Tuesday, 29 January 2013

Call for hiking boot tax in Budget

From the BBC:

Leading safety campaigners are calling for a £20-per-pair levy on hiking boots to be included in this year's Budget.

More than 60 organisations, including the Royal Society for Prevention of Accidents, are backing the recommendation by charity Mountain Rescue. They say it would raise £1 bn a year in duty to fund computer games and gentler indoor pursuits to cut down the risk of people dying of exposure or being killed by an rock slide.

The hiking boot industry says raising taxation is unnecessary. The British Shoe & Boot Association (BSBA) says companies are already playing their part in the fight against early and accidental deaths.

The BSBA's director general Gavin Partington said 61% of hikers "do not take unnecessary risks and we have seen manufacturers and retailers lead the way in committing to further, voluntary action to educate walkers and climbers on keeping safe as part of the government's Responsibility Deal acccident-reduction pledge."

He said £10 from every £60 pair of boots already goes to the government in tax.

"Putting up taxes even further will put pressure on people's purses at a time when they can ill afford it," he said.

A spokesman for RoSPA said that there had been a spate of deaths in British mountains recently, and in all instances, the victim had been found wearing hiking boots. Rescue and recovery operations cost the NHS and emergency services up to £6 billion a year.

9 comments:

adamcollyer said...

What a depressing load of fakecharity tripe that BBC article was!

Incidentally, the "Sustain" website contains the immortally funny line " Membership is open to national organisations which do not distribute profits to private shareholders and which therefore operate in the public interest." Ho ho ho.

Mark Wadsworth said...

AC, nice link.

Their members list is a veritable cornucopia of fakecharities, it's almost pornographic.

Bayard said...

"The BSDA's director general Gavin Partington said 61% of soft drinks "now contain no added sugar""

Yes, because they contain vile sweeteners. That's what should be taxed, not sugar.

. said...

Aren't sweeteners now linked to everything evil too?!

I agree with cutting down on sugar, but that is an individual's/parent's responsibility not for the tax man to get involved in.

Simple.

BE

. said...

Aren't sweeteners now linked to everything evil too?!

I agree with cutting down on sugar, but that is an individual's/parent's responsibility not for the tax man to get involved in.

Simple.

BE

Ian Hills said...

What did I tell you? Brussels has wanted us to charge VAT on foodstuffs for years. This is the start - and it's in our own best interests (sic).

. said...

I don't know what the VAT status of soft drinks is, but I have *never* heard anyone describe Coke as a foodstuff!

BE

Bayard said...

I have a feeling that the only soft drink that is zero-rated for VAT is water.

Coincidentally, an anti-aspartame rant appeared on my Facebook page today. I wonder how much of the campaign against sugar is being funded by the companies who make sweeteners.

adamcollyer said...

Bayard, the sweetener manufacturers and the sugar nanufacturers are the same people. Both Tate and Lyle and British Sugar (Silver Spoon) are big in sweeteners.

The people who really like the sweeteners are the soft drinks makers, because sweeteners are much cheaper thsn sugar but the drinks sell at the same price. That's why all the drink makers are pushing low calorie drinks so hard.