Fortsätt till huvudinnehåll

A really big tax fiddle - and legal too

I came across this on the website of Price Waterhouse Coopers (PWC)...

“So much has happened in the past three years to progress the development of Jersey and the Channel Islands as a tax-efficient environment to attract those property-owning corporates, etc... seeking to set up offshore property companies and unit trusts... However, as with so much offshore, it just takes some changes in tax legislation elsewhere to provide an impetus and take the offshore market to a new level.

“This certainly happened with Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT) in December 2003... The massive growth brought about by these changes led to the coining of the term 'JPUT' as the market norm for the holding of UK based property assets in a tax efficient way to shelter the sale of the property assets from SDLT...

“While ‘seeding relief’ (a concession for new unit trusts – henry) has been withdrawn, the legacy is a fantastic one of a much deeper market in indirect property owning offshore unit trusts...

"The future, at least the immediate future, for offshore property funds and companies remains favourable in my view. There is critical mass, the structures continue to be flexible and provide tax efficient benefits to investors, the income yields remain attractive for those London listed offshore property companies pursuing this route..

”Longer term is naturally harder to assess, but the offshore market continues to evolve. We are already seeing some innovative structuring for European property investment, both in the near and far continent, as property investment groups seek to continue to use the islands and also seek the benefits of the offshore route for the first time."

For the document in full, see
PWC ARTICLE ABOUT OFFSHORE PROPERTY FUNDS

So ordinary people get clobbered by the tax, whilst those who can afford to pay for the best advice get off scot-free. And meanwhile, we are all urged to grass on people who work a little fiddle job whilst claiming a meagre Social Security benefit.

So is the Chancellor really concerned about this leakage? The liberal press tut-tut about it on some pages and advise their readers how to take advantage of the loopholes elswhere on their pages. The government and EU have leaned on the Channel Islands authorities.

But really, the Chancellor has nobody to blame but himself. The people who frame these taxes are supposed to be experts, and should have been able to forsee how SDLT and any other tax can be avoided. SDLT is in any case a bad tax as it discourages land transfer and therefore is an obstacle to the most efficient use of land.

The Land Value Taxation Campaign submitted a report to the Treasury when the SDLT was up for consultation. The Campaign advised that the tax on land transfer should be no more than a charge to cover administration, and that the appropriate way to tax land should be through a charge on the annual site rental value (land value taxation), payable by the beneficial owner. Such a tax could not be avoided by offshore ownership as the liability would remain, with the ultimate sanction of forfeit of the land if the tax was unpaid.

ABOUT LAND VALUE TAXATION

Kommentarer

Skicka en kommentar

Populära inlägg i den här bloggen

Importing people to sustain demand

I got involved in a discussion with a Youtuber called “Philosophy all along”. This was in connection with criticism of Trump’s policy of deporting illegal migrants, which he argued would be bad for the economy as it would reduce demand. This implies that there is a need to import people to sustain demand. There is no obvious reason why a population should not be able to consume everything that the same population produces. If it can not, then something else is going on. It is a basic principle that wages are the least that workers will accept to do a job. Wages are a share of the value added by workers through their wages. The remainder is distributed as economic rent, after government has taken its cut in taxes. Monopoly profit is a temporary surplus that after a delay gets absorbed into economic rent. Land values in Silicon Valley are an example of this; it's like a gold rush. The miners get little out of it. Rent and tax syphon purchasing power away from those who produce the g...
Skicka en kommentar
Läs mer

The Zombie Train that refuses to die

The Guardian has published a couple more articles against HS2, one by specialist rail commentator Christian Wolmar, and another today by journalist Simon Jenkins. The main arguments in favour will doubtless be wheeled out by the commentators: the need for capacity and the disruption caused by upgrading existing routes. HST itself will severely disrupt services to Euston during the construction period. Capacity can be increased at a fraction of the cost by a variety of measures, provided that it is accepted that the additional traffic will run at existing speeds. It is not generally known that the Midland main line is, or was, four track all the way from London to Trent Junction, between Nottingham and Derby. This is because the additional tracks are separate, having been added for coal trains which trundled down to Brent sidings, on the edge of London, from a collection point at Toton in Nottinghamshire, where the Midland Railway build a huge marshalling yard. Beyond Derby, the main l...
Skicka en kommentar
Läs mer

How much more will the British tolerate?

The British are phlegmatic, tolerant and slow to rouse. Thus there was no great reaction after the terrorist attack in July 2005. The murder of Lee Rigby created a sense of outrage, but nothing more, since it appeared to be an isolated incident. Two serious incidents within a fortnight are another matter. Since the first major terrorist incident in 2001, authority has tried to persuade the public that Islam is a religion of peace, that these were isolated events, or the actions of deranged "lone wolves", having nothing to do with Islam, or to reassure that the chances of being killed in a terrorist attack were infinitesimally small. These assurances are are beginning to wear thin. They no longer convince. If government does not act effectively, people will take the law into their own hands. What, however, would effective action look like? What sort of effective action would not amount to rough justice for a lot of innocent people? Given the difficulties of keeping large n...
Skicka en kommentar
Läs mer