HERE we go again. Michael Fry parroting the political dogma of the ruling party down south, saying that Scotland has the characteristics of a socialist state (Scotland’s tax regime for business is the real hostile environment, November 6). He is entitled to his opinion of course, but he has little evidence to support this claim. In fact, even his own examples contradict this assertion. To read his article you would think that Scotland was suffering paralysis as a result of the burden of high taxation and government bureaucracy. Before jumping to conclusions, let’s examine the evidence.
Personal taxation in Scotland is higher than that in the rest of the UK, but we need to examine what the extra income achieves as well as who is paying more. Firstly, Scotland’s economic output is the highest in the UK except for the Greater London area, and its growth, measured by the increase in its Gross Domestic Product, GDP, is highest in the UK, full stop. It has a significant net surplus of exports over imports. Wales is the only other part of the UK which has a surplus, but it is only a small one.
Scotland has been a land of innovation ever since the days of the Scottish Enlightenment and remains so to this day. The largest proportion of applications for patents to the European Patent Office, around 37%, are applied for from London, not because the research was conducted there but because the company was registered there. Despite this “London bias”, 9.7% of all UK patent applications were from Scotland. This compares well to the 8.3% of the UK population that live here.
Scottish students do not have to pay university tuition fees and there is some circumstantial evidence that, because they spend less time working to cover their costs, they may be more innovative and productive. It could be said that free prescription charges and dental check-ups and our shorter hospital waiting lists are not just a benefit to the individual but also return workers to the workplace quicker and result in better productivity. Taxes pay for these services and tax avoidance deprives the economy of these benefits.
Michael quotes Norway and Switzerland as more productive than the UK. Yes, and the burden of taxation in Norway is one of the highest in the world, at around 45% of GDP. Income tax rates in Switzerland are just over 40% for all tax-payers. Levels of business taxes in the UK, at 19%, soon to be reduced to 17%, are lower than in Norway, at 23%,
and just a fraction of a percent higher than Switzerland, at 16.55%. The Norwegian sovereign wealth fund, derived largely from the country’s oil and gas reserves, has a value of $1 trillion to invest in infrastructure, a policy which we in Scotland are prevented from following.
Scotland is not taxed too much, but the Westminster Parliament has voted to reduce tax for the richest members of society. It has also failed to address large-scale tax avoidance by UK businesses. This is the result of a belief in “neo-liberal” economics, which was tried out during the reign of Margaret Thatcher as PM, when it was described as the “trickle down” theory. It was discredited then, but still looms large in the economic policy of our Westminster government.
I do not advocate a return to the days of “supertax” of 90%, but I believe Scotland has it about right.
Pete Rowberry
Duns
FOR once I disagree with Mr Fry. For one thing, Norway has higher tax rates than UK. Public pensions are no longer what they were, and cost the individual considerably more (unlike CEOs etc). And I scarcely think that we will be regarded as a high-tax country with both such small differences when the median wage is around £25K, and we are not yet a country with control over our finances.
Norman Mackenzie
via thenational.scot
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here