Britain will be left behind if it doesn’t support the financial transaction tax

It's time Britain joined the other major economies of Europe in introducing the Financial Transactions Tax to help pay down the deficit. The other option is to continue to cripple its poorest citizens.

Once upon a time, the financial transaction tax (FTT) was the stuff of legend, supported only by radical economists and written off by the European Commission as unfeasible unless introduced on a global scale.

But now, with 11 member states moving forward with the Commission’s ambitious plan to place a 0.1 per cent tax on transactions in shares and bonds transactions and a 0.01 per cent tax for derivatives, with robust anti-avoidance measures built in to compensate for the lack of EU-wide agreement, the world is set to see the first working model of an international FTT.

It is significant that four of the EU’s five biggest economies are set to introduce the tax in 2014. But the UK, home to the EU’s largest financial sector, is conspicuous in its staunch opposition.

George Osborne has written the EU’s FTT off as “economic suicide”, but his alternative is an attack on Britain’s poorest people.

Next month, the under occupancy charge – erroneously but evocatively described as the “bedroom tax” – will make 660,000 people living in social housing £728 per year worse off, according to Department for Work and Pensions estimates.

The charge, to be deducted from the benefits of those in houses with one or more unused bedroom, will fall disproportionately on disabled people and single mothers. Even the most cold hearted apologist for austerity would struggle to make the case that these people got Britain into its current economic mess.

Meanwhile, Osborne is giving handouts to the richest individuals and biggest companies by abolishing the 50p tax rate and introducing ever larger corporate tax cuts, whilst he has raised the cost of living for the poorest families by raising VAT.

The chancellor’s priorities are all wrong.

Instead, he should be looking to the source of the financial crisis to help raise the revenue necessary to offset an austerity drive that has the country teetering on the brink of a triple-dip recession and to invest in infrastructure and housing projects which will provide homes for the poor, jobs for the unemployed and kick-start the economy.

The advantage of the FTT is that despite miniscule rates it could bring in £10 billion a year for the British economy. Instead of placing the huge burden of reducing the deficit on the weakest backs, it spreads a light load across the strongest.

Crucially, it will also help to discourage some of the kinds of risky transactions that helped cause the crisis in the first place. Meanwhile, it will go some way towards recouping from the banks the cost of the bailout and can be used as an insurance fund against future bail outs.

While Osborne remains stubbornly opposed to exploring the benefits an FTT can bring, Labour have begun to make the right noises about it.

Writing in the Guardian this week, Chris Leslie, shadow financial secretary to the treasury, said that the time is now right to start looking seriously at the FTT.

Leslie stops short of calling for the UK to join the 11 countries looking to introduce the FTT next year, however.

“We support a financial transaction tax with the widest possible global participation. London and New York City are the two largest global financial centres – and if they are to enforce a financial transaction tax, ideally both will need to move in concert,” he writes.

But if global tax policy moves at the pace of the slowest countries, little will be achieved. The Commission itself initially ruled out an FTT that was not global. But as Manfred Bergmann, the FTT’s architect, told me, EU countries simply needed the money and it was time to “lead by example”.

It’s time Britain joined the other major economies of Europe in introducing the Financial Transactions Tax to help pay down the deficit. The other option is to continue to cripple its poorest citizens.

As you’re here, we have something to ask you. What we do here to deliver real news is more important than ever. But there’s a problem: we need readers like you to chip in to help us survive. We deliver progressive, independent media, that challenges the right’s hateful rhetoric. Together we can find the stories that get lost.

We’re not bankrolled by billionaire donors, but rely on readers chipping in whatever they can afford to protect our independence. What we do isn’t free, and we run on a shoestring. Can you help by chipping in as little as £1 a week to help us survive? Whatever you can donate, we’re so grateful - and we will ensure your money goes as far as possible to deliver hard-hitting news.

46 Responses to “Britain will be left behind if it doesn’t support the financial transaction tax”

  1. LB

    Lets tax ATM withdrawals. It’s a financial transaction.

    Billions are withdrawn from ATMs all the time.

    Meanwhile I notice you spouting the usual crap about “Pay down the deficit”.

    You can’t pay down a deficit. It’s spending money you don’t have. There is no paying off anything, just debt inexorably rising.

  2. JoeThorpe1963

    What utter rubbish this article is! who can you collect a Transaction Tax from a banks based in Singapore, Bermuda or Hong Kong? because that is where they will relocate their trading desks to & on top of that we will lose the revenue that we generate in normal taxation. We already have stamp duty you cannot squeeze blood from a stone, why dont we have a transaction charge for cars? they pollute the planet & clog the streets they have enormous factories churning out gases, they wreck the countryside extracting the steel not to mention rubbers, plastics etc etc but no the FTT is an easy attack on the City of London because it wont affect 25 of the countries in the EU & as is usual the lefty subsidy junkies want something from someone else. Finally after 40 years people are realising we are better off out!

  3. John Whittaker

    I hope I’m wrong about this, but I’m under the impression our debt, despite or because, of austerity is still growing? Clearly we need to do something about it, if so and taxing those most able to pay it seems the most logical choice.

    One fact is that our tax laws are out-dated as it took some time for tax avoidance schemes to even be noticed, and they were, as I recall, legal. That says to me rather than naming and shaming we should write better laws.

    As for driving business away, VAT was accused ot doing the same thing and it didn’t. Britain is a good place for financial transaction for a host of reasons above and beyond simple cost. Othersie a lot of head offices would have headquarters in places like Sao Paolo, Saigon or Dhubai.

    Also, can we not encourage the return of our manufacturing? I seem to recall from my history that, before Maggie milk-snatcher we had quite a bit of it?

  4. John Whittaker

    It was the conservatives brought us in. They liked the open markets. I imagine they still do. We do tax cars. Heavily. Petrol too. Further taxes on automative transport would push spending of the middle class even further down, depressing the economy yet further. We need a tax which doesn’t impact the spending power of the majority of the country or schemes which increase their spending power without affecting government revenue’s. I believe that second was the idea behind the abolition of the 50p tax, though a very unpopular move. Let’s hope it’s successfull

  5. Newsbot9

    Trying to play to manufacturing rather than what we do well isn’t perhaps the best idea.

    (We do in fact have quite a bit, but it’s small/medium shop stuff in higher margin areas, not factories)

Comments are closed.