Can we just take a few minutes to reflect on what is happening here? I refer to the foot stamping tantrums of the ruling classes, by which I mean Gordo the Clown and his chums, Alistair and Hazza. What I’m worried about and indeed it would appear I’m not alone in this, is the thinking behind this outpouring of anger over the Fred Goodwin pension. It isn’t going away and I guess I’m not helping here but the point is that if you make a deal, just because you subsequently don’t like it, doesn’t mean you should change it.
There are wider, much wider and scarier implications here. We all make a deal with our government no matter which country, which generally involves an agreement to abide by the laws of the land, pay whatever taxes are imposed and behave in a responsible manner when taking advantage of the facilities offered by the country. It is a two way bargain, because having signed up for it, the Government of the day, must maintain a consistency in its approach to matters of public importance, law and trade etc. What is scary here is that this government appears to think that just because it doesn’t like the laws which affect the bargain it made with Fred Goodwin; it can just change those laws in order to get its own back. A touch of the playground bully there; and of course as with all playground bullies, they are scary not because they are tough, but because they are unpredictable. With a playground bully you never know if you’ll keep your dinner money because it’s been stolen from your mate or today it will be filched from your pocket as protection money.
If, as this government has demonstrated on previous occasions, it does push through a law in this case in order to obtain Sir Fred’s pension then presumably that law will apply to anyone, simply because you can’t make laws personal, they apply to the land. Therefore anyone who is currently saving for their future (although here I’m unsure as to what the efficacy of such action may be at this time) is fair game to have it stolen from them by Gordo the Clown and his previously mentioned mates.
Then there’s taxation. Some people live in regimes where taxation is applied to funds that are earned in the home country and not to funds earned in overseas locations. It is a source of constant envy for folks who can’t live/move abroad, that those who can are benefitting from what is assumed to be a “tax free” existence. Time to clarify a few things here before I come to the point: First if you are a Brit working abroad and you are registered as overseas then you can’t go home for longer than 90 days per year, if you do, you pay the tax on all of the earnings you accrued that year. Second if you wish to return at some point you continue your social security (we call it National Insurance) contributions, whilst overseas, but because you aren’t actually using the facilities, you get to pay a reduced sum. Third if you own a home in the UK you pay all the taxes and levies applicable to that home and in this case it is unchanged, whether you are at home or not.
I realise that this may not apply to other countries, in particular the USA but it is the current status in the UK. However, and this is another scary thing, it appears that Gordo has a further terrific wheeze. He’s apparently suggested to the other EU members that it would be good to grab the taxes on those expat funds because they deserve to be fleeced even though as above they’ve worked hard and suffered in return an inability to enjoy life at home. I’m sure many will not sympathise with the last point but the former is real and thus deserves some consideration.
However in his greed he ignores the financial boost the economy gets from expats who generally return their income to their home shores. Offshore accounts are OK but they are restrictive. These funds in turn help the institutions by way of investment and therefore are an unseen but very significant contribution to the economy. But if they are subject to taxation, there is no need to send them home, better to place them in the offshore accounts where the offshore country benefits instead. Good isn’t it?
But what about that taxation thing? It is clear that when the dust settles there will need to be a reckoning and there can be no doubt that the burden of that reckoning will fall upon those who are working, therefore earning wages and thus paying taxes. Indeed, as is the norm, anyone who is working in a higher paid position will be taxed at a higher level. The problem comes with what the higher level means. Is it the factory worker who is paid a minimum wage but then gets more money because of the effort he/she has put in? If so then where is the incentive for that worker to improve? Or is it the executive who is earning because he/she is bringing business and therefore trade to the country? I suspect the targets will be the latter and the former will be forgotten in the rush to villify those who are perceived to be better off. Sadly the worker who has made such an effort and is making a similar contribution to the country’s purse will be disheartened and the country will lose. The executive will probably just up sticks and move abroad in a repeat of the 1960’s “brain drain”.
Soooooooooo, bearing all of the above in mind, I wonder what the requirements are for Antartic Citizenship?
Build Dream Home
2 years ago
No comments:
Post a Comment