Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Charlie Elphicke (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 18 April 2012. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Finance (No. 4) Bill (Clauses 1, 4, 8, 189 and 209, Schedules 1, 23 and 33, and certain new Clauses and new Schedules relating to value added tax).


(Clauses 1, 4, 8, 189 and 209, Schedules 1, 23 and 33, and certain new Clauses and new Schedules relating to value added tax)

With the 45% rate, there is less utility and less maximisation of revenue from doing so. Of course, it is marginal, but the unacceptability of paying—paying, not avoiding—at 45% is less than it is at 50p. People resent 50p and think, ““These people are trying to stuff me and take all my money away.”” The 40p rate was well settled and people's behaviour was sort of booked in. The judgment is that the most revenue will be raised halfway between the two because, on the one hand, people will think it acceptable—they will not go the extra mile to avoid it—and, on the other hand, they will not think they are being fleeced as they were under the so-called temporary 50p rate, which Labour is now saying was not temporary.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
543 c369 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Devolved matters Aviation Corporation tax Banks Caravans Air passenger duty Income tax Food Economic situation Personal income Northern Ireland Passengers Scotland Wales Tax avoidance Taxation Repairs and maintenance Tax rates and bands Religious buildings Take-away food Wealth Regional airports Bank levy
Legislation
Finance Bill 2010-12 to 2012-13
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk