Duncan’s Economic Blog

Osborne’s Corporation Tax Failure

Posted in Uncategorized by duncanseconomicblog on July 12, 2011

Amid the ongoing News International fallout and the developing Eurocrisis, yesterday’s FT carried quite an important story on the likely failure of a key component of the government’s growth strategy.

Osborne has made boosting investment a core pillar of his economic strategy – something I entirely agree with. I have written at length on the need to boost business investment and also on the problem of the corporate surplus.

The problem is that Osborne’s preferred strategy is simply to cut corporation tax and hope for the best. Something I feel is unlikely to work. Especially when it has been largely funded by slashing investment allowances.

Significantly the OBR appears to agree, writing that the most recent cut will have a ‘minimal impact’.

Yesterday’s FT reported on some new analysis by the Centre for Business Taxation at Oxford’s Said Business School. The story – entitled ‘Osborne corporate tax plan will fail’  - is well worth a read. As it notes:

The researchers said that the main problem for the UK was that allowances for capital expenditure were the lowest in the G20. Few countries had pursued the policy of cutting allowances to recover revenue losses caused by lowering the tax rate as aggressively asBritain, it said. So while theUKhad the fifth lowest tax rate in the G20, the rate was applied to a broad definition of profit, implying that the effective tax rate was much higher.

As the report itself says:

Reforms which reduce allowances as a way of paying for rate reductions mainly redistribute the tax burden between companies, rather than making the tax system as a whole more competitive.

This was a point repeatedly made by the manufacturing trade body, the EEF, in 2010.

Cutting corporation taxes but reducing investment allowances isn’t a tax cut for business – it’s a transfer from businesses that invest heavily (i.e. manufacturers) to those who don’t (i.e. financials/banks).

As such it is likely to be ineffective as a growth plan as it totally at odds with the talk of an investment led recovery and rebalancing.

A proper, business friendly growth plan, would focus on increasing investment allowances  rather than going for headline grabbing moves like cutting corporation tax whilst hammering productive businesses in the small print.

 

About these ads

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Bill Kruse said, on July 12, 2011 at 12:20 pm

    This isn’t a proper business-friendly growth plan though, is it? Look at what it does, not what he says it does. It transfers money from the hard working and the able to the already wealthy, largely the financial community. It’s my increasing suspicion that once inside their ruby-studded castles, having gathered all the wealth in the world to themselves, they’ll simply pull up the drawbridges and leave the rest of us to it. When the fighting over the few remaining resources has died down along with the majority of us, they’ll step forth into a scarcely-populated Garden of Eden rich with resources. Paradise for the wealthy, doomsday for the rest of us. Go on, tell me this doesn’t fit with what we’re all seeing…

    BB

  2. Mike said, on July 15, 2011 at 7:21 am

    Off-topic but pertinent to earlier discussions on stagnating wages and manufacturing sector employment:
    Rapid decline in ‘mid-wage’ jobs.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 63 other followers

%d bloggers like this: