As if to once more confirm what Peter Jukes said about them - (“like a disownable branch of Conservative HQ”) - the perpetually thirsty Paul Staines and his rabble at the Guido Fawkes blog have today done the Tories’ bidding in trying to rubbish Mil The Younger’s announcement that a future Labour Government would look to end “non-dom” tax status, and therefore have one rule for all UK residents.
Fart in lift Inquiry sounds bum note
Having a situation where the obscenely overmonied get away with not necessarily paying their full tax whack might look like something that the sane should not be attempting to defend. But as Labour have seized the high ground, either the Tories and their followers lose face by admitting that Miliband was right all along, or they must take an adverse stance and somehow spin it as economically sensible.
This they did: meanwhile, CCHQ found a video of “Auguste” Balls giving an interview back in January, selectively edited it to change the meaning of his remarks, and span that Labour was now split, because Balls had said abolishing non-dom status would end up costing more money than it saved. “Balls In Jan: Non Dom Reform ‘Will End Up Costing Britain Money’” announced the Fawkes folks.
There was, though, as Captain Blackadder might have observed, only one thing wrong with this idea - it was bollocks. Balls said “might”, not “will”, and CCHQ edited out him saying “But I think we can be tougher and we should be and we will”. CCHQ then lied about the edit. The Fawkes rabble span this as “Watch Balls Undo Labour’s Big Non-Dom Policy”. This was most obedient of them. But it was still bollocks.
And, as ITV man Tom Bradby was by now pointing out, the Tories defending non-dom status was looking like a bad move. But at the Fawkes blog, cometh the hour, cometh the purveyor of iffy reasoning and shonky grammar, in this case Staines himself, to urge his loyal readers to “look over there”. “Labour’s Tax Expert Admits Error” he asserted, telling “This morning on the Today Programme Ed Balls namechecked the blog of Jolyon Maugham a tax specialist QC, he [think that should be ‘who’, Paul] estimated that Labour’s change to the non-dom tax rules would bring in an extra billion”.
He goes on “Well other independent experts have taken him to task on Twitter for a basic error [no citation, no surprise there], most countries have double taxation treaties (DTCs). If you pay tax in one country on your earnings, you can’t be taxed again in another jurisdiction – the UK has over 100 such treaties”. Did anyone say otherwise?
Do go on. “On Twitter Jolyon has conceded ‘I accept DTCs could have some impact. There’s plainly some uncertainty about the numbers’. When you take this into account the net tax take will be nowhere near the billion claimed”. Where is the admission of error? There isn’t one. And no citation for the “nowhere near the billion claimed”.
This is shameless even by the abysmally low standards of the Fawkes rabble, as well as making next to no sense, except to the most tribal and right-leaning. Labour has stolen a march on the Tories, with Staines and his pals left clutching at the straws they just invented for the hell of it. Another fine mess, once again.
If Milliband wins this election, by actually daring to go against newspaper owners and daring to be as left leaning as he can, it will show that the papers now have diminished power (thank god) and it will possibly be one of the unlikeliest and best victories the Labour Party will ever enjoy
Fact is even without the edit Ed Balls does not sound like he is keen to change nom dom rules if he gets into power. Ed is a right winger and trickle down is his economics, actions speak louder than words.. If he gets elected I am willing to guess the issue is no longer mentioned by him. Another wolf in sheep's clothing.
Anon@22:39 - Not sure your remarks on Ed Balls ring true, trickle down was in intellectual fashion back in the noughties when everyone was going on about rising tides lifting all boats.
This kind of belief has since fallen out of favour. If you look at the recent Inclusive Prosperity report for the Center for American process that Ed wrote with Larry Summers (another third way type who also appears to have changed his mind) you get a better example of this thinking these days.
"Left to their own devices, unfettered markets and trickle-down economics will lead to increasing levels of inequality, stagnating wages, and a hollowing out of decent, middle-income jobs. This outcome is morally wrong, economically myopic, and at fundamental odds with a democracy in which everyone quite reasonably asks for an equal chance to succeed."
If this applies to immigrants, why not also to non-doms, who are surely more cut off from the wider society than immigrants. Couldn't be because right-whingers are victim-blaming hypocrites, could it?
Andreas, interesting point but I guess I'm just too skeptical - Why would Ed Balls team up with a guy who is resposable for Glass-Steagle act, which oversaw the biggest free market take over leading the big bust post 2008. Mabey some lepords change their spots but there were already economist saying it was a stupid idea to let the banks lose... so as I said actions speak louder than words - If Ed had hooked up with a genuine progressive thinking economist to write a report like this I might be a little less skeptical about Labours new found persuit of social justice. New New Labour same as old Tory.
Post a Comment