Pensions

[ASC1951]

"What's really fueling this law and order hysteria and the draconian prison sentences for relatively minor, innocuous and even non-existent "crimes" is the extraordinarily profitable Prison for Profit system. ..

Am I right in recalling that whole swathes of US industry are undercut by slave labour carried out in US prisons? Something about 90% of US Army helmets, being manufactured by prisoners, for instance?

 

[swee'pea99]

Am I right in recalling that whole swathes of US industry are undercut by slave labour carried out in US prisons? Something about 90% of US Army helmets, being manufactured by prisoners, for instance?

Absolutely. Not just helmets - virtually all US Army clothing, tents, hand tools and the like is manufactured in prisons.

 

[Flying Dodo]

Maybe Bichard could suggest raising the top rate of tax on those earning, say, £150k per annum and the tory government really going after those evading tax or how about closing all the tax evasion loop holes together with an overiding "spirit of the law".

Then we could limit pension tax relief to say standard tax rate only plus an increased tax on bankers bonuses. We could follow this with a tobin tax on financial,transactions.

We could also charge VAT on aircraft fuel.

How about a limit to the profit a company can make on a govenment or local authority contract (This one I know something about)

Stop public schools claiming to be charities and charge VAT on school fees and tax them the same as any other business.

Just a few ideas

Raising taxes massively on the high earners has been shown to be counter-productive in the past.

A Tobin tax has been shown not to work - look at the example of Sweden in the mid 1980's - trading volumes dropped by 85% in the first week, and within 2 years, 60% of the market had moved to the UK. France has just introduced a similar transaction tax on certain products, and the initial diagnosis isn't looking good. Even though the EU is possibly going ahead with a transaction tax, their own figures show that despite such a tax raising between EUR 25 billion to EUR 43 billion, due to the fall in trade and movement of some parts of the financial sector outside of the EU, overall it would reduce EU GDP by between EUR 86 billion and EUR 286 billion.

Aviation fuel has always paid VAT. However, commercial jet fuel is free from duty by international convention. The UK couldn't unilaterally add duty to it.

Putting a restriction on the amount of profit a company can make would be contrary to EU legislation.

However, I'd agree with you re the charitable status of public schools. The problem is that if you did that, then churches couldn't use the same VAT exemption.

 

[Primal Scream]

Not limit the amount of profit a company can make in total but the percentage on government and local authority contracts.

I know of contracts which are making 35% profit which is far to high.

 

[Primal Scream]

I have no problem with churches paying VAT.

 

[al78]

Planes don't need to refuel for every leg of a journey do they? The would presumably just refuel at the other end.

And the problem with that is?

It's less fuel efficient.

 

[al78]

For Churches to pay VAT?

I thought your statement "And the problem with that is?" was referring to your statement above it about planes refueling at the other end, not the quote about churches and VAT. Apologies if I've misread what you said.

 

[Flying Dodo]

Planes don't need to refuel for every leg of a journey do they? The would presumably just refuel at the other end.

And the problem with that is?

If refuelling planes are going to be taxed just in the UK, then airlines will simply tanker fuel in, so that a plane has enough to do a round trip without needing to refuel in the UK. The fact that planes are carrying more fuel than currently would increase emissions. On anything other than very short haul routes, this would also entail them having to add in a refuelling stop. This would also increase airfares (although that may of course be a good thing). Airlines would also reduce flights into and out of the UK, which obviously would be a good thing from an emissions point of view, but would reduce inward trade and tourism, which would be a bad thing.

Anyway, it is all academic due to the constraints of the 1944 Chicago Convention which all Governments have signed up to which states

‘fuel … on board an aircraft of a contracting State, on arrival in the territory of another contracting State and retained on board on leaving the territory of that State shall be exempt from customs duty, inspection fees or similar national or local duties and charges’

There are also around 2,500 bilateral Air Service Agreements between nations and organisations which all have the same restriction, plus it would be contrary to EU law for the UK to put duty onto all aviation fuel.