Tax baton passes to the new States
Friday 18th November 2011, 1:00PM GMT.
Treasury minister Charles Parkinson presents his last Budget. (Picture by Steve Sarre, 1199651)
THE responsibility for replacing zero-10 will be handed to the next Assembly.
Treasury minister Charles Parkinson yesterday admitted he was disappointed not to have sorted out the problem within his term of office.
Guernsey has just learnt that the EU Code of Conduct group will review its corporate tax strategy at a meeting on 31 January.
A report on the topic was due to be presented to the States early next year, but Deputy Parkinson said that was no longer possible due to the timescales involved – the election is in April and States agendas have already been set.
- To read Guernsey Press stories in full click here for subscription details. Individual editions are now available online.
Thursday 23 February
- Recycling and export is the way forward for waste
- UK mail will arrive later
- Free motoring supplement
- Herm prepares for summer
- Win a night at the White House
Island Life
All about Guernsey
Ambassador of the Year 2011
History & Heritage
Visitor Information
Guernsey's government
Campaigns
Voice For Victims
Voice for Victims is a campaign aimed at promoting the rights of those affected by child sexual abuse.
This is Guernsey
Guernsey Press
Useful Links
Parkinson, what a let down that guy has been!
Report abuse
By ‘disappointed’ read ‘releaved’!
By ‘batton’ read ‘hot potato’!
This is absolutely no surprise this political hot potato will be gladly tossed into the laps of the next government.
I just hope the right decision is made.
Report abuse
If we had accepted a review at the same tme as Jersey and the Isle of Man it would be pretty well done and dusted by now.
Remember Parkinson got landed with it by the previous Chief Minister and Treasury Minister, Laurie Morgan and Lyndon Trott respectivly. He had to make the best of a bad job, and zero/ten was always a bad job.
Report abuse
I totally agree with Simon, it is so obvious that CP is leaving the States and the Island, how can he expect the Island to prosper when he keeps increasing the tax on fuel, hasn’t he got any original ideas!!! One suggestion get Flouquet and the other members of the Public Services to pay back all the millions paid out on the cancellation costs of the two incinerator proposals, this would go a long way to filling the ‘black hole’
Report abuse
This has got to be potentially the best news today, at least it offers hope.
Report abuse
This is a good move. I don’t believe a decision of such magnitude should be made months before potentially the most radical overhaul of the House in a long time.
I only hope we get people of sufficient calibre elected to make the right decision.
Report abuse
I agree with Sam,
My views have not changed from the time 0/10 was first muted. Of course we had to remain competitive but there was a better alternative put on the table by Charles Parkinson, which still maintained our competitiveness, but also just about balanced the books. I don’t believe for one minute we would have lost the established finance business, because we would still have been competitive. The 0/10 put forward, for the most part, by the then Chief minister Laurie Morgan and Treasury Minister Lyndon Trott, relied on growth to eventually balance the books. The UK expert we got in at the time, Rosemary Radcliffe, thought the growth strategy risky, but they took no notice, they knew it all. Well growth failed, of course the global crash didn’t help, it exacerbated an already poor tax strategy. So we are where we are today with the finance industry still not contributing their fair share to the tax burden and the onus being placed more and more on the lower and middle income taxpayers.
We thought we were being clever over delaying the review on zero/ten, another mistake, we should have gone with Jersey and the Isle of Man. The UK Treasury and the EU are playing games with us. We now have uncertainty until the end of January 2012 and the Finance industry for the most part are still taxed at zero and it looks as though they will still be taxed at zero in the near future.
Good luck to the new States next April
Report abuse
Gary
The proposal out forward by Charles Parkinson was equally non-compliant, but it was 0/20 rather than 0/10. Local companies would have paid 20% rather than 10%, that is true but several banks (major employers, remember, so you lose employee tax revenue as well as bank tax revenue) would have inevitably looked to move to Jersey, the Isle of Man or Dublin, against whom we would have become uncompetitive. Imagine if that turned out to be 3000 jobs,
Quite rightly, the House voted (not just Deputy Trott, remember), for zero-10. Only fools disregard the competition factor in a highly competitive world.
Report abuse
GM
We will have to agree to disagree. You are set in your ideas, i believe in mine,
meanwhile, we are now the ones with uncertainty, while Jersey and the Isle of Man have their reviews completed and we are in limbo until at least 31 january 2012.
and
Guernsey’s Rich and poor gap continues to widen
Report abuse
Gary
At least we agree on something! I’m not actually sure what your “ideas” are though, because all I’ve seen from you is criticism of the decision which was made, without taking into any account what would have happened if we had taken a different tack. Are you really saying that none of the banks would have left for a more favourable regime? How are you able to be so sure? Is it just a hunch? If so then I am glad that the House makes considered decisions based on more than a hunch.
Jersey and the Isle of Man are not over the line yet. They have won the battle but not the war. Do you seriously believe that the EU is going to say to them “good game old chaps, you won – we will leave you alone now”? If you do believe that then there you are more naive than most of Europe’s politicians who cannot see that the Germans are trying to take over the rest of Europe without resorting to war.
Your last paragraph I’m afraid sums up your comments. So what would you do/have done which would have protected Guernsey’s principal industry in order to prevent a huge loss in GDP?
Remember that our politicians could introduce GST at any time they wished to fill the deficit. How much more unpopular would that decision have been than last week’s Budget? Which would you have preferred? Criticise decisions all you like, but you seem typical of the armchair critic who shouts criticism with the benefit of hindsight but never offer any constructive solutions.
Report abuse