As Alistair Darling steps up to deliver his "Pre Budget Report", and probably implement an unworkable "bankers' bonus tax" (see below an article from today's HMRC Is Shite), the Office of National Statistics (ONS) reports that Britain's goods trade deficit worsened unexpectedly in October from £6.9BN to £7.1BN (the largest gap since January).
This fall raises uncomfortable questions over the UK's ability to pull itself up out of recession in Q4 this year.
To add to the pressure on Darling, Moody's warned that unless he acts swiftly to reduce the debt the UK's AAA rating will be reduced.
Article from HMRC Is Shite
Good luck to HMRC in trying to levy a "bankers' bonus tax", in the event that Darling implements one in his "Pre Budget Report" today.
Disregarding the fact that taxing one specific "class" of worker is contrary to the concept of taxes being non discriminatory, the tax will be unworkable:
1 There will be a wholesale exodus of banks, other financial institutions and individuals from the UK.
2 What is the definition of a "banker"? Those who currently fall into Darling's definition of "banker" will simply have their employment status/title changed, to eg "admin clerk".
3 Pay rises will be backdated to mop up the bonus pool.
The tax will be shot to pieces, and HMRC will be forced to waste valuable time and resources trying to "pin a tail on the donkey" of the bankers.
I am perplexed at the government's approach to the bankers. The banks were technically bankrupt, most of these bankers are second rate and would all have lost their jobs without our money to stop their banks going bankrupt. Anyone can make a "profit" by declaring money that they have not actually received on the company's books but a day of reckoning will come and it did come. The bankers paid themselves vast amounts for false "profits" and we are now just letting them continue. Why?? See Bankers Bonuses for some thoughts on how to deal with bankers and bonuses.
ReplyDeleteWe are interested to increase traffic to your website, please get back to us in order to discuss the possibility in further detail.
ReplyDelete