ideas get near the top of politics ?

carnmores's picture

spot on Tom    3 thanks

carnmores | | Permalink

We are getting the most badly needed overhaul of pubex. The coalition will last till autumn 2014. People have such short memories they want to vote for the idiots who caused the problems Balls to that

Steve-EBL's picture

Inequality    1 thanks

Steve-EBL | | Permalink

Its fact that CEO's salary gap has grown, and it's fact that in the Anglo economies there is now a bigger proportion of low wage earners, these changes happening over the last twenty years. It's fact that high earners are avoiding being taxed as employees as we have seen at the BBC and Whitehall. Bankers etc have caused an economic collapse, but have not suffered themselves relative to the average employee. Clegg is correct there will be social disorder when austerity really kicks In.

sluglet's picture

American model    1 thanks

sluglet | | Permalink

I remember seeing a BBC report earlier this year based on a study done by one of the big four (can't remember which one) into how it would effect UK if we had USA levels of taxation and public spending. Basically what was said was that there would be another 900,000 small/micro businesses in the UK which would mean virtually zero unemployment, much more investment, vastly reduced benefit payments and we would by now be out of recession and into positive growth. Perhaps someone with more time to spare than me would be kind enough to dig out said report and send a copy to Nick Clegg.

(Incidentally is it just me or does anyone else think it's appropriate that his name is "Nick". As in steal, thieve, take without owners consent, etc.)

Tax proposed is on wealth, not income    4 thanks

pwainewright | | Permalink

Most commenters have not bothered to understand that what is being proposed is a tax on wealth rather than income - for the very good reason that everyone knows the wealthy minimise their income tax by various dodgy schemes whereas wealth (such as property, shareholdings, other assets) is much harder to hide. 

On the whole when huge cuts to benefits and other social spending are being proposed it seems reasonable to clobber the wealthy to do their bit too. That's what is meant by 'cohesive' - everyone in it together. 

Personally, my only quibble is that this is targetted solely at individuals whereas the most egregious tax avoiders are the likes of Google, Virgin and others that pay next to no corporation tax by exploiting various international loopholes. 

Will the last to leave please turn thelightsoff!    1 thanks

Dutchnick | | Permalink

I have always thought that if the Lib/Dems were the answer it must have been a stupid question.

Our company would like to relocate to the UK but the 50p rate prevented that and indeed the 45% is not much better. Two other interesting factors are air travel and Labour in the wings!

We are currently based near Schiphol and as we  travel around Europe a very great deal we arppreciate the fabulous Schiphol. We can only see the SE airports getting worse. The threat of Labour getting in with the disaster that would be for the UK  unfortunately has put the idea of moving on to the back burner. We are not a huge outfit but around 40 good jobs could be created in the Uk if we moved. To plagurise President Calvin Coolidge "the chief business of the UK people is business".  ""'

I take it that Mr Clegg will

springacweb | | Permalink

I take it that Mr Clegg will include the capitalised value of public sector pensions in his wealth calculation for the purposes of his new wealth tax. The capital value of the £55000 paid to a retired primary school headmaster in this village the current gilt yield of 1.47% is £3,741.496 and of top of this is the annual retail price index linking. An individual in the private sector would need a minimum of £5m of capital today to achieve this pension.

 

 

yep    2 thanks

The Black Knight | | Permalink

Steve-EBL wrote:
Its fact that CEO's salary gap has grown, and it's fact that in the Anglo economies there is now a bigger proportion of low wage earners, these changes happening over the last twenty years. It's fact that high earners are avoiding being taxed as employees as we have seen at the BBC and Whitehall. Bankers etc have caused an economic collapse, but have not suffered themselves relative to the average employee. Clegg is correct there will be social disorder when austerity really kicks In.

They have created a system where a single part time employee, with one child, 16 hours a week is on the equivalent (including benefits etc) of £19,000 after tax = a salary of £24,500.....Bit of a pain if you want that employee to work full time as you are asking them to double their hours and take a pay cut? Great for Tescos etc as no employers NIC cost.

This has supported an over priced housing market.

We have government workers that are to expensive to employ (because of their pensions alone) and too expensive to get rid of.

Work has been created for services by over regulation that hampers business making a profit in the first place.

A lack of policing has lead to a massive increase in Evasion.

We have engaged on a massive spending spree financed by debt.

And still the Idiots cannot see what they have done,.....undoing is the answer??

I agree there will be a riot if the provided for don't get their pasty quota..... that is why Evasion has to be tacked first to get some cash (how many billions do they need?) to manage a staged tactical withdrawal from the other policies.

What If you collect some of what should have been paid and used some of that to invest in us making something again?

Nick Graves's picture

That's only the funded!    2 thanks

Nick Graves | | Permalink

lordburnside wrote:

May I suggest that the government stop over-spending rather than raise taxes.

There is over £36000 of national debt for each working person which arose from overspending by government in order to get re-elected. I pay enough tax. I want to buy things for my family not others families.

 

 

 

If you include contingent liabilities and off-balance sheet finance, the figure probably doubles or triples. Anyway, these numbskulls are wedded to the hokum that is Keynesianism, because state control of spending worked so well in the old Soviet Union and because it's populist.

He's a politiciunt; you can tell he's talkng opportunist garbage because his lips are moving.

 

@ cecilgorwyn: He was better at staring straight into the TV cam

dstickl | | Permalink

cecilgorwyn wrote:

Q: How on earth does a man with such daft Ideas get near the top of politics ?

A: IMHO: He was better at staring straight into the TV camera lens at the first televised 3-way "Leaders' Debate", compared with Cameron and alleged boss-eyed Brown.

Tax the rich    3 thanks

Vinoo | | Permalink

What the Governemt really want is more money.A lot of money is given to those on the system (benefits) who do not deserve or should not qualify (no contribution no benefit bases).

What a complete and utter

NIGELSEAN | | Permalink

What a complete and utter fool!  He just comes out with absolute rubbish. Thank the lord he is just Cameron's personal Jester!  He should wear the silly Hat so we all know he is only joking!!!

Clegg is Vice President of Alter - Google it.

androo235 | | Permalink

I agree that Clegg is playing politics here. He's after some of those lost Labour and younger voters in marginal seats with Tories in 2nd place. (I hope) Clegg knows that the Mansion Tax and the Wealth tax are poor taxes but the best that can be hoped for given the parliamentary arithmetic and asking for them sends a message to said constituencies. I don't think he seriously expects either tax to come about.

A Lib-Lab coalition may well see open talk of Land Value Tax (LVT). At the moment I think the most likely next government is Labour but they won't introduce LVT on their own either. Labour has a faction that supports LVT (to be fair even the Tories do), however much of Labour are almost as hostile to it as the Tories are as they dislike the single-tax logic  of LVT which argues that all other taxes can be abolished (except, in a modern implementation, sin taxes, e.g. alcohol, tobacco, carbon - whatever is deemed sinful) . Hence LVT, for left wingers, is a capitalists tax. Well, it is, but it's a workers tax too. What it isn't is a rentiers tax.

Henry George - Progress and Poverty. Mason Gaffney - Corruption of Economics.

I also like Steve Keen and his other jubilee.

Meh, they know exactly what they are doing......    2 thanks

mackthefork | | Permalink

""And still the Idiots cannot see what they have done,.....undoing is the answer??""

The problem for them is if they do what they need to do to solve the problems, they know they will lose the election, because the electorate are largely made up of complete imbeciles who are idealistic and have no idea how the world works. So the politicians come out with these zany sound-bitey schemes, to be popular of course, and we can see the greatest evil of all is commited when smart people pretend to be idiots so they can be popular, and the whole world burns.

Regards

MtF

Nick Clegg    1 thanks

Eddystone | | Permalink

It's nice for a change to see a Tory making the rich poorer

Er, Clegg's not a Tory !

But raising taxes is aready proving counter-productive, as it has in the past - the super-rich just move out of the UK, the rest either do less work or fiddle their tax.

carnmores's picture

what would happen    1 thanks

carnmores | | Permalink

if only those who paid tax had a vote in national and local elections, time to stand the old adage on its head , no taxation without representation

would more people pay tax

would high spending councils be checked

would the less well off suffer disproportionally

would the costs of benefits go up or down

etc

 

should businesses have votes in local elections

Paying my fair share

JackHarper | | Permalink

I have just received a payment from the Equitable Life Payment Scheme in respect of my loss caused by Government maladministration.

 

I am only to receive 22.4 % of my full Loss "in the interests of fairness to the taxpayer"

@JackHarper

mackthefork | | Permalink

JackHarper wrote:

I have just received a payment from the Equitable Life Payment Scheme in respect of my loss caused by Government maladministration.

 

I am only to receive 22.4 % of my full Loss "in the interests of fairness to the taxpayer"

Hi there

Tangent but, what has government maladministration to do with Equitable Life?  Was the whole dealy not caused by overzealous projections for market growth by the board, I am not in the possession of full details on this so interested.  PM me if you prefer as this is a total hijack.

Regards

MtF

Steve-EBL's picture

New world order

Steve-EBL | | Permalink

I still say we need a completely new tax system, one fit for the 21st century and the era of computerisation. Our tax system has its routes in quill and ink.

If we all had a statutory income bank account and a statutory capital bank account, it would be quite straight forward and equitable every one pays say 10% of what ever gets paid into their statutory income account. Of course this requires the end of cash, which is not too much of a leap from the status quo and would solve the rife cash in hand culture. Only purchases from uk statutory income bank accounts would be possible at the Til of businesses, salaries and dividends and invoices etc could only legally be settled into stat income bank accounts, this all being controlled by IT.

In 100, 200 or 300 years time are we still going to have this crazy tax system? No of course not, so we might as well get on and change it now, we need some radical and 21st century solutions.

johnjenkins's picture

I agree

johnjenkins | | Permalink

we need a totally new tax system, but to trust the banks and IT - I don't think so. You will never get rid of the CIH system it will always be about in some form or another. There isn't a politician with guts enough to take on the task. The only way it would come into being is if there was a worldwide agreement on a universal tax system. That would effectively end off-shore crap and many other devients.

Dissenting view    4 thanks

The Black Knight | | Permalink

You don't need a new tax system.

The solution is so simple no one can see it.s

We just need to spend less and tax less and enforce the system we have.

johnjenkins's picture

Can you honestly see

johnjenkins | | Permalink

Governments taxing less. Why should we spend less? Interest rates are poor, pensions, when they are not robbed by governemnts are poor etc. etc.

When Governments start showing confidence and trusting their subjects then perhaps things might get better.

@dutchnick

andrew.hyde | | Permalink

Interested by your comments.  But www.expatax.nl says that Dutch personal tax rate on chargeable amounts over €56,491 is 52%.  Is that right? And if so why is that preferable to the UK?  Do folk in the Netherlands have the same debate about whether raising tax rates will drive businesses abroad?  Let's face it, it's only a short drive from the Netherlands to 'abroad'.

I'm sure Schiphol is a fantastic airport but wonder how the people who live next to it feel about it (but that's another debate).

Before a penny of emergency tax is paid

robblay | | Permalink

Blair, Brown, Balls, both Milibands et al must answer to the British Courts for the crippling of our Nation.  Their assets must be seized and they must be made personally bankrupt.  

No politician or political party is above the Law as currently they all think they are.

Politicians must be made to realise that acting recklessly with our Country's assets will end with    them answering in-person to the British people in a British Court not at the ballot box.

Sadly....

mackthefork | | Permalink

robblay wrote:

Blair, Brown, Balls, both Milibands et al must answer to the British Courts for the crippling of our Nation.  Their assets must be seized and they must be made personally bankrupt.  

No politician or political party is above the Law as currently they all think they are.

Politicians must be made to realise that acting recklessly with our Country's assets will end with    them answering in-person to the British people in a British Court not at the ballot box.

...politicians will never be held to account for ineptitude and incompetence, how would it be fair to punish them for what after all is a requirement of the job.

Regards

MtF

Sorry, I have googled it but I give up. What is CIH?

androo235 | | Permalink

Aside from that calls for a worldwide tax system are hopelessly unrealistic (and someone even suggests a wholly digital centrally monitored - for tax purposes - world economy - they really should get out more). Thankfully, it will never happen, what's more I don't think it should. I say this despite being, on balance, and by inclination, pro European Union. I hope no-one thinking that a world wide tax system would be a good idea (WORLDWIDE for gods sake not just European) is also, for example, anti-EU.

.... and supporters of LVT, like me, are seen as hopeless idealists!

Henry George - Progress and Poverty, Mason Gaffney - Corruption of Economics.

Steve Keen's other jubilee.

 

johnjenkins's picture

CIH is

johnjenkins | | Permalink

normally short for cash in hand - meaning that the income is cash so might not be declared. Ther are other meanings I'm sure!!!!!!

A worldwide tax system isn't too far away, just as most people will eventually speak a version of English and it will benefit all business.One currency is not a bad thing as long as it's not linked to a central banking system. I don't believe in a contolled world economy or bank or central monitoring. That's just impossible as the EU has shown.

Why is it that all many ideas get altered and become useless.

ShirleyM's picture

I do think something need to be done    1 thanks

ShirleyM | | Permalink

So well done to Cleggie for raising the subject, even if he doesn't have a workable solution.

The infamous saying that 'only little people pay taxes', isn't too far from the truth.

I think we have seen enough in recent times to convince most people that the less wealthy pay a higher overall % of their income in taxes than the extremely wealthy people and corporations. It would be reassuring to the general public if we could get a minimum 20% tax from everyone over a certain income.

Shouldn't he concentrate    1 thanks

mikewhit | | Permalink

on getting the Stamp Duty paid each time a property's beneficial owner changes, to pick up those avoiding stamp duty by buying/selling properties wrapped in a company ?

LVT is the workable solution....

androo235 | | Permalink

As Clegg supports LVT he does have a workable solution. Only trouble is it's politically tricky and he dare not speak it's name.

LVT is Green party policy too.

Henry George - Progress and Poverty, Mason Gaffney - Corruption of Economics.

Steve Keen's other jubilee.

I also like positivemoney.org whose main mover and shaker (Ben Dyson) also suppports LVT - though his main concern is monetary rather than tax reform so LVT is not his or their focus.

Thanks John, CASH IN HAND, well of course it is.

'Blair, Brown, Balls, both Milibands et al must answer...'

andrew.hyde | | Permalink

Hang on, how far are we going back?  Surely we should include Norman Lamont, the estate of the late Jim Callaghan, whoever was responsible for the South Sea Bubble...

There comes a time in every administration when the politicians have to stop blaming the previous lot, take ownership of the problem, and start solving it.  I believe that most politicians from both sides are sincere in their desire to find the solutions to economic problems.  It's just that those solutions are never as easy and reliable and doable as some of the previous correspondents suggest.

Or in other words, if it was all as simple as that, somebody would have done it by now! 

 

johnjenkins's picture

Sorry Andrew

johnjenkins | | Permalink

but yes it is as simple as that. The banks are mainly responsible for the last 2/3 recessions and it is when they let things go then pull in the rope that things start to go wrong. They have too much power. When things go wrong tax payers have to pay for it. Lives are ruined because of "policy" changes. When your dealing with peoples homes and business this should not be allowed to happen. At least Maggie had the guts to stand up to the unions. Where are the politicians who are standing up to the banks. Oh hang on a mo a couple of banks have decided to talk about changing their ways. If that is not an admission of guilt I don't know what is.

Politicians will only find solutions as long as it doesn't affect them or their interests.

Normal (not artificial) bust and boom is what this country is all about. So let's get back to the business ethics of the eighties or we will be continuing this conversation in the years to come.

The banks are only a symptom

The Black Knight | | Permalink

Governments have caused recessions in particular the last one, by over spending in the good times....Gordon Brown had all the financial acumen of an alcoholic,gambling footballer.

The problems this country faces have been self created.

Maggie got rid of the unions by getting rid of the industries. Great? "cutting off ones nose to spite ones face"

To replace it we had more rules that created new service industries and more government work so services could sell to services and we all produce nothing but debt.

We borrowed heavily so we could pay the voters with their begging bowls... if you don't work you get more than if you do!

This government will not fix the problem as they are following the same political process of 1, problem? 2, Make it go away 3, There you can't see it any more because it does not show up in statistics, 4, fantastic next problem.

This has been applied to everything from mad cow to the economy.......its called sweeping the problem under the carpet....and does not solve the problem.

johnjenkins's picture

Maggie got

johnjenkins | | Permalink

rid of the unions because (a) they were affecting other business and (b) they wouldn't modernise.

Yes some Industry has to go "naturally". Major and Lawson cut off the tax allowance for mortgages and expected no problems. The banks lost loads a money to South American countries then upped business borrowing rate to get the money back. That to me is not a "natural" recession. Tax payers cannot create any financial problems, they don't have the power. The only time tax payers get their say is at the ballot box and by then it's too late cos all the other lot do is blame the previous lot.

I do agree with you, however on the problem not being solved and "swept" under the carpet. Can't wait for Boris to rule the world.

Pages