Category: Treasury

Kiran Stacey

It never looks Traders at the NYSEgood for a politician to gloat in the middle of the turmoil, and George Osborne isn’t doing that. But he is pointing out, unsurprisingly, that the swift cuts to eliminate the deficit have made bond traders less likely to turn their sights onto the UK.

In the Telegraph today, he writes:

In retrospect, the use of political capital to implement immediate efficiency savings, pass the emergency Budget, agree the most difficult Spending Review for generations and put in place long-term fiscal reforms to pensions was an excellent investment in our country’s economic stability. Thanks to these decisions, the credit rating agency Standard & Poors took the UK off negative outlook and reaffirmed our AAA rating.

Jim Pickard

Is George Osborne planning to scrap the 50p income tax rate? Yes.

But not today, nor tomorrow. Not this month, or next. Not even before Christmas. The move may not even take place next year.

The rate – which applies to those earning £150,000 – has always been classified as “temporary” by the coalition.

In recent weeks the Tories and Lib Dems have played up their differences over the issue. In fact neither think the 50p rate should be removed just now; the internal debate is whether to go for 2012 or 2013.

Danny Alexander insisted last Sunday that scrapping the rate was not a priority – and that lifting the income tax threshold to £10,000 should come first. Tory outriders such as Boris Johnson and Lord Lamont called for it to be axed; but even Lamont said this should happen in 2013. Johnson, meanwhile, is unfettered by the responsibilities of national coalition government.

Kiran Stacey

George OsborneChancellors have always seen the all-important GDP numbers a day before they are formally published, which makes any event involving the chancellor on that day a fascinating game of bluff and second-guessing.

So what could we tell from Monday’s press conference with George Osborne, which was ostensibly about the UK-India trade relationship?

Osborne walked slowly and confidently into the room, his head held high and smiling. But read nothing into that: others have commented before on how he always manages to grin, whatever storm he is facing.

Kiran Stacey

Top stuff here from Bloomberg’s Rob Hutton (@robdothutton).

Since the coalition government took over, and particularly since George Osborne laid out exactly which cuts he would make, confidence of UK consumers in the economy has nosedived.

The FT’s Westminster blog is running live commentary on the Budget. Join us here from 12.30pm, London time.

Commentary led by Jim Pickard and Alex Barker of the FT’s political team, Michael Hunter, markets reporter, Gordon Smith, FT.com’s deputy news editor and co-ordinated by Darren Dodd, of the UK newsdesk.

FTSE 100 unchanged at 5,763.64 after the Budget. Sterling down 0.8 per cent at $1.6230, yield on 10-year denominated UK government debt down 4 basis points at 3.57 per cent.

Chancellor sits down at 1.39pm.

Jim Pickard: I wonder what Robert Chote makes of the new ‘fair fuel stabiliser’ – the OBR chief expressed doubts about this a few months ago.

Also, how does the cut in fuel duty – and freezing of air passenger duty – fit with the coalition’s promise to raise ‘green taxes’ as proportion of the total?

Fuel duty cut by 1p per litre from 6pm tonight.

Jim Pickard

The fog is lifting – and the shape of tomorrow’s Budget is becoming more clear.

My expectation is that this will not be a time for huge giveaways or takeaways given the extraordinary spending review we had last October. (Here is a reminder of the upcoming tax and benefit changes, with 16 alone in April – as illustrated by our Austerity Calendar).

Leaving aside the inevitable surprises, here is what we already know – or expect – in the showpiece event.

UPDATE on Wednesday morning:

i] £250m for housebuilding. The government will replace its old Homebuy Direct (£275m) – which effectively ended last autumn – with a new Firstbuy Direct (£250m) which will help 10,000 first-time-buyers. (The old scheme also helped 10,000 first-time buyers.). The housebuilders are delighted but others may simply see this as filling a vacuum in the shared-equity market.

ii] Rumours on corporation tax. The government is due to cut the rate from 28 per cent to 27 per cent next month (as part of a plan to lower the rate to 24 per cent by the end of Parliament) but could go further – or signal its intention to go faster.

iii] George Osborne will announce a further £600 rise in the tax threshold from April 2012 to £8.045 – on top of the £1,ooo rise taking effect next month. Bear in mind, however, that this threshold should have risen by inflation (4.4 per cent) anyway.

1] George Osborne will signal his medium-term intent to merge National Insurance and income tax. The idea is to convince the British public that they pay too much tax – preparing the way for a more low-tax future.

2] Fuel duty escalator. The chancellor is set to reduce or cancel the 5p a litre rise. But a “fuel duty stabiliser” – being considered by the Treasury – seems unlikely after being criticised by the OBR.

3] Aviation tax:

a] The government has cancelled plans to shift aviation duty from a per passenger to a per plane duty which would have stopped half-empty planes paying less tax.  Officials claimed that the change would have been thwarted by the Chicago Convention from 1944.

b] Air passenger duty will be frozen, according to reports – instead of being raised in line with inflation.

c] Lear Jet levy – passengers in private jets will pay duty for the first time in a small but symbolic hit on the rich.

4] Employment tribunals. Could change rules so that staff at SMEs must work at a company for two years – up from one – to be eligible.There are also plans to charge for visits.

5] More support for apprenticeships, including 100,000 work placements.

Jo Johnson

Taxing bankers to death is more difficult than “wring[ing] their necks”, the punishment Nick Clegg says he favours.

That’s why the 50p rate – dubbed the “banker tax” – was always going to be a blunderbuss of a weapon with which to punish the guilty men of the UK’s financial services community.

In a recent hearing of the Public Accounts Committee, I asked Treasury Permanent Secretary Sir Nicholas Macpherson how many people working in financial services actually paid the tax.

Unable to give an answer at the time, Sir Nick agreed to provide a written note to the committee.

I read it over the weekend and, as I suspected, the 50p rate is overwhelmingly paid by non-financiers. Brilliant!

Out of the 275,000 paying the new top rate of tax, only 63,000 work in ‘financial intermediation’, defined to encompass banks, insurance firms and pension funds.

The 50p rate is hitting three times more innocent bystanders than bankers.

On its own, this would be a powerful argument against continuing with it for a minute longer than politically necessary.

But we will soon find out whether the banker tax will generate anything like the £2.7bn that Labour projected for it in the new marginal rate’s first year in operation.

If it turns out to lose the Treasury money, as many suspect, the pressure to scrap it will be immense the minute the public sector pay freeze ends.

Jim Pickard

This is the point at which I have to wrap up and go for lunch I’m afraid. Here is a link to the live player on the Commons website in case the committee keeps going for a while.

To recap some of the most important points which will provide tomorrow’s headlines:

* Diamond said that the “period of remorse and apology” for banks needs to be over and the City should be allowed to move on.

* He said banks should be “allowed to fail” and that taxpayer-funded bailouts were unacceptable.

* He said he was committed to being responsible on bonuses, though bonuses at Barclays have not yet been set and therefore he couldn’t possibly comment on this year’s round.

* He defended Barclays shareholders from the suggestion that they are “uninformed”, given that they aren’t given a chance to discuss bonus payments before they are paid.

* He claimed not to know how many Barclays subsidiaries are offshore (although Chuka Umunna suggested it was over 300). Nor did he know how much of the tax paid by the bank was via its payroll.

* He reminded MPs that there was an inherent contradiction between being asked to behave responsibly – while being asked to lend more and more by politicians.

12.15: Diamond is asked by Andrew Tyrie whether matters would improve if executives had more skin in the game via unlimited liabilities. Unsurprisingly, this prospect is not very tantalising to the Barclays chief executive.

He cites the example of Stephen Hester, the highly-regarded new head of RBS. Would he have taken that job if he had unlimited liabilities? Ditto the new chief executive of Lloyds Banking Group, Antonio Horta-Osorio.

12.09: Andrea Leadsom, the MP who used to work for BZW, says Diamond has been talking in “fantasy” speak.

Jim Pickard

Alan Johnson was guilty of modest political opportunism this morning when seemingly questioning Philip Hammond’s position in the light of the extreme weather conditions. The shadow chancellor hinted that the transport secretary should resign.

It reminded me of the occasion that Boris Johnson appeared in front of the transport select committee (in May 2009) to defend charges that he had failed to protect London from the wintry elements.

It seems to testify to the theory that Boris is at his most witty when under pressure:

Q197 Graham Stringer: You are telling me what gritting went on, but that was not the question I asked. The question I asked was what action you took, with your overall responsibility for transport in Greater London, over the five days when we knew, the whole country knew, there was going to be a heavy downfall of snow which was likely to cause disruption. I would like to know what actions you took.

Mr Johnson: As Chair of Transport for London, I am happy to say that I had general oversight and I presided over, with my Commissioner for Transport, a massive programme of gritting. If you ask me whether I personally went around trying to repel each snowflake as it tried to settle over London, then obviously I would have to give you a negative answer. You do ascribe phenomenal powers to me – quite rightly, I think, as I think it is high time that we thought about a revision of the powers-to have authority over basic meteorology, but it is not within my competence to get up into a helicopter and encourage the snow to stay away. What I think you need to focus on, if I may be so bold, Chairman -

Jim Pickard

We reported yesterday that David Cameron had joined Nick Clegg in warning of new action against banks which did not show bonus restraint.

David Cameron warned banks on Friday that they faced higher taxes if they continued to pay “unjustified” bonuses, adding to a growing political and regulatory pressure on the City before the industry’s bonus season early next year.The prime minister, speaking after a European Union summit in Brussels, said that the public found such payments “galling”, adding: “Every decision the banks make like that makes it more difficult to keep a tax regime that they might favour.”

Vince Cable’s comments on today’s Andrew Marr show this morning continued in the same vein. But if you listened carefully the words indicated a threat rather than an imminent crackdown.

“If they don’t behave, if they don’t take account of their wider responsibilities the government has as a possibility some form of taxation,” said Cable.

Understanding the government’s stance would be a lot easier – as I pointed out on Friday – if they could indicate what they want from the banks, which are already heading for a lower bonus payout than last year. A bit less than last year? Half that figure? Ten per cent? For now it is not clear.

As for the opposition, what should we make of Alan Johnson’s suggestion that last year’s one-off bank levy could be made permanent? Is it credible? Is it official Labour policy?

Johnson told Sky:

Last year we introduced a tax on bankers’ bonuses; it pulled in about £3.5bn. Nobody fell over, nobody went abroad, all the kinds of things that we heard that would happen. So you know there is more money to be taken from banks. Particularly when you look as a fair share not as retribution; as a fair share to getting the fiscal deficit down.”

The counter-argument is that the banks only stayed onshore was because they knew it was a one-off; to regularise the levy could change their calculations.

Meanwhile Cable is still keen for banks to enforce new disclosure rules put on the statute book by Labour – requiring them them to list how many staff (albeit unnamed) received £1m-plus bonuses.

In this respect he is at odds with George Osborne, the chancellor, who last month watered down the rules – as revealed in the FT by George Parker. Which makes this a genuine spat at the top of government.

Jim Pickard

This may come as a surprise to those who read Nick Clegg’s comments today about the need to crack down on bankers’ bonuses. (And David Cameron’s veiled threats today of a higher tax on banks that don’t comply).

Yet last week coalition MEPs were sent a document on how Britain has been seeking to water down a EU rule intended to restrict bonuses in the future.

The EU last Friday laid out its new rules meaning that no senior banker should get more than 20 per cent of their bonus in cash upfront.

The EU wants bankers to defer half of their bonus, of which at least 60 per cent will have to be paid in shares or other financial instruments.

The British (via FSA policy set out in the summer) had argued that banks should be allowed to give all of the cash element upfront while mostly deferring the shares element. That would have meant bankers getting 40 per cent of their bonus in cash upfront – double what the EU wanted.

The document argued that Britain “led the way” in implementing G20 principles and that the EU should not go any further.

It was an entirely valid point of view to take; but there is a distinct irony in the idea of the British government proposing weaker restrictions than the rest of the EU while posing as banker-bashers.

The document is a bit long but here you go:

CRD3 Briefing

CEBS Guidance on Remuneration Provisions in the Capital Requirements Directive

Summary

  • There are two issues at play in the various press reports covering the CEBS guidance on the CRD3 remuneration provisions: (i) the current interpretation of the upfront cash limit provisions and the tax implications of retention conditions; and (ii) the exaggeration of provisions that relate to state assisted banks and fixed/variable pay ratios.

Upfront Cash and Retention Conditions

  • The provisions in CRD3 imply a cap on the maximum proportion of a bonus that can be paid in cash upfront.
  • These provisions are open to interpretation and throughout the negotiation and implementation of the Directive, we have supported an interpretation that limits upfront cash to 40% of a total bonus. This interpretation is consistent with the G20 agreed FSB Standards.
  • The European Parliament has taken a different view and interpret the provisions as imposing a 20% cap. This will go beyond the globally agreed position and will have a significant impact on the European financial services sector’s international competitiveness.

Jim Pickard

There was something faintly depressing – as well as predictable – at the comments from David Cameron’s spokesman this morning ruling out any review of Britain’s drugs policy. And at Ed Miliband taking a similar stance.

The issue has reared its head once again after former cabinet minister Bob Ainsworth called for legalisation. But is such a controversial subject that party leaders fear they cannot even raise the possibility without being mauled by critics.

Yet surely there is a case for reviewing the policy and allowing it to be discussed calmly on an adult level. As this recent Home Office document spells out, the illegal drugs trade is worth up to £6bn.

Legalising the industry could – if levels of demand stayed the same – result in tax revenues of several billion pounds. It would also remove the estimated 70,000 street dealers who often carry out other crimes and whose presence make many people’s lives a misery.

Ainsworth has experience of the issue having formerly been the Home Office minister responsible for the issue. He said prohibition had failed not only in the UK but around the world:

“We must take the trade away from organised criminals and hand it to the control of doctors and pharmacists. After 50 years of global drug prohibition it is time for governments throughout the world to repeat this shift with currently illegal drugs. We spend billions of pounds without preventing the wide availability of drugs.”

A Labour source has been quoted saying “I don’t know what he (Ainsworth) was thinking”. And thus the debate is closed down again.

UPDATE: Similar points from Peter Hoskin at the Spectator Coffee House and Mike Smithson at Politicalbetting.

Westminster blog

on the UK political scene

About this blog Blog guide
Jim Pickard and Kiran Stacey, FT Westminster correspondents, share the latest news and analysis on the UK's political scene.

Follow the latest news on the UK coalition government.

To comment, please register for free with FT.com and read our policy on submitting comments.

All posts are published in UK time.

Contact the Westminster blog team: Jim Pickard, Kiran Stacey, Nicholas Timmins, Elizabeth Rigby and Helen Warrell.

The illustrations of Jim and Kiran are by Nick Hardcastle.

See the full list of FT blogs.

The authors

Jim Pickard joined the lobby team in January 2008. He has been at the Financial Times since 1999 as a regional correspondent, assistant UK news editor and property correspondent.

Kiran Stacey is an FT political correspondent, having joined the lobby in 2011. He started at the FT as a graduate trainee in 2008, working on desks including UK companies and US equity markets before taking over the FT's Energy Source blog.

Contributors

Elizabeth Rigby, the FT's chief political correspondent, joined the lobby team in September 2010. Elizabeth has worked at the FT for more than a decade and was most recently its consumer industries editor.

Helen Warrell is the FT's UK reporter, covering home affairs, crime and policing. She joined the FT in 2008 and has spent time as a reporter in the Brussels bureau and more recently, editing the paper's Asia coverage on the world news desk.

Archive

« JanFebruary 2012
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
272829