We shouldn’t cut taxes for the rich – we should raise them

September 7, 2011 4:16 pm

Author:

Share this Article

TaxesBy Owen Jones / @owenjones84

Today, we learned that right-wing economists don’t like progressive taxation. Not a bombshell, you would think: but a letter signed by 20 economists calling for the 50p tax band to be scrapped was deemed important enough to be the BBC’s main news story. If you’re wondering who’s behind this initiative, it’s being funded by big business using the PR firm Westbourne. This is a blatant attempt by the rich and powerful to soften up public opinion into supporting their selfish economic interests. It’s an old trick of the wealthy to conflate their interests with those of society as a whole.

If you want to read the arguments of these mouthpieces of Britain’s economic elite being shredded, I recommend reading the ever-excellent Richard Murphy’s piece. The 50p tax band was one of the most popular policies of the last Labour government. At a threshold of £150,000, it applies to the richest 1% of the population (about 328,000 individuals, to be specific). We live in an era where a crisis of neo-liberalism perversely led to more aggressive doses of neo-liberalism than ever before: here was the one striking exception.

But I don’t think we should be forced into a defensive position on this. Let’s not simply defend the 50p tax band. Instead, let’s push for it either to be increased to 60p, or to take the threshold down from the current £150,000 to £100,000. In a country where if you earn £21,000, you are bang in the middle, decreasing the threshold would still only affect the very wealthiest – the top 2%, to be precise.

Either move would be popular with a public that wants to see the rich paying more. A poll last year revealed that 54% (against 29% who disagreed) wanted the top rate of tax increased to 60p in the pound.

It is said that higher taxes will just encourage tax evasion by the wealthy. It’s worth noting that – to flip the argument around – the low level of benefits is never offered as an excuse for so-called ‘benefit cheats’. But a more progressive taxation system should be combined with an all-out war on tax evasion and avoidance by the wealthy (worth around £70 billion a year) – from loopholes to tax havens.

It’s not as though there’s a lack of money sloshing around at the top. In the current economic crisis, working-class people are being made to suffer the most. The average Briton is experiencing the biggest squeeze on living standards since the 1920s. But, between 2010 and 2011, the richest 1,000 Britons saw their wealth go up by nearly a fifth. At the end of 2010, it was reported that boardroom pay leapt by 55%. As the bank balances of the richest continue to soar, why not increase the top rate of tax to increase revenues as an alternative to devastating cuts?

Tory opponents of more progressive taxation argue it will damage the economy. Given they back an austerity drive that objectively is damaging the economy, there is an element of chutzpah in this. But it is worth looking at countries with high tax rates whose standard of living is higher than our own: like Sweden (56.6%), Norway (54.3%), Finland (53%) the Netherlands (52%), Denmark (51.5%) and Belgium (50%). But it is questionable whether impoverished Albania has been given much of a boost by its tiny top rate tax (10%); the same goes for Macedonia (10%), the Ukraine (15%) and Romania (16%).

Britain did once have far higher taxes on the rich, peaking at 98% in the 1970s. But our economic growth between the 1940s and the 1970s was greater, more stable and more equitably distributed than it was after Margaret Thatcher trashed the post-war consensus. Indeed, the three catastrophic economic crises of post-war Britain have all taken place in the neo-liberal era: in the early 1980s, the early 1990s and – of course – today. In his book Keynes: Return of the Master (2009), Lord Skidelsky found that average British unemployment in the Keynesian era of high taxes on the rich was 1.6%. In the neo-liberal period initiated by Thatcher’s governments – with ever-lower taxes on the top – it was 7.4%. So much for high taxes being a block on job creation.

The 20 right-wing economists may be part of an orchestrated campaign by wealthy businesspeople, but let’s take their letter as an opportunity and go on the offensive. At a time when working Britons, the unemployed and the poor face being hammered by cuts and – in the case of VAT, higher taxes – the case for the rich to pay more is unanswerable. It is popular and it makes economic sense. And – just as importantly – it would allow us to do what only the right are currently doing: dictating the terms of political debate in Britain.

Comments are closed

Latest

  • Comment Reaching new communities

    Reaching new communities

    This article is from Our Labour, Our Communities – a pamphlet of 10 essays by Labour PPCs, published by LabourList in partnership with Lisa Nandy MP. I am proud to be standing as the candidate for my hometown of Hastings & Rye, but I am equally proud to stand as a parliamentary candidate who is also half Chinese and half British. My mother is Chinese Malaysian and came to this country 41 years ago to be a nurse in Hastings and continues to […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Labour could lose out by not making it’s stance on Trident clear

    Labour could lose out by not making it’s stance on Trident clear

    Cutting Trident will be the price of support in a hung parliament. That’s the news reported from a meeting of the SNP, Plaid Cymru and Green leaders this week. With Labour’s slim lead and the SNP and Green vote threatening to impact on its share, this is a serious issue. Labour’s policy clearly states, ‘Labour has said that we are committed to a minimum, credible independent nuclear deterrent, delivered through a Continuous At-Sea Deterrent. It would require a clear body […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Featured Is Cameron “frit” of TV debates? Let’s try the empty chair threat

    Is Cameron “frit” of TV debates? Let’s try the empty chair threat

    Lord Ashcroft has told him he shouldn’t have done it in 2010. Lynton Crosby has told him not to do it in 2015. It’s no surprise that David Cameron is trying to wriggle out of televised leader debates during the General Election – even though he has said he is willing to take part “in principle”. Time perhaps to dust off one of Margaret Thatcher’s favourite barbs “He’s frit.” Neil Kinnock tried it in 1992 to try to goad John Major into […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Flexibility makes for good work, strong families and thriving communities

    Flexibility makes for good work, strong families and thriving communities

    By Stephen Timms MP and Ian Murray MP The Christmas period reminds us that modern life can be busy, hurried and demanding. The pressures of work, demands of family life and hectic Christmas schedules can prove stretching as we juggle competing demands. Increasingly the need for flexible work is driven by the complex shape of people’s lives; as parents go to work, struggle to make ends meet, perform career roles, take their children to school and activities and try and carve […]

    Read more →
  • News Labour MP questions campaigning roles of publicly funded advisers

    Labour MP questions campaigning roles of publicly funded advisers

    As the start of the long campaign begins today, curbing the amount of money parties can spend between now and May 7th, Labour MP Jon Ashworth has sought to clarify what precautions are being taken to ensure publicly-funded government advisers are not using their time campaigning. Ashworth has sent a letter to senior civil servant Jeremy Heywood, asking him to answer a number of questions about what kind of campaigning activity was permitted and undertaken by special advisers (SpAds) in […]

    Read more →