Could a Financial Transaction Tax be the answer to the local government squeeze?

October 12, 2012 4:30 pm

Ed Miliband’s One Nation Labour has, it seems, got more immediate traction than his responsible versus predatory capitalism distinction of last year. Yet arguably his 2012 speech forms a continuation of the themes of 2011: the same challenging of vested interests, the continued emphasis on rebalancing our economy both geographically and away from the privileged few, and the same desire to reward the hard-working small businesses vital to community life and a productive economy.

Gradually then, the leadership is sketching out the type – if not yet, five point plan aside, the specific content – of the Labour led economy we may see post May 2015.

With that in mind on the Monday evening of conference (the day Ed Balls pledged to fight for ‘an international financial transaction tax’) Compass, the Co-operative Party and the Robin Hood Tax campaign hosted a fringe event, Ideas for a Fairer Economy, which set about filling in what this detail may look like. The event, with Chris Leslie MP, Polly Toynbee, Larry Elliott, Frances O’Grady, Neal Lawson and David Hillman on the panel, saw a packed room debate a number of topics from funding childcare to the tough decisions on particular benefits Labour will have to take in the near future.

There was however one issue that dominated discussion, and which is steadily gathering momentum in the Labour movement (evidenced by a survey on this site which recently showed 78% support for the tax).

This is the potential adoption of a broad based Financial Transaction Tax which would roll out our present tax on shares to include modest levies on bond and derivative transactions. Should Labour adopt the policy, it would merely be following in the steps of 11 European economies including Germany and France which this week have forged ahead with an FTT. Christine Lagarde of the IMF has also lent her support of late.

A broad based FTT would raise some £20bn in the UK annually – money which could cost progressive (and popular) policy pledges to re-institute Educational Maintenance Allowance (£500m), help capitalise a British investment bank (Lord Skidelsky has put the amount needed at £10bn, the IPPR at £40bn) which could make a real difference to SME finance (arguably unlike the Coalition’s recently announced and truncated version), or drastically reduce child poverty (estimates have put achieving this at £19bn worth of spending to 2027).

An FTT would also help us not only to meet our commitments on international aid and climate change abroad, but increase them. In the global north the recession has cost jobs, in the global south (as remittances have declined post 2008) it has cost lives – and particularly in times of economic depression Labour must not forget Britain’s wider responsibilities. Allocating a significant proportion of FTT revenues to such ends would be a valuable and bold step.

At the same time, in terms of the domestic use of such monies, could local government offer the most deserving beneficiary of a large percentage of the revenue?

After the cuts implemented from the 2010 Comprehensive Spending Review onwards, local government and, consequently ordinary people who use public services, have faced a tougher time on a daily basis. Meanwhile, several functions – including public health – are being devolved to local government for the first time in decades, and councils across the country are being given new responsibilities (such as over council tax benefit) whilst seeing a reduction in funding. Local government is having to do much more with less, and despite numerous examples of innovative work by councillors across the country, cuts in grant have and will increasingly take their toll.  The FTT could help plug such gaps, and deliver a shot in the arm to communities across the country. Resourcing some of the largely theoretical powers within the 2011 Localism Act – such as the Community Right to Buy – with meaningful funding streams would potentially be a good start in sketching out Labour’s alternative to the discredited Big Society.

What could councils do with such money? Well, inevitably, this will vary council by council according to local priorities. Yet with well over 100 Sure Start centres having closed since the General Election, and with £250bn+ of infrastructure investment needed across the country in the coming years, there is clearly much that could be done with the revenues. Local government might wish to use the monies for either capital or revenue expenditure – that would be debated in each authority and in the local government sector generally in due course – but the future use of such revenue depends on Westminster (which, given the Coalition’s intransigent stance, means a future Labour government) first committing to implement the tax.

FTTs have been successfully introduced across the globe – and levied, as with our own stamp duty on shares, unilaterally. The UK – and the Labour Party – can go further than it has done previously. France and Portugal have levied unilateral FTTs this year whilst leading European nations are coming together to introduce a common, broader, series of taxes.  An FTT would curb unwanted high frequency trading, stabilise our financial markets (much needed after 2008) and, as this article has illustrated, raise significant revenues at a time of pressure on public finances.

Call it a One Nation that looks beyond the mile or so around Bank tube station. Call it a Responsible Capitalism that backs business with investment, our young with skills training, and our people with opportunities for jobs. The overarching agenda is clear however – an FTT would allow Labour to deliver a fairer economy, contribute towards a costed-out manifesto at the next election, and reduce the effect of the Tory charge – ‘One Notion: borrowing.’ It could help local government deliver on the sterling work it is already doing in tough times, and aid local communities across the country. As European countries forge ahead, an FTT must increasingly be part of Labour’s offer to the electorate going forward.

Richard Carr is a Policy Adviser at Stamp Out Poverty

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=531041445 Robin Hay

    And in one bound, we are free……
    I understand,  and think the priorites established for,  the spending element of this argument, but I worry when a see a single clause which states “a broad based FTT would raise some £20bn in the UK annually”. Raising £20bn is not likely to be without consequences, and it certainly opens up avenues for our opponents to attack us.
    Please can we have the same degree of intellectual effort being expended on the economics and politics of raising the money as we do on the spending it. Because the causes on which we spend the money might be popular and progressive does not mean that the same applies to tax itself.

  • robertcp

    A FTT sounds like a ‘no brainer’  to me, particularly if it works well in France. 

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZPXYLRVP4XOIGGDJWAL6HUO7U4 David

      The FTT performance issue needs close scrutiny.  A report by Ernst & Young entitled Financial Transaction Tax – implications for banks makes a number of predictions, including drawing together conclusions of other reports.  I recommend this to anyone interested.

      While the report is fairly long, two conclusions stood out for me:

      “In short, the Commission’s assessment is that FTT will raise circa €57bn with a loss of 0.53% of EU GDP and that GDP fall takes into account a predicted 70% fall in volumes of derivative transactions and a 10% fall in securities transactions”

      and

      “BlackRock have analysed the performance of some of their funds using hindsight to see how FTT affects returns. They note that the effects are most dramatic in some of the low risk classes… [and therefore] fund managers may be incentivised to take on more risk to compensate for reduced returns due to FTT.”

      • Dave Postles

         In view of the forecasts of the Item Club, E & Y involvement in REPO105, and some failures in the accountancy/auditing world, one might regard it as special pleading.  If the fall in transactions in derivatives was discretionary – suppressing some of the more nefarious instruments – then that might not be such a bad outcome.  How can anything be worse than the current HST?

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZPXYLRVP4XOIGGDJWAL6HUO7U4 David

          One might, or alternatively one might also regard experts in their fields to have insight that politicians and a baying mob might have overlooked.

          Derivatives, per se, are not a bad thing: they encompass a huge range of financial instruments, and can be used for many good things as well as bad.

          • Dave Postles

            1 The track record is there for all to see.   The auditors and banks have not actually recommended themselves by their recent actions and projections.  Why should we believe them now?

            2 You didn’t notice my discrete comments about derivatives then? 

          • robertcp

            David, the mob might be entitled to do some baying when our economy has been wrecked by the banks!

      • Dave Postles

         By the way, your link does not work, it seems.  The link should probably be to:

        http://www.ey.com/Publication/vwLUAssets/Financial_Transaction_Tax_implications_for_banks/$FILE/FTT_flyer_01.pdf

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZPXYLRVP4XOIGGDJWAL6HUO7U4 David

          Thanks, yes

      • Dave Postles

         Derivatives – like the ones that the banks sold to SMEs, as was illuminated just about the time E&Y was composing this flyer.

    • Dave Postles

      You now have the agreement of 11 European countries as well as France.  You are in good company.

  • Dave Postles

     What’s £20bn by comparison with the bailout, the QE directed to the banks by the BoE, and the short-term loans directed to the banks first by the Fed and recently by the ECB?  What’s £20bn by comparison with: (a) the mis-selling of PPI; and (b) the mis-selling of derivatives to SMEs?  It can’t always be one-way traffic.

  • robertcp

    Robin, Labour will be very short of money if it wins in 2015, so it cannot turn down an opportunity to raise a lot of money.  Consequences will be relatively minor and I do not see why this tax should not be seen as progressive.

    Regarding opponents attacking us, surely parties debating policies is part of democracy.  Labour going into an electionwith no policies that can be criticised by political opponents would make a very boring election and result in a low turnout.  What is the point of voting if the parties agree on everything!

Latest

  • Featured Technology isn’t just something for geeks to worry about

    Technology isn’t just something for geeks to worry about

    If you Google ‘Ed Miliband,’ you quickly get the old stuff about him being a bit of geek. His appearance at Google’s big Tent on Wednesday almost begged the headline “Geek Goes Home”. But that assumes technology is just something for geeks to worry about, and that Ed is a techie. Neither are true. What we saw on Wednesday was a leader with the courage to tell Google straight that it should live up to its founding principles on the [...]

    Read more →
  • Featured Woolwich: The British people – and our politicians – have risen to the occasion

    Woolwich: The British people – and our politicians – have risen to the occasion

    “We want to start a war” – Woolwich attacker “right now it is only you versus many people, you are going to lose” - Ingrid Loyau-Kennett Only 24 hours ago, news began to trickle through about a barbarous crime, committed on the streets of our capital city, in broad daylight. It seems that the murderers who attacked and brutally murdered a soldier felt they were acting in a way endorsed by their religious beliefs and their god. But to try and [...]

    Read more →
  • News Labour NEC Report – 21st May 2013

    Labour NEC Report – 21st May 2013

    Party Organisation The General Secretary (GS) noted the party’s good performance in the recent Local, Mayoral and South Shields elections and thanked all members, activists and staff for their contribution to that success. The committee discussed the work of Blue State Digital who have been brought in to revolutionise the party’s use of new and social media as part of our suite of campaign tools. It was noted that Matthew McGregor, Head of Blue State Digital’s London Office and former [...]

    Read more →
  • News Labour’s London Assembly Leader responds to Woolwich attack

    Labour’s London Assembly Leader responds to Woolwich attack

    Following yesterday’s attack in Woolwich, Leader of the Labour Group on the London Assembly Len Duvall AM said: “The attack in Woolwich was horrific, the actions of local people in response and the head-teacher and staff at the school are a reflection of the values and strength of our community. “At this afternoon’s London Assembly Police and Crime Committee questions will be asked about yesterday’s attack and the response, and at a future assembly meeting we will come together to [...]

    Read more →
  • Comment If Labour is to build One Nation, it must be a safe and equal one for women

    If Labour is to build One Nation, it must be a safe and equal one for women

    Today End Violence Against Women (EVAW) releases a new report auditing the Government’s progress in acting to prevent violence against women and girls. And with the revelations from Operation Yewtree and group exploitation cases set to roll on for many months , we hope the response from Parliament, policy-makers and the media will be unanimous : that prevention must be at the top of the priority list for any government, of any colour, from now on. On that basis, it’s [...]

    Read more →