Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Saturday, 11th October 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Families 'will be £290 worse off under new SNP tax plans'



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 14 April 2008
DOUBLE-INCOME households will be an average of £289 a year worse off if the SNP succeeds in its plan to introduce a local income tax, the Tories claimed yesterday.
The Conservatives published a raft of figures which, they argued, showed that dual-income households in every part of Scotland would lose out if the council tax was scrapped and replaced with a local income tax.

They claimed that, even in the area with the smallest margin – Moray – households with two earners would be worse off by £62 a year.

But in areas like the Western Isles, with relatively low council tax rates, the loss would be £458 per household.

These statistics, compiled from official figures, represent the latest blow to Alex Salmond's attempts to introduce a new, nationally set local income tax.

The plans were unveiled last month by John Swinney, the finance secretary, to a chorus of opposition from the Tories, Labour, the business community and some unions.

Mr Swinney said he wanted to scrap the council tax and replace it with a flat-rate, 3p-in-the-pound income tax for all tax-payers.

He admitted his plans would not raise as much as the council tax and that they rested on the return of £400 million in council tax benefit – which the Treasury said would not be given to Scotland if council tax was scrapped.

Since then, the constitutional legality of Mr Swinney's plans has been questioned, as have the financial calculations on which they were based.

Now, though, the Tories have published figures which, they claim, show that households with more than one earner will be worse off if the local income tax is introduced.

The Tories produced their figures by taking the average income for houses with more than one earner for each part of the country. These range from £44,554 a year in Moray to £64,698 in Stirling.

They worked out what the local income tax liability would be for a household on that income and compared it to the average council tax for the area.

In each case, there was a gap between the current average council tax bill for each council area and the average local income tax bill for a household with more than one earner.

Derek Brownlee, for the Tories, said: "It's time for the SNP to drop its plans for its national income tax. The costings are questionable, its legality is under challenge and its impact severe.

"The money needed to plug the black hole in its finances would be much better spent slashing the council tax instead – real cuts for every taxpayer."

He added: "The First Minister must face facts – his unfair Scottish national income tax is unravelling by the day. What he should do is reform the existing tax, follow our lead and cut the council tax for everyone."

But Mr Swinney hit back. He said: "The Tory figures are a travesty of reality, and amount to nothing more than an inaccurate apology for retaining the hated council tax – which the Tories imposed on Scotland.

"The reality is that under the Scottish Government's proposals, on average people across all family types will be better off – apart from those in the very top ten per cent income group. Everyone will pay according to their ability. The Tory claims are nonsense."

SNP hails its 'winning performance'

The full article contains 571 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

karinxxx,

14/04/2008 00:05:32
yawn yawn yet another snp scare story.


WHERES THE SURVEY PUBLICATION PROMISED BY 13TH APRIL BY THE SCOTSMAN?
2

karinxxx,

14/04/2008 00:06:51
The money needed to plug the black hole in its finances would be much better spentslashing the council tax instead – real cuts for every taxpayer."


THE COUNCIL TAX HAS BEEN CUT IN REAL TERMS DUE TO THE FREEZE ON COUNCIL TAX.

the tories reall need to keep up
3

Hen Mc Stoorie,

Port William 14/04/2008 00:09:57
the tories reall need to keep up

They could'nt if they tried Karinxxx

But do you think the Libs will see it our way?
4

Mr A Roy,

14/04/2008 00:13:10
You can bet your life that if this was a nu-labour idea the whole population would benefit
5

Brian S,

Edinburgh 14/04/2008 00:20:23
And how much worse off are almost 500,000 folk thanks to Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling abolishing the 10% tax rate?!?!?!? Up to £240!!!!!

Give it a rest Scotsman will ya!
6

Rosie,

Edinburgh 14/04/2008 00:20:25
Just because we pay more income tax doesn't mean we are always worse off.... Tax has to be paid it is just how and who from that differs. I earn under £10000 a year and the Brown/Darling lot have doubled my tax!
7

Vivas,

Edinburgh 14/04/2008 00:28:36
"...represent the latest blow"...

aye, right Hamish, whatever you say Hamish...
8

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 14/04/2008 00:45:27
The simple solution is buy a bigger house that the tax bands meant you could not afford before. Then you will be better off.
9

Boggle fey the Bog,

14/04/2008 00:49:02
1 karinxxx,14/04/2008 00:05:32

I agree!!

I just read a story 'placed' in this 'newspaper' by the trades Union 'Unite', which is basically 'another scare story' about job losses if we buy our trains from Germany, rather than Derby.

Oh Well, I suppose we should be used to it by now ;-)

ANY WAY WHERE ARE THE POLL RESULTS, anyone know?
10

FS,

Stirling 14/04/2008 01:00:43
This mud-slinging is pretty standard procedure, it's the liberals who really don't make sense (given they have an almost identical plan).

The problem will be if Westminster prevents the Scottish Government with going through with a fairly major election proposal. Though I think they'd be pretty stupid to do so given the perception of control-freakery that already surrounds Whitehall.
11

,

14/04/2008 02:16:08
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
12

,

14/04/2008 02:31:21
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
13

Edward,

14/04/2008 02:37:59
Rumour has it that the Scotland on Sunday poll which was supposed to have been published has been delayed as Scotsman publications are waiting on Labour to make up some kind of spin story to counter what the survey stated, apaprently in runs counter to what Labour and the Scotsman have been pushing. It may never be published
14

VoteoutLibLabConTraitors,

Arrochar 14/04/2008 02:42:49
It gets worse from The Scotsman. Really sad the way it has sold out to Labour. Money talks I suppose. My mum pays over a grand in council tax. She'd pay nothing at all in local income tax so the extra cash would help to pay her fuel bills. With Labours scrapping of the lower 10p tax band and their blocking of the EU's attempt to introduce equal pay and conditions for agency workers it shows how much they care about the working class. I never thought I would turn my back on Labour but I really hate them now. That's after 30 years of support. Imagine that fat controller Prescott getting £4K to feed him. Beggars belief.
15

Richardinho,

14/04/2008 02:44:31
Yet again this old fallacy that LIT will raise less tax, yet everyone will end up paying more.
Double income households-in other words-people with more money who at the moment get an advantage over those with only one earner. It's all swings and round abouts, but at the end of the day the basic princible of tax according to income is obviously the fairest method.
16

R.I.P. HONEST BALANCED JOURNALISM,

14/04/2008 02:57:17
The only way t ocounter this blatant biase is boycott their advertisers. I am sure many an advertiser would not like to be associated with a paper in ethical, financial and moral decline.

This paper does not in any way reflect the true ethos of the Scottish people.

BOYCOTT JPRESS PUBLICATIONS!
17

somerferg,

Perth 14/04/2008 03:45:23

Same old, same old from Hambo - I knew the article yesterday must have been too much for him!!
18

democracy,

Galashiels 14/04/2008 03:53:05
Hamish MacDonell, So the people will be paying much more in tax under the SNP than they were with the council tax under NEW Labour?
If that is the case, what about this "black hole" you were all ranting about in the SNP's sums when they first unveiled the scheme? Does this mean there will be a surplus now, or does it mean that the "black hole"
you spoke of was already there under NEW Labour, but will now be less under SNP? Please try and be more consistent with your arguments when trying to denigrate
the peoples government!!
19

democracy,

Scottish Borders 14/04/2008 04:13:08
I just love the way the opposition are so dumbfounded with the government and its success with the electorate
that they are blindly clutching at straws every which way to counter any proposals put forward whether they are good or even great ones.
It is wonderful that they keep strengthening the independence cause for and behalf of the SNP and we are grateful to them for being so politically naive, the Scottish electorate now know that NEW Labour are totally unelectable as they discovered they were abysmal in office but even worse in opposition!!
20

An Beal Bacht,

14/04/2008 04:34:05
I just come to these boards for a laugh at the propaganda. The unionist posters are becoming a real bore as are the awful articles. Don't think I'll be here much longer. What's the point - it's all so contrived and artificial. No real news - no real debate.

I'm off back to the Herald.

Slainte
21

,

14/04/2008 04:37:30
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
22

steve 1511,

aberdeen 14/04/2008 06:34:06
time the scotsman woke up and smelt the porridge and report the truth of what is going on in scotland
23

Bridged and tunnelled,

14/04/2008 06:45:25
same old tactics here from Nat posters.

If the argument made in the article is basically sound, make vociferous complaint about the newspaper as a whole, or some other topic. In fact any other topic will do, so long as it shifts attention.

Local income tax as it's currently proposed is dead in the water. It collects too little money and the collection costs will be too expensive. That's before we get to council tax benefit or the political impact on big swathes of the country and whether it would be ultras vires in terms of the Scotland Act.

Dead dead dead in the water.

24

Jimmy the Pie,

14/04/2008 07:20:39
So you think we should vote for somebody other than the SNP Hamish??

Funny you run this daily drivel yet I can't find any mention of the New Labour Sleaze and Corruption Party's MSP who is embroiled in a scandal about a widow's will??
25

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 14/04/2008 07:29:18
So, the SNP wants people who get up early each day and work hard, to pay for those idle baskets who lie in bed and lie about back injury; or who boozed and smoked away the money they should have invested in pensions; or who hang about street corners in track and shell suits rather than going to school/college to raise their own qualifications, etc. These are the SNP voters?

The Brave New World SNP style? Ugh.
26

Linda,

Edinburgh 14/04/2008 07:31:10
Tories and Hamish should check their facts.

Average double income couple will be £3.40 a week better off under SNP Local Income Tax plans.

Pensioners will be much better off and 80% of all tax payers will be better off or no worse off.

Obviously some will be worse off - mainly those earning will over £30,000 or in excess of £60,000 joint income.

Tory plans have no chance of being implemented and they are not serious otherwise David Cameron would be suggesting their option in England.

The only real alternative is Labour's extra Bands idea but this will mean major revaluation and those living in Bands E to H will see huge increases in their council Tax bills.

When will Scotsman mention these factors?
27

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 14/04/2008 07:35:38
Seems to me most journalists are from double income families. Might explain their bias. Bet they are paying through the nose for their mortgages too.

As a single householder, why should I pay proportionaly more for council services than my neighbours? They have two incomes and I only have one. They still share the mortgage and running costs of the property whereas I have to bear the brunt myself.

Sob, sob from those who have had the advantage for so long.

Well, it is still just a consultation paper, Hamish, so get all your sobs out of the way now.

Bring on LIT. And I speak as someone who end up paying more.
28

Unbeliever,

14/04/2008 07:55:01
And here ws me thinking I'd be £5,000 worse off.
What a ridiculous story. With any change in tax systems there will be winners and losers. Double income families will be worse off translates to single income and no income families will be better off. Wonder why they didn't spin it that way.
29

AndyWalkerSpeaksMince,

Falkirk 14/04/2008 07:55:51
I remember when Brown announced the change to the tax system that meant a tax rise for poor single households and there was not a peep from the papers. Now the SNP are taxing people who actually have money then the Labourman is up in arms. Its amusing how wealth redistrubtion seems to be a lost concept amongst that lot.
30

,

14/04/2008 08:02:07
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
31

Joe90,

14/04/2008 08:25:25
"DOUBLE-INCOME households will be an average of £289 a year worse off if the SNP succeeds in its plan to introduce a local income tax, the Tories claimed yesterday."
My wife and I have a double income - we are both pensioners - so we would be BETTER off!!
Away an' bile yer heid, Hamish

1 karinxxx - "WHERES THE SURVEY PUBLICATION PROMISED BY 13TH APRIL BY THE SCOTSMAN?". Answer - The data have been sent to Zimbabwe for processing....


32

puskas,

East kilbride 14/04/2008 08:29:01
As I said yesterday ( SOS )Hamish.

This newspaper and the Herald together sell less copies than the Daily Mail in Scotland.
Also The Daily Mail sells each day more copies than the Retard and the Sun...

A man of your intellect surely can understand the reasons?. My question to you would be :

What is in it for yourself and this newspaper in heading down this precarious path.

I can see the headlines from your last printed edition blaming the Scottish Government.

That I do not believe is as far fetched as it may seem to some..






33

puskas,

East kilbride 14/04/2008 08:30:27
By the way I don't buy the Daily Mail. Libraries and PC's are handy though.
34

Roy,

14/04/2008 08:30:36
Or to turn the headline around: 'Single income families worse off under old unionist council tax regime'

The Tories have short memories. How did double income families fare under the poll tax? How did families in a council house with parents and four grown-up kids fare under the poll tax?
35

conservative,

Fife 14/04/2008 08:30:53
I thought that the SNP idea was to be FAIRER not CHEAPER!

If some people pay less then some people are bound to have to pay more. Is that not obvious? The SNP argument is only that those who CAN pay more should do so, not only those who happen to live in a large house. Where's the unfairness?
36

thinking,

Scotland 14/04/2008 08:31:23
There is an easy solution if the SNP (or whoever is in power at any time) had the courage to do it.
Look at the facts first
1.The treasury, quite rightly, says they can't give a rebate on something that doesn't exist (Council tax if abolished)
2.The SNP want to have taxpayers pay an extra 3p in the £ instead of the Council tax
3. This will result in a shortfall of needed income.
4. There are thousands of Scots (English too but we are only talking about Scotland here) on benefits who could work but don't (I'm not talking about mothers as I think they should be with their children where possible)
The solution - make sure that those who can work do. It doesn't matter what the work is, as long as they are back on the work ladder.
This will provide income in two ways.
1. reduction in benefit payments (which are financed by tax payers.
2. Extra income tax from those back in work
Aaaaaaah! I forgot - EU Human rights - will they say it is against the human rights of the unemployed to be forced into work??!!!!!
37

JimC,

Kilmarnock 14/04/2008 08:34:50
£64,698 a year. Nice point to base your calculations on. Now tell me who within the working class including their partner (joint income) are earning this kind of money a year? That's over £1200 a week. Pssst, I hear Des Browne is due for the chop - makes my day that does.
38

Alex, Young Laird d' Drumchapel,

Madrid 14/04/2008 08:34:57
Who cares what the Tories say or think. Who cares what propagandists like The Scotsman, Barnes, McDonnell et al say or think?

After a while fibbers don't get listened to anymore. They are irrelevant to the debate. Each passing day, their existance diminishes in significance.
39

Phil C,

14/04/2008 08:40:15
Do the media and the greedy not get it? Local Income Tax is a fairer system based on INCOME!! The more you earn, the more you pay.

It means that higher earning households will pay more than those who earn less! No surprise there then. They will also pay more than the old lady next door who lives in a similar house on a small pension. Where's the news-worthiness in this?

We should be hearing about Westminster muddying the waters, by trying to steal back Benefits from the proposed LIT system, or how Gordon Brown and Labour are taking a pounding in the polls....Or how a majority are in favour of independence (albeit 41% to 40% in a poll yesterday).

Much more newsworthy and satisfying that people are waking up to the deceit of the Labour years. Because of a lack of opposition the Tories (nearly as deceitful!) are unfortunately the main beneficiaries down south. Let's hope that the 'blind' Labour (and Tory) voters up here start to see what's going on soon.
40

JimC,

Kilmarnock 14/04/2008 08:41:25
#37 thinking,
Well your handle does you no justice. And for your information the government does and has done for over 4 years now, force people into any job and the NMW regardless if they are suited or wither it plunges them into a life of poverty. Its attitudes like yours that make me sick.
41

Duncan in Edinburgh,

14/04/2008 08:41:52
It's sad that in this rush to defend the SNP against perceived bias, people are failing to examine the facts.

The Tories have some of this stuff absolutely right: the 3% LIT will not generate enough revenue. Swinney has said so himself. Why won't the SNP levy the LIT at a rate which would generate the same revenues? Or at least tell us what that rate would be, and how much it would cost us, so that we can make the choice?
42

thinking,

Scotland 14/04/2008 08:45:00
#40
'Local Income Tax is a fairer system based on INCOME!! The more you earn, the more you pay.'
Wasn't the Poll Tax supposed to do something like that.
i.e. one person in a house would pay one tax, two people would pay two taxes?
The problem with income tax is that only those who work pay it, while those who could work, but don't, get away with being supported by the worker.
Then again, that is happening now as the worker pays the benefits of the unemployed.
43

Phil C,

14/04/2008 08:50:07
#43 thinking

No, the Poll Tax was a flat rate tax which everybody paid at least 10% of. Benefit rebates helped the worst off. It was not at all the same thing, though I thought it was fairer than the Council Tax or Rates!
44

,

14/04/2008 08:50:11
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
45

Joe,

Montague Street 14/04/2008 08:50:30
Is this the same Tories who are keeping the SNP in power at Holyrood? Unbelievable
46

Phil C,

14/04/2008 08:57:03
#42 DiE

People like you (I don't mean people LIKE you, but people like YOU!) always try to cloud issues by looking for a final figure before a project is even off the ground. Try to look at the bigger picture. The objective is to replace an unfair tax with a fair one. Get it?

Roughly the same amount will need to be raised as now. If Scotland is still contributing to Westminster's coffers then, to keep the status quo, we should get back about £400 million, or whatever, and the rest will be raised from LIT payers, with the wealthiest paying the most. Not too tricky is it.
47

thinking,

Scotland 14/04/2008 09:02:55
#41
I take it you are unemployed or have you been forced back to work then?
For your information, we are not wealthy, don't own our own home (have to rent privately because we have never been able to get a council house), have faced redundency 3 times and could have gone on the dole but didn't.
Any work was taken as well as eventually returning to college for retraining. This wasn't easy as there was precious little financial help to retrain.
Result - full employment - no burden on the taxpayer and contributing what seems a huge chunk of our income on PAYE and Council tax.
We are just ordinary people, doing what we were brought up to do, provide for ourselves and our family as much as our abilities allow us to and to improve those abilities as much as possible.
48

mr angry,

ayrshire 14/04/2008 09:11:52
#41 Its not forcing enough of them into jobs. They shoudl get 6 months to get sorted out and then issued with a shovel/ brush and told to get on with tidying up this country. Might focus their minds, and also nobody should be paid any more than the minimum wage, less any taxes , for not working , and having lots of children should not count either. Give them equivalent of a minimum wage and make them work for it and you will see a stampede to the job centre.
49

Auckland Arab,

14/04/2008 09:20:58
the Tories claimed yesterday.

Says it all!!

Then again, the Poll Tax was a fair tax, the Tories claimed yesterday.

Just about as believable!
50

Duncan in Edinburgh,

14/04/2008 09:23:44
#47 Ah, I see - it is nit-picky to address the question of whether a new form of taxation will raise the revenue needed? But presumably it isn't nit-picky to continually state that 80% of people will be better off under this new tax - even though this 80% figure is entirely reliant on the tax no longer raising enough revenue!

Honestly, it's laughable. I would support moves towards an honest progressive local taxation policy; but this simply isn't it. This is a deeply dishonest one, and for you to attack my pointing out the glaring fault in it, while mentioning nothing about the tissue of half-truths under which it is being sold to a hopeful nation, is beneath contempt.

Either we talk in broad brush-strokes - in which case, yes, a progressive local taxation system is a good idea - let's hear your proposals before we make any claims as to who will be better off; or we talk about the concrete proposal on the table from the SNP, which is fatally flawed by simply not raising enough revenue.
51

Melly,

Sussex 14/04/2008 09:25:05
Every morning now I open up the Scotsman website and I just know there will be at least one anti SNP story. It`s the one constant that this newspaper has every single day. It`s so sad that a once respected publication has sunk to such depths. I can`t buy a copy down here in rural Sussex but I would no longer buy one now anyway. There is something rotten in the Scotman.
52

Citylocal Fife,

Citylocal Fife News 14/04/2008 09:29:09
There will always be winners and losers, but it would seem to me to be *fairer* that couples with two incomes are taxed more than those with one, certain pensioners excepted of course.
53

Xena - Warrior Princess,

14/04/2008 09:29:15
Dearie Dearie me, this story is in ALL the national newspapers. Don't shoot the messenger!
54

Senga Jean,

Scotland 14/04/2008 09:32:36
The SNP are trying to introduce FAIRNESS. Join the debate and suggest something better, I do notice that Westminster Labour have gaffed with the 10%. Yes let's try FAIRNESS.
55

Brian Hill,

Edinburgh 14/04/2008 09:33:58
SCOTSMAN NEWSPAPER SAVING UNION SINGLE HANDEDLY.

The Scotsman has become a legend in its own mind as it delivers blow after blow to this pathetic SNP excuse for a Government.

Unfortunately so far, the only people who recognise the genius of the Scotsman articles are...erm, the Scotsman/SOS reporters.....oh and Brian Taylor BBC and Profs Curtice and Middleton at Labour HQ.

The Unionist parties are also grateful that the Scotsman's spin on their articles is even better than their own.

Shame the voters aren't able to grasp the Scotsman's version of reality.

56

John S,

14/04/2008 09:34:51
Westminster 'withholding £1.2bn
Nationalist Treasury spokesman Stewart Hosie said money totalling £1,219,678,400 was either being withheld, or was proposed to be withheld. And he said that amounted to £874 for every family in Scotland.
The figure includes £400 million that Scotland currently receives in council tax benefits. UK ministers have repeatedly said this funding would end if the SNP's proposed local income tax is introduced north of the border.
The total also includes £184 million of Lottery funding, which the SNP claim being used to fund the 2012 London Olympics instead of good causes in Scotland, £8.1 million in compensation for farmers and crofters that they say was withdrawn last year and £120 million of Barnett consequentials that the Nationalists argue is due to Scotland from £1.2 billion worth of spending on prisons.
TheStar - South Yorkshire- Sunday, 13 April 2008
http://www.thestar.co.uk/latest-scottish-news/Westminster-39withholding-12bn39.3976969.jp
57

Jimmy the Pie,

14/04/2008 09:35:01
Just read this classic line in the Independent today!!

Alan Johnson, the Health Secretary, came to Mr Brown's defence yesterday. He insisted the Prime Minister was facing a "character assassination" campaign from journalists similar to that endured by Tony Blair, John Major and Margaret Thatcher.

Does this ring any bells Hamish ,Eddie???
58

LKK252,

14/04/2008 09:36:43
As anticipated the usual Nationalist onslaught and rant. The Tories have presented financial figures to back up their argument. A novel idea for the SNP. If you must attack this argument can you please do so using financial facts and figures not Natioalist propaganda. Until Alex Salmond can provide sound figures to back up this tax then I remain unconvinced
59

Publius,

London 14/04/2008 09:38:41
#40 Phil C

You write "Do the media and the greedy not get it? Local Income Tax is a fairer system based on INCOME!! The more you earn, the more you pay."

Sorry Phil but you're mistaken. The wealthy never pay their full wack of income tax. They move their money to tax havens overseas or they take their earnings in share options or dividends or interest payments or they buy forests or fields and claim money for those. There is a large industry of accountants who advise them how to avoid income tax. Income tax is a tax on middle earners, but it doesn't touch the rich.

The SNP don't seem to be aware of this obvious truth.


60

Doh,

14/04/2008 09:39:22


This is outrageous.

Taxes should NOT be based upon the ability.

If you dotn pay up - become a non-dom or sell your house and move into a cardboardbox.

Thank goodness the Labour party have abolished the 10p tax rate. That should encourage all those low paid scroungers to get a well paid job.

Council tax should be scrapped and replaced by a tax on windows.
61

Miss H,

14/04/2008 09:45:55
The Tories haven't published this on their website yet so we can't see where their figures have come from.

I would predict however that it will reinforce the fact that politicians - both Labour and Tory - have absolutely no idea what the 'average' family actually earns.

62

Miss H,

14/04/2008 09:46:15
59 Where are they?
63

A Better Way,

Edinburgh 14/04/2008 09:47:40
Thinking Scotland, is the classic example of what a mess the New Labour Party has left Scotland in.

Thinking isnt being unreasonable in the slightest. He/She is obviously willing to adapt and do whatever needs to be done to provide the best for their family, that this shoite system lets you do.

Council Houses are an essential part of our Society. The Scottish Councils jumped at the chance to get them out of their hands. They didnt have to build anymore. The New Labour Party needs to keep ordinary Scots under the thumb by always keeping them in their place. The more they struggled the more the New Labour Party could show up every four years to promise the world if only they would vote Labour one more time. These Pollies got richer and richer, they were the ones who got a great pension that the ordinary punter had no chance of. They got the expenses and overseas trips, while hundreds of thousands of Scots just dreamed about a holiday overseas. Why are Scots as cynical as they are. Well the answer can be found in a few million homes in Scotland everyday.

Firstly the 520 million that Brown & Co are stealing from Scots, is our money, and ours to do with whatever way we choose.

The Tories are a mere example of the past feudal system that has been a pox on our society for to long.

Thirdly, I fall in the between, Middle and Above income bracket and I couldnt give a rats botty, if I have to pay more, providing the money and system means that those less well off pay less. I would not agree with a system that meant me paying more for another countries people as well. You see I am Scottish, and I support my Country and People in whatever they do, to help the Scottish People. If I did end up paying 5 quid a week more, to me its easier to do that than ask a struggling pensioner, or Scot who was trying to establish a decent quality of life for their family, to pay that same 5 quid.

To me the Unionist Voices on these forums always talk about themselves. They dont
64

A Better Way,

Edinburgh 14/04/2008 09:50:46
They dont give a rats about the people around them. They are more concerned about their lifestyle than they are about the Scottish People as a whole.If you were a Labour Insider, who earned 45,000 quid a year to work at Stevenson College, but never went there, Im sure you would fight to keep that system going, no matter the price. If you listen to a Unionist you get lies lies lies.

It is Definately Time for Scotland and its People, so lets just get on with it, and move forward.
65

John not from the Borders,

Haddington 14/04/2008 09:52:36
The Council Tax aligns the costs of the services provided to the local community to the ability of the community to raise the money. It also makes the locally elected Councils accountable to the people who elect them

A National Income Tax removes that link, penalises efficiently run councils who try to deliver locals services as cheaply as possible, disenfranchises the electorate and questions why we have local government in the first places. Let’s centralises more power, why not!

I see in the posting that this is a ‘hated’ tax. Yes I hate it, I also hate Income Tax, VAT, Road Tax, Fuel Duty, alcohol duty, airport tax, passenger tax, insurance tax, inheritance tax, capital gains tax and I’m sure there are a few more that I’ve missed.

The point is this is set at a local level and in theory reflects the services provided to the local community. This is another example of Big Brother centralisation which all political parties seem to become as soon as they get into power. I suppose it makes it easier to impose their will on the majority of the population who didn’t vote for them.

And before the SNP apologist jump on to their high horses, when was the last time any government get an overall majority!
66

Foulkes Off the CyberNat,

Edinburgh 14/04/2008 09:54:34
Let me guess they forgot to add the new banding revue when they did their sums. Let them try redoing their Math after they put everybodies properties 3 bandings higher to reflect the house price increaces since 1991 right up to the introduction of LIT in 2010 at the earliest.
Any takers?? how about you Duncan do you think the Tory sums would still hold water after a band revue??
67

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 14/04/2008 09:55:12
The Tories are wrong. It will be more than £290.
68

Foulkes Off the CyberNat,

Edinburgh 14/04/2008 09:56:41
Did they also add on this years 4% increase??
How about next years 4 to 6% increase.
And the year afters 4 to 6% increase.
69

Foulkes Off the CyberNat,

Edinburgh 14/04/2008 09:58:34
69

Aye we're going to listen to a wind up merchant right enough.
70

Miss H,

14/04/2008 10:00:43
68 The issue is that the sums may be wrong. The Moray couple for example would pay £1010.52 under LIT - less than Band D council tax in Moray.

So let's see all the figures.
71

Alan B,

14/04/2008 10:00:50
#42 Duncan
U make little sense and i do not even support LIT.

"the 3% LIT will not generate enough revenue."
This is rubbish. The LIT proposals rightly or wrong are part of an overall tax cut. A tax cut by definition will not raise the same amount of money but "enough" is subjective to ur view of amount of tax a government should tax us by.

"Why won't the SNP levy the LIT at a rate which would generate the same revenues?"
Why should they? If they want to have a tax cut that is their choice. After all labour screwed us all with massive rises in council tax.

"Or at least tell us what that rate would be, and how much it would cost us, so that we can make the choice?"

So they should be telling us the rate of LIT that they are not going to bringing in. That makes sense. Lets try to really confuse. Maybe they should also tell us how much it would cost if labour disgracefully try to withhold scotlands 400million share of the council tax rebate. Why do all governments not put out figures for policies they do not want?
72

Adam Birnie,

Peterborough 14/04/2008 10:02:54
How can the Tories still be defending this evil, regressive tax? It's based on an estate agent's guess about the value of your home, and it means a single person pays 1.5 times what a member of a couple pay. Putting the charge on income tax would abolish a whole strata of tax collectors from local government and thus reduce it significantly. It was always a mad idea and all credit to the SNP for wanting to ditch it.
73

Foulkes Off the CyberNat,

Edinburgh 14/04/2008 10:06:22
72

You can create a fictious family scenario to match any statistics you want and claim its an average. Look how often the opposition loves to use the band D examples with medium to high earners.
The reality is medium to high earners will mostly be living in higher band houses why wouldnt they??
The planned banding revue by Labour had they won the election would have seen almost all properties in Scotland lifted up 3 banding places.
And lets not forget the council tax increases between now and the introduction of LIT compared to the tax freeze.
74

Arfur,

14/04/2008 10:07:01
First mistake Hamish 'Scottish Political Editor' (thats a laugh) was basing this on a salary like £64k. Now i am no mathematician but is this not about 3 times the national average salary?

As for the survey I come on looking for it yesterday - and no sign. I am guessing the hootsman are not happy with the results i.e most folk are happy with the SNP.
75

Jimmy the Pie,

14/04/2008 10:07:43
Another classic line from the Daily Mail

However, a senior member of Tony Blair's last Cabinet said yesterday that Brownites and Blairites - who gathered recently - all now shared the same analysis of Labour's prospects.

"We all agreed that we are f*****," the ex-minister said.
76

Publius,

London 14/04/2008 10:09:04
#74 Adam Birnie

You write "Putting the charge on income tax would abolish a whole strata of tax collectors from local government and thus reduce it significantly."

Sorry Adam. You're mistaken. Under the SNP proposals council tax will be kept for second (and third!) homes, so every house in Scotland will have be valued for council tax and a fair number of collectors retained by local authorities to collect council tax.

This is another instance of SMP muddled thinking about LIT.
77

Foulkes Off the CyberNat,

Edinburgh 14/04/2008 10:10:37
42

I keep telling you Duncan to say the LIT doesnt raise enough revenue states that the council tax was spot on with regards to the income spending ratio with every council.
And we all know it wasnt. So what do you base yer meaningless argument on?? how do you know how much revenue is needed if the UK government cant work it out??
78

Foulkes Off the CyberNat,

Edinburgh 14/04/2008 10:11:47
76

Exactly and not only that the couple with the 64K income are supposed to be living in band D housing.
As if.
79

Phil C,

14/04/2008 10:12:28
#60 publius

I trained as an accountant and hated it! While you are correct in extreme cases, most people that live and work in Scotland pay their share of tax. As usual it's the Scotsman's slant that's biased and dishonest.

They say "Families 'will be £290 worse off under new SNP tax plans'". Nonsense! The story is about how double-income households (presumably earning more) will pay a bit more than single income households in a Tory report!

There's no story here, just the Tories being mischievous. As I said earlier, we should be hearing about Westminster muddying the waters, by trying to steal back a huge amount Benefits before the proposed LIT system is even finalised, or fiddling with Barnett, or how Gordon Brown and Labour are taking a pounding in the polls....or how a majority are in favour of independence (albeit 41% to 40% in a poll yesterday). When we have independence, then Westminster can keep as much as she likes of English, Welsh and Irish money!! And we mean Scots can keep all our bawbies, ya beauty!

See John #57 and everyone should see why nobody can talk precise figures for LIT at this stage.

And Die #51 -"Honestly, it's laughable. I would support moves towards an honest progressive local taxation policy; but this simply isn't it." Welcome aboard the fairness express, but how the hell do you know this isn't it?
80

Alan B,

14/04/2008 10:15:56
#78 Publius

I think u overstate ur case. I would imagine with LIT very few people living in scotland would pay the charge for a second home. Firstly those that are rented out will not be liable similar to the current council tax. ie the renter would pay.

Also i could imagine for those properties not rented u would simply put it in ur partners name. Both would pay LIT once.
81

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 14/04/2008 10:16:42
The SNP's taxation plan was drawn up on the back of a fag packet. Scotland deserves better.
82

,

14/04/2008 10:18:33
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
83

conservative,

14/04/2008 10:19:31
#60 Publius

No - the wealthy never pay their share, but the layabouts never pay their share either and there are a whole lot more of them. I don't give a stuff about the few ultra-rich living in their own little world but it makes me mad to see the collection of workshy at my bowling club every day guzzling beer, paying no tax and telling me how daft I am for having worked all my life (retired now happily though).
84

Stepford Nat,

14/04/2008 10:20:14
Lovely photo of John. It doesn't look as though he's straining for a f@rt.

www.snp.org - our f@rts don't smell!
85

,

14/04/2008 10:20:29
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
86

William the Bruce,

14/04/2008 10:21:42
The council tax is unfair because those on middle and low incomes have to pay their own way, you know? Like buying a service.

It is only fair that we tax those people who worked hard for an education far more and then you and I (1/4 of us in the SNP are unwaged) can live for free.

That is fairer.
87

Duncan in Edinburgh,

14/04/2008 10:34:30
#81 Phil, this isn't a local tax. It's a 3% increase in income tax, which removes fiscal accountability from local authorities and fails to generate an equivalent revenue, thereby making local authorities entirely reliant on central government funding for everything they do. I would support a local, progressive taxation scheme which does not remove non-income tax payers from the local revenue stream. The best I've seen is the Green's land tax proposal.
88

Arfur,

14/04/2008 10:35:05
#87 . kimba - you really are a thicko!

Someone on £18,500 would pay £555 a year. Now if they were to live in a normal flat like mine they would pay around £1,150 a year. Now i am no mathematician but that first figure seems fairer to me.
89

Foulkes Off the CyberNat,

Edinburgh 14/04/2008 10:35:56
85

So how about the wealthy layabouts?? the ones that dont tell you all about their tax fiddles in the bowling club
90

Miss H,

14/04/2008 10:36:04
78 More like your muddled thinking. The SNP proposes that 'the collection of tax on second homes and long term empty properties should be made through the existing system used for the collection of Non-Domestic rates.'

That's non-domestic rates not council tax.

It would really make debate a lot easier Publius if you would READ THE CONSULTATION PAPER.

You clearly haven't read it.
91

Miss H,

14/04/2008 10:39:29
89 Land tax has exactly the same flaws as a property tax. You can have 8 different households living in up the same close, which would be valued the same, in totally different financial circumstances. A land value tax would not take account of that any more than council tax does.

Also, I have told you before that this proposal is not ideal. No-one in the SNP would claim that. However it is the best that is available in the circumstances. If we had full control of tax and revenues things would be very different - but we don't.
92

Foulkes Off the CyberNat,

Edinburgh 14/04/2008 10:40:12
89

If its ring fenced for local spending then it is a local tax how do you define local taxation then??

Equivilant revenue to what?? spending or council tax income?? because one isnt compatible with the other is it??

You will have to explain the advantages of the Greens land tax proposals especially with regards to your arguments regarding tax shortfalls relative to council taxation or do you think the Greens have got the tax revenue to spending ration spot on??
93

Foulkes Off the CyberNat,

Edinburgh 14/04/2008 10:42:08
94

That should be ratio not ration.
94

McX,

14/04/2008 10:42:56
You know, one day I'm going to open the Hootsman cyber page and see a story that claims, "SNP doing not too bad in Government." One day.
95

Foulkes Off the CyberNat,

Edinburgh 14/04/2008 10:44:52
Anyway Duncan do you think the Tories got their sums right or did they forget about the banding revue and the annual council tax increases up til the introduction of the LIT??
96

James Annand,

Edinburgh 14/04/2008 10:45:41
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that MSPs will lose out on this scheme. After all, they are on high incomes, and most are married.

Maybe that's why the Unionist parties are so up in arms about this. They'll personally lose out. So, of course, will the SNP MSPs, but most of them seem to care more about their countrymen, rather than their own interests.


I already know the reply the Unionists are thinking so I'll post a pre-emptive response.

The thing that makes me laugh is whenever you hear someone saying that SNP members are power hungry with no real care for the people of Scotland, just their own interests. (Implying that every SNP member is a mini-Mugabe) Alex Salmond is especially accused of this.

The people that usually say this are Labour members. Here's the thing: the SNP were a joke party until relatively recently. If you were power hungry, and just wanted on the gravy train, it would be sensible to join the Labour party and get a nice cushy job as a councillor pretty much anywhere in Scotland.

Beware those that shout the loudest.