Wednesday 30 April 2008

Why politicians love Value Added Tax (VAT)

1) It's a tax on "consumption"; and consumption is A Bad Thing, as opposed to taxes on "production" which is A Good Thing. This completely ignores the fact that in a largely service based economy, one man's consumption is another man's production. Funnily enough, the right-wingers are more guilty of perpetrating this lie than the lefties. As it happens, VAT is mildly regressive - people on low incomes pay a higher fraction of their income on VAT than those on higher incomes.

2) It's an EU requirement, so we can't do anything about it. Apart from reducing our standard rate from 17.5% to 15%, the minimum standard rate required by the EU. Funny how nobody mentions that.

3) VAT receipts are relatively stable; in times of economic downturn, people spend more than their incomes - even if people's incomes and business profits are falling, the government can still rake in the tax. The flipside is, VAT sends more businesses to the wall during a recession than would otherwise be the case (they have to pay it, even if they are making losses). And VAT receipts are about three times as high as receipts from Council Tax, without the protests or the hassle.

4) Voters and businessmen don't understand it! People don't inspect their sales receipts closely and think 'Shit! I just paid £200 for a new hi-fi for £200 - £30 of that went straight to the taxman'. Similarly, VAT-registered businesses that make VAT-able supplies to the general public are conned into thinking 'We don't pay VAT - we just add it to our selling price and the customer pays it." These chaps need a lesson in the difference between the legal and economic incidence of a tax. See page 95 of this for explanation.

5) Of course, some businesses are zero-rated or exempt, so they don't care. Some VAT-registered businesses make supplies to other VAT-registered businesses and think that it doesn't affect them. Which mathematically it doesn't, but just you wait until your customer (who makes VAT-able supplies to the end consumer) goes bankrupt ... Or they're beneath the registration threshold and make damn' sure they stay there (see STB in the comments for details).

6) "VAT is a simple tax". Yeah, right.

7) VAT raises about twice as much as corporation tax, once you strip out the additional 20% corporation tax paid by North Sea oil & gas companies. The LibLabConsensus are happy to wrangle over whether the large companies corporation tax rate should be 28% (down from 30% last year) or 25% (proposal 18 on page 142, this whole report was far too radical for George 'Twat' Osborne, of course).

8) If the government f***s things up and we have inflation, or even if they just print money and we have inflation, then prices go up, so VAT receipts go up as well.

9) Banking is exempt from VAT; new housing is zero-rated and sales of second-hand homes are exempt from VAT, so if politicians fancy blowing a credit/asset price bubble, the tax system makes this all the easier.

10) If the government f***s up and our currency plummets, then great. Fewer people go abroad on holiday, but the UK is cheaper as a tourist destination, so overall VAT receipts (on hotels, restaurants, musicals etc) go up. This also feeds through into inflation, see point 8).

See also "Ten reasons why VAT is the worst tax".

BTW, this rant does not just apply to Value Added Tax, it applies to all Sales Taxes or Turnover Taxes, local, general or otherwise, unless the proceeds are clearly earmarked for and matched with spending on external costs, e.g. if petrol duty revenues are spent on roads and public transport, then fine. If tobacco duties are spent on cancer research, then great. And so on.

7 comments:

ScotsToryB said...

Years ago I ran a very small business with excellent margins/extremely low costs, including VAT on my supplies.

Twice I had to actively discourage sales towards my year end as I was in danger of breaching the VAT threshold. To cover the possible liability I worked out I would have to increase turnover by roughly 25%: patently if the business was capable of sustaining that level of sales it would have been obvious over the years.

Thus VAT works as just as much a disincentive as does the benefits trap.

Had I wished to expand to other areas my optimum time for doing so would be the 3 months during which I made most money. Had the new outlet proved insufficiently profitable all the earnings from both would have counted VATable and I would have been in danger of losing the first outlet.

The solution is to bring VAT in at a lower level with an increased percentage as turnover rises. Something to make the risk worth taking.

STB.

ps For those who do not know, if you have margins of say 125% (something costs £1 and you sell it for £2.25) it is possible to earn the average wage within the VAT threshold.

Anonymous said...

MW

It was the worst ever Chancellor (Barber) serving the worst ever PM (Heath) until Brown (who qualifies in both cases funnily enough) who foisted this abortion on us. Barber claimed that VAT was "simple" compared to the "complexity" of purchase tax. Even then - setting aside the lie concerning "simplicity" of the tax itself - informed commentators were sceptical that a tax regime in which Customs was going to have deal with hundreds of thousands (now millions?) of taxable entities against one in which Customs dealt with about 50,000 would not be more intrusive and complicated to administer.

Of course, this was part of the "grand projet" whereby we have been delivered tied hand and foot to Brussels. It went along with decimalisation and the, so far incomplete, metrication policies of the 60s and 70s in making us more "communitaire". Were I any kind of believer, I would hope that both Barber and Heath are rotting in Hell.

Mark Wadsworth said...

STB, exactly. Using your figures, once you have paid the £10k penalty for crossing the VAT threshold, your marginal overall tax rate is about 56% (VAT plus income tax plus NI).

U, LOL, see my new online poll.

ScotsToryB said...

Thanks Mark,

I believe every socialist who wants to become an MP should be given £2000 pounds, no other income and demonstrate their ability to create work through a viable business within six months/a year. That way we might not have to listen to economic illiterates quite so often.

Mr Umbongo,

I fully understand.

Can we leave yet?

STB.

Anonymous said...

"U, LOL, see my new online poll."

Gosh - voting in two elections on one day - bliss! Or is the London election actually 3 since we've got 3 papers to put our crosses on - in which case 4 elections. BTW was your poll up before I posted? In which case I can only plead tunnel vision.

Mark Wadsworth said...

U, the new poll is based on your earlier comment, of course. Too good to miss.

Anonymous said...

Great post, Mark. It has been a huge disappointment to me that the newly-formed Libertarian party is so devoted to consumption taxes at the expense of income taxes.