Calamity Chris Grayling has condemned the principle behind his own leader's new banking policy.
Calamity Chris Grayling has condemned the principle behind his own leader’s new banking policy.
Asked a question about financial transaction taxes, at a candidates’ debate in his Epsom and Ewell constituency, Grayling said:
“It’s a principle that no-one could oppose but the devil is always in the detail. And I think it needs a lot of work.
“First of all, the one thing there is absolutely no point on earth is any one country doing this unilaterally, because otherwise all the banking transactions will simply move to another one.”
Watch it:
Earlier today, David Cameron announced that a Conservative government would impose a unilateral tax on banks. Mr Cameron said:
“So I can announce today that a Conservative government will introduce a new bank levy to pay back taxpayers for the support they gave and to protect them in the future.
UPDATE 15.47:
For the benefit of the commenters who seem to have missed the point of this story, it is the principle behind Grayling’s remarks (hence the use of that word) which put him at odds with Cameron’s policy. Of course, a financial transaction tax and Cameron’s unilateral bank tax are separate policies but the same principle applies. If – as Grayling believes – you can’t behave unilaterally for one policy aimed at the financial sector, you can’t for the other either.
UPDATE 17.19
It seems that commenters are unable to follow our comments policy. We’ve suspended comments as a result.
On the topic in question, Chris Cook has tweeted about Philip Hammond’s reservations in January of taking unilateral action on Newsnight.
34 Responses to “Calamity Grayling opposes Cameron’s unilateral bank tax”
Costello
How long before this lying blogpost is taken down?
les
nice try Will but you failed – again !!
John77
Will, YOU have missed the point. Chris Grayling was opposing a transaction tax which will not work unless every banking jurisdiction in the world signs up to it a an uniform rate as otherwise all transactions will be routed through a country with a zero (or lowest) rate and the Cayman Islanders will all become as rich as Bob Diamond thanks to reciving the whole world’s baking transactions taxed at 0.0001% on practical grounds.
David Cameron’s proposed levy, on the other hand, cannot be dodged unless the bank gives up it UK banking licence so it can be collected at any rate up to 100% of UK-originated profits of that bank plus the synergistic benefits to its worldwide network of having a subsidiary or branch in the world’s leading banking centre.
Secondly Chris Grayling did NOT attack the principle of David Cameron’s proposal – he acted the PR Spin and/or futility of the suggested “Tobin tax”.
Wikipedia says you read PPE so it is mildly disappointing that you don’t grasp the point that, for tax purposes, banks can locate transactions wherever they have a branch or subsidiary or even associate; it is more disappointing that your comprehension of English does not stretch to recognising that your quote “It’s a principle that no-one could oppose” says that Chris Grayling does NOT oppose the “principle” of taxing banks.
Tobin’s idea was not to raise money but to stop banks wasting time and money chasing tiny fractions of a percent in speculative forex trading – that was a good aim but everyone who has looked at it seriously has concluded that it cannot be made in the real world
John77
Sorry: that should read “he attacked the PR Spin” not “he acted”
Also “banking” not “baking” – although the idea of turning the Cayman Islands into the world’s largest bakery does have its attractions
Old Holborn
It seems that commenters are unable to follow our comments policy. We’ve suspended comments as a result.<<ROFFLE http://bit.ly/92RmzH