Arthritis Herbal Pills Buy Accutane Online Usa Where To Buy Clonidine Online Purchase Clomid Cheap Cialis Back Pain

The hilariously embarrassing report against the 50p tax today


8:01 am - November 24th 2011

by Sunny Hundal    


      Share on Tumblr

The Telegraph today puts on its front page the shocking news that the ‘50p tax band will cost Britain £1bn a year‘.

Damn! Not bring in money but actually cost us! Scandal! The Telegraph is a serious newspaper that rates this “influential research group” highly, so this must be big news.

So I thought I’d look at the actual piece of research. I was shocked I tell you… absolutely shocked – by how hilariously bad it was.

The research is put out by the “influential” Centre for Economics and Business Research.

I went to their website, which features impressive sounding testimonials that curiously miss specific company and people names. I’m sure that’s an oversight. The About Us section doesn’t mention any names from their brilliant team either.

Here’s the press release. It actually says the 50p tax is “set to” lose us billions. Big news!

So I downloaded the PDF report. I saw lots of nicely coloured graphs about Britain’s competitiveness in the world. Ok…

It goes on to make the shocking claim that: “Since the 1980s, the UK labour force has become increasingly globalised. Immigration and emigration have increased sharply.” – Who knew?!

It also cites quotes by an entrepreneur who said that “excessive tax” was a “burden on business” – which, I’m sure you agree, amounts to incisive research.

More stunningly, Section 10 mentions increasing tax evasion, with the header: ‘Resistance to paying tax is leading to new collection costs’. I’m not even joking here – attempts by HMRC to stop tax evasion is labelled as a ‘collection cost’ (presumably something the Treasury should trim).

But the coup de grace is the conclusion, here in its entirety:

There is some possibility that the 50% rate of Income Tax may raise revenue in the short term, but to use one or two years’ worth of tax receipt data to support the case for maintaining the top rate would be misleading. Individuals may take several years to emigrate or rearrange their income/wealth in response to higher taxation, meaning that the negative impact of excessive Income Tax on government revenue may not be initially apparent.

In the long term, however, globalisation, financial liberalisation and mobile labour means that the scope for governments to raise revenue by taxing the rich has become increasingly limited.

The impeccable report actually admits the 50p tax may raise revenue… for several years!

But you see, because the world has become more globalised, and because tackling tax evasion is a ‘cost’ – there may be a negative impact. I can’t tell you by how much, because I can’t actually see any projections based on credible figures.

I can’t even see where the £1bn figure the Telegraph self-confidently mentions comes from. Can anyone find it?

This is the height of right-wing research and thinking? Really? Perhaps the “influential research group” CEBR should consider commissioning researchers who have studied beyond Economics A level.

As for the Telegraph… well I can only point and laugh.

Addendum
I actually enjoy attempts by right-wingers to keep pushing at the 50p tax, for two reasons. First, it increases tension with the Coalition as the Libdems don’t want to reduce it. Secondly, it reinforces the impression that Tories govern only for the super-rich. The public overwhelmingly support raising taxes. This is political poison.

    Share on Tumblr   submit to reddit  


About the author
Sunny Hundal is editor of LC. Also: on Twitter, at Pickled Politics and Guardian CIF.
· Other posts by


Story Filed Under: Blog ,Economy

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Reader comments


Yes, page 24 is a joy to read. It’s that bad. I might give it to my 9yr old to see if he can critique a page or two of it.

This kind of thing appears to be catching.

Last week a Tory MP wrote a blog on ConHome arguing for a removal of the 50% rate, with her main evidence source an article in Moneyweek magazine, which shows 84 more UK bankers living in Switzerland in 2010 than in 2009. She reckons this will cost us £53m in lost tax revenue. Meanwhile, there are roughly 300, 000 50% tax earners in the UK, and 300,000 is quite a lot more than 83. (See http://conservativehome.blogs.com/platform/2011/11/from-karen__bradley-with-low-simple-and-certain-taxes-the-uk-economy-could-get-the-turbo-boost-it-ne.html)

As for the whole concept of cost-benefit, another Tory MP writing in the same series at ConHome look like he did workfare with CEBR. He claims:

“Based on over 2,300 of the government’s own impact assessments, an Open Europe study (2010) found that regulation has cost the UK economy £176 billion since 1998, a sum roughly equivalent to the UK’s entire budget deficit.”

In fact the OE report (http://openeurope.org.uk/research/stilloutofcontrol.pdf) says on page 1:

“We estimate the benefit/cost ratio of the regulations we studied at 1.58. In other words, for every £1 of cost introduced by a regulation since 1998, it has delivered £1.58 of benefits”.

“The public overwhelmingly support raising taxes.”

The public also support reducing immigration and having a referendum on the EU, but I don’t see you calling for these things to happen.

I love the way that they say that people will avoid tax by investing in venture capital and businesses, as if that is a bad thing.

Investments create jobs. Jobs reduce the cost of government and generate taxes.

It does not matter if the 50% tax band lowers or increases the deficit. For brownshirts it is an article of faith that rich people should get tax cuts.

Also austerity is not for the elites. It is the little people who must sacrifice, not the rich.

I think this report is a spoof. Consider, for example, section 6 on Virtual Emigration:

“Spending a mid-career tax year abroad (known as a “Tax-yah”) is becoming an enjoyable gap year for many young wealth creators seeking to crystallise their earnings and maybe take their family on a worldwide trip before returning to Britain.”

There is a new paper in journal of economic perspectives called The Case for Progrressive Taxation which is getting a lot of attention

http://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/jep.25.4.165

It argues for high marginal rates on high earners, and taxes on captial income

Worth reading in itself, but perhaps particularly for those ignorant buffoons who have some beliefs about “neoliberal” economics in dire need of revision

,.. What’s wrong with taking into account the cost of collecting taxes?

Obv in most cases we’d expect cost to be lower than revenue gathered, but equally obv there’s little point in spending £x to collect <£x

For a far less laughable analysis on optimum tax rates checkout below, US research but relevant for the UK, which recommends a top marginal tax rate of 70%.

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2011/10/11/Tax-Those-Who-Ruined-the-Economy-Its-Only-Fair.aspx#page1

http://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/jep.25.4.165

N.b. I agree the idea that costs are relevant to the 50p question is risible

“but equally obv there’s little point in spending £x to collect <£x"

For a pigou tax there probably is, as one of the purposes is to reduce consumption of X due to the externalties.

Some people would say excessively high pay concentrated in one region has created externalities so large that a punitive tax rate – even one that doesn't raise £££ overall – is justified. Kind of like calls of 200% council tax rates on properties empty for 6 months or more – the tax doesn't really raise money, it's designed to provide an incentive to property owners to bring the property back into use.

“This is the height of right-wing research and thinking? Really? Perhaps the “influential research group” CEBR should consider commissioning researchers who have studied beyond Economics A level.”

Agreed, that’s a very good idea.

“There is some possibility that the 50% rate of Income Tax may raise revenue in the short term, but to use one or two years’ worth of tax receipt data to support the case for maintaining the top rate would be misleading. Individuals may take several years to emigrate or rearrange their income/wealth in response to higher taxation, meaning that the negative impact of excessive Income Tax on government revenue may not be initially apparent.”

Although perhaps not for that particular point. That taxes have different short and long term effects is hardly a controversial suggestion. You might even find it in the A Level syllabus.

It’s only the distinction between short and long term elasticity after all…..

12. Luis enrique

Planeshift, yes there may be cases where benefits exceed the £x raised, you’re right. Even then, you still take into account cost of doing it.

nonny mouse – A bit like the tax evader Philip Green, who last autumn joined with other big business types to beg the Chancellor to make cuts and promise that they’d create loads of jobs to deal with unemployment, but who has now announced he’s cutting shops and jobs?

14. David Boothroyd

Douglas McWilliams, founder of the Centre for Economics and Business Research, was happily part of a Conservative Party panel together with George Osborne shortly before the election. See http://blog.moneysavingexpert.com/2010/03/12/george-osborne-read-your-questions/.

This is just preparing the path for the big one: it’s not the 50% rate that’s the real problem; it’s the 40% one and its threshold.

They don’t care if it’s true. It seems true to them, and without thinking, they press on with the low tax good thing. All the cuts are ideological, not based in fact. Why is anyone surprised by the lack of evidence for lowering taxes?

More stunningly, Section 10 mentions increasing tax evasion, with the header: ‘Resistance to paying tax is leading to new collection costs’. I’m not even joking here – attempts by HMRC to stop tax evasion is labelled as a ‘collection cost’ (presumably something the Treasury should trim).

Why is this at all stunning? Some taxes cost more to collect than others – some cost so much that most of the revenue gained is taken up by collection costs. There’s nothing especially stunning about that.

My favourite is section 9, where they presume to link countries like Korea, and their high average working hours of all workers 15-64, with countries like France and their low average working hours of all workers 15-64, and come up with the conclusion this is because the Koreans are taxed less.

Nothing cultural, nothing to do with poverty, nothing to do with wage values, all to do with “tax wedge”

If we’re to believe these economists we should get rid of all NI and Income Tax, we’d all be happier and work many more hours! (even though the sample is selective as they’d admit, and aside from the outliers at the left hand side, show scarcely such a trend anyway)

It’s a highly amusing read, anyone wanting a good chuckle should go ahead and look at it.

19. Siôn Eurfyl Jones

The cost of clamping down on benefit cheats is likely to far exceed the actual savings made, but that isn’t stopping them, is it? If the 50p costs more to collect than it raises, then make it 60p, or whatever. If they want to move abroad, let them.

20. Leon Wolfson

@1 – No, there are actual proper studies which have been done on tax. Immigration and the EU? No, those are polls. And again, I could (but wouldn’t) make a poll which would show support for slapping gingers. It’s not hard, it in how you put the question.

@17 – Like all those high earners in the Nordic countries, who actually pay 50% tax overall and who are leav…wait, they’re not. A few high-profile people have.

Collection costs are not matters to be overlooked, these aren’t tiny amounts they tend to amount to a significant part of our tax going into just the collection, for income tax its usually 10p to the pound and VAT is about 15p to the pound, so we are talking about significant amounts of money that can often have impacts upon policy, the poll tax was a good example, it failed so utterly because it was costing the government more to collect it than they got from it.

Of course high incomes tend to have better returns as, you know, there is more of it, so i don’t oppose this tax on those grounds, but it is not something i would just dismiss outright.

There seems to be some confusion over cost of collection for the taxpayer. Government receipts or revenue raised from UK Budget report 2010-2011: http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum_dg/groups/dg_digitalassets/@dg/@en/documents/digitalasset/dg_188581.pdf
£548 billion.
of which £150billion income tax
of which £99billion National Insurance.
of which £81billion VAT
of which £46 Excise duties

all of the above plus more are collected by HMRC of which I’m struggling to find the budget document for the 2010-2011 tax year, but for 2009-2010 you can see its budget figures here: http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/about/hmrc-accs-0910.pdf

Annual budget from that is £4.1 billion.

Cost to tax payer of all tax collection is under 1%.

Conrad’s figures seem grossly over inflated.

Kevin

Well if I ever earn enough for this 50% rate to kick in I promise I will be (a) emigrating to Asia/USA and/or (b) hiring an accountant so I can avoid as much as possible.

You may say ‘good riddance’ but that will be x thousand pounds of tax revenue lost, as well as a skilled worker.

Oh come on Sunny, I am surprised that you didn’t know: all you need to do is put 50% into the Laffer Curve and you can get out any figure that you like!

Hmm, seems to be a comment stuck in the spam trap from Oxford Keven. Pointing to the Diamond and Saetz paper on optimal top tax rate and for the US, they say 70%.

Before everyone goes yay! Let’s raise taxes! it’s worth pointing out what they’re actually measuring as the tax rate.

For the US, it’s income tax plus state income tax plus sales tax plus Medicaid (which, unlike social security, doesn’t have a cap on it).

So, for the UK, the equivalent tax rate we’re talking about is income tax plus employers’ NI plus VAT.

And I would be very surprised indeed if the UK top marginal rate (please note, marginal rate, not average rate) wasn’t up around and about there somewhere already (50% income, 13.8% NI, 20% VAT on whatever portion of purchases are vatable).

My basic theory is that if someone is worth over £150,000 and thus has the “horror” of paying an extra 10% tax on those earnings over £150,000, then their employer will pay them the extra money required to keep them in the country and employed with them.

I.e., tax the people who can stand up for themselves against their employer. Earn £200,000? You’re so important to the company that you can ask for a raise to mitigate the £5,000 loss you’ve just experienced (it’s a 5% pay rise). Earn £1m? You’re so amazingly important to the company you can ask for the extra £85,000 tax to be covered (admittedly a 17% pay rise), or you can SUCK IT UP because you’ve got enough money coming in anyway every year.

Or maybe they will actually assess your performance to see if you’re worth that extra outlay, decide you’re not and get rid of you. Diddums. Shouldn’t have performed better for that wage.

Also, people who avoid tax should pay additionally for the cost of collecting that tax. Simples. If you leave the country because of that, good riddance, you’re a leech on society and you’re not welcome here.

British families could be hit with an extra £30 tax bill by 2016 because of Labour’s 50p income tax rate, an economic think-tank claimed today.

Small price to pay for a sense of fucking over the rich if you ask me.

Well i am [just like rich bankers ] emigrating as soon as too

…to avoid the cost!!!

Thats the £60,000+ bill to send my kids to uni .
The hundreds of pounds extra i will soon have to pay into my public sector pension to retire on 10 thousand pounds a year.
The extra costs from my 2 year pay freeze [10% pay cut over 2 years]
the cost of fuel and food increasing
the constant threat of losing my job because i provide a service to school kids and i am not a banker.

go on, give the rich tax breaks it will truly show you for who you are. this country is just going down the toilet with the top 10% rich being protected and everyone else being treated as an underclass to serve them.
No wonder the tories couldnt get a majority as everyone was frightened of what they would do. our worst nightmares are being realised.

Leon @ 20:

“No, there are actual proper studies which have been done on tax. Immigration and the EU? No, those are polls.”

I assume that was aimed at me, since I mentioned immigration and the EU, whereas poster no. 1 didn’t. If that is the case, could you kindly tell me what “proper studies” on people’s attitude towards taxation levels would involve, since polling apparently doesn’t count?

“And again, I could (but wouldn’t) make a poll which would show support for slapping gingers. It’s not hard, it in how you put the question.”

You probably could, but it would be lazy and unjustified to dismiss all polls on the basis of that. After all, I could probably falsify some scientific data and publish it in an academic journal, but that doesn’t mean that every piece of scientific data we reas in journals is untrustworthy.

This eport almost hangs together as well as a Tim Worstall blogpost on economics.

Almost.

31. Leon Wolfson

@29 – No, “you” (people interested in a serious debate) reject polls for serious studies because they’re not *designed* for serious studies, and only the trends in them can be used.

Serious studies need proper studies.

(Moreover, scientific journals are peer reviewed, which is another important element!)

@25 – Strongly disagree. NI’s contribution at that level is capped, and capital gains is at 28% for higher rate earners. It’s not going to be anywhere near 70%.

Is there any particular reason to care if they leave the country, even if the article were correct? They are no use to man nor beast if they won’t pay tax.

30. BenM
This eport almost hangs together as well as a Tim Worstall blogpost on economics.

Almost.

Check this exchange (posts3/4/7) for a real gem of Worst of All logic:

http://liberalconspiracy.org/2011/11/24/real-george-osborne-comedy-series-debuts/

Leon @ 31:

Nobody’s suggesting that we accept everything polling reports say; but when reports from a variety of reputable polling sources consistently point to significant majorities in favour of something, it’s surely hypersceptical to just dismiss them all.

Also, you still haven’t explained what it is that enables us to know public opinion on taxation, but not on immigration, the EU, etc.

The public also support reducing immigration and having a referendum on the EU, but I don’t see you calling for these things to happen.

Odd, that for a right-wing troll who spends so much time here, you actually don’t bother reading my writing.

I’m very much in favour of an EU referendum, and have repeatedly said here that the public support reduction in immigration.

Tim J Why is this at all stunning? Some taxes cost more to collect than others

Do the math tory boy – how much tax is being evaded? Far more than £1bn. Also – odd that right-wingers don’t make such an argument on petty crime. Why shouldn’t the broken windows theory also apply to tax evasion?

“Strongly disagree. NI’s contribution at that level is capped”

Employer’s NI Leon. Not capped. But almost all economists (even R Murphy) agree that some to all of that is really paid by the worker.

37. Leon Wolfson

@34 – Again, ONLY the trends can be read. Argue with statistical science all you like.

@36 – Great, so, no need to taper the personal NI for higher earners then under that argument, and we can drop employer’s NI for the same total amount to the to compensate. Great!

Sunny @ 35:

“a right-wing troll”

Yeah, because anybody who deviates from the party line must be a troll…

“I’m very much in favour of an EU referendum, and have repeatedly said here that the public support reduction in immigration.”

You might have said there was public support, but I don’t think you’ve said “And therefore the government should reduce it.”


Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. bc

    The hilariously embarrassing report against the 50p tax today http://t.co/LGu24Yxj

  2. sunny hundal

    Telegraph splashes with "influential" report saying 50p tax costs us £1bn. Report is hilariously bad http://t.co/Qe2ug9oJ

  3. Nicolas Chinardet

    And I thought the Telegraph was a serious newspaper MT @libcon The hilariously embarrassing report against the 50p tax http://t.co/iBfSqL8F

  4. Ben Bruges

    RT @libcon: The hilariously embarrassing report against the 50p tax today http://t.co/czr7yoYS << would love to read a Telegraph reply

  5. Tony Braisby

    The hilariously embarrassing report against the 50p tax today http://t.co/LGu24Yxj

  6. Billy Davey

    The hilariously embarrassing report against the 50p tax today http://t.co/LGu24Yxj

  7. Jonathan Haynes

    Telegraph splashes with "influential" report saying 50p tax costs us £1bn. Report is hilariously bad http://t.co/Qe2ug9oJ

  8. Saggydaddy

    @Keiranmacintosh Good piece about it here http://t.co/JtYbC55t

  9. Alex ?

    Telegraph splashes with "influential" report saying 50p tax costs us £1bn. Report is hilariously bad http://t.co/Qe2ug9oJ

  10. sunny hundal

    In fact, the hilariously bad Telegraph is splashing on admits 50p tax will bring in more money…for years! http://t.co/Qe2ug9oJ

  11. MervynDinnen

    @MJCarty @FlipChartRick one for you guys http://t.co/bteP3fco

  12. Bill Wilkinson

    Oops. RT @libcon The hilariously embarrassing report against the 50p tax today http://t.co/JcCRYEM8

  13. Michael Moore

    The hilariously embarrassing report against the 50p tax today http://t.co/LGu24Yxj

  14. Matt Zarb-Cousin

    In fact, the hilariously bad Telegraph is splashing on admits 50p tax will bring in more money…for years! http://t.co/Qe2ug9oJ

  15. Sarah Ditum

    Telegraph splashes with "influential" report saying 50p tax costs us £1bn. Report is hilariously bad http://t.co/Qe2ug9oJ

  16. Mark Patterson

    In fact, the hilariously bad Telegraph is splashing on admits 50p tax will bring in more money…for years! http://t.co/Qe2ug9oJ

  17. Gods & Monsters

    Telegraph splashes with "influential" report saying 50p tax costs us £1bn. Report is hilariously bad http://t.co/Qe2ug9oJ

  18. Matt Bolton

    In fact, the hilariously bad Telegraph is splashing on admits 50p tax will bring in more money…for years! http://t.co/Qe2ug9oJ

  19. John West

    Telegraph splashes with "influential" report saying 50p tax costs us £1bn. Report is hilariously bad http://t.co/Qe2ug9oJ

  20. Peterward

    Telegraph splashes with "influential" report saying 50p tax costs us £1bn. Report is hilariously bad http://t.co/Qe2ug9oJ

  21. Michael Hanley

    The hilariously embarrassing report against the 50p tax today http://t.co/LGu24Yxj

  22. Roger Thornhill

    RT @sunny_hundal: Telegraph…"influential" report…50p tax costs us £1bn…is hilariously bad http://t.co/WIa4VUqY // but is it wrong?

  23. George W. Potter

    In fact, the hilariously bad Telegraph is splashing on admits 50p tax will bring in more money…for years! http://t.co/Qe2ug9oJ

  24. Ryan D

    In fact, the hilariously bad Telegraph is splashing on admits 50p tax will bring in more money…for years! http://t.co/Qe2ug9oJ

  25. David Smith

    Telegraph splashes with "influential" report saying 50p tax costs us £1bn. Report is hilariously bad http://t.co/Qe2ug9oJ

  26. no name

    Telegraph splashes with "influential" report saying 50p tax costs us £1bn. Report is hilariously bad http://t.co/Qe2ug9oJ

  27. Jamie Pett

    Brilliant dissection of the Telegraph's 50p tax rate story by @sunny_ hundal http://t.co/geQI4IwT

  28. Jamie Pett

    Brilliant dissection of the Telegraph's 50p tax rate story by @sunny_hundal http://t.co/geQI4IwT

  29. Nick Day

    The hilariously embarrassing report against the 50p tax today http://t.co/LGu24Yxj

  30. Claire Spencer

    Agreed: RT @JamieFro: Brilliant dissection of the Telegraph's 50p tax rate story by @sunny_ hundal http://t.co/G2LFaTiw

  31. Jamie Potter

    Agreed: RT @JamieFro: Brilliant dissection of the Telegraph's 50p tax rate story by @sunny_ hundal http://t.co/G2LFaTiw

  32. pollyrt

    Agreed: RT @JamieFro: Brilliant dissection of the Telegraph's 50p tax rate story by @sunny_ hundal http://t.co/G2LFaTiw

  33. Danny Moules MQuack

    Oops. RT @libcon The hilariously embarrassing report against the 50p tax today http://t.co/JcCRYEM8

  34. Lilly Haines-Gadd

    But first @sunny_hundal has posted a great article on the source research for a Telegraph article on the 50p tax http://t.co/FaQIQIVJ

  35. Mark Ferguson

    The hilariously embarrassing report against the 50p tax (via @sunny_hundal) http://t.co/yRxPhDH2

  36. Stephen Carter

    Who the hell funds this garbage The hilariously embarrassing report against the 50p tax today http://t.co/O2rDZKma

  37. Jane Phillips

    The hilariously embarrassing report against the 50p tax (via @sunny_hundal) http://t.co/yRxPhDH2

  38. Simon Buckmaster

    The hilariously embarrassing report against the 50p tax today http://t.co/LGu24Yxj

  39. Gregg

    The hilariously embarrassing report against the 50p tax (via @sunny_hundal) http://t.co/yRxPhDH2

  40. Alexander McCulloch

    The hilariously embarrassing report against the 50p tax today http://t.co/LGu24Yxj

  41. Gregg

    Oops. RT @libcon The hilariously embarrassing report against the 50p tax today http://t.co/Ytwkkw4x

  42. Bryan McComb

    RT @libcon: The hilariously embarrassing report against the 50p tax today http://t.co/czr7yoYS << would love to read a Telegraph reply

  43. 50p tax: Still a Tory obsession, still not that exceptional | Left Foot Forward

    […] concludes his piece: The impeccable report actually admits the 50p tax may raise revenue… for several […]

  44. Dan Brickley

    Am still amused Telegraph & @ConHome took seriously this embarrassing report on 50p tax today http://t.co/Qe2ug9oJ

  45. Anthea Rogers

    The Tele's £1bn fact. btw, how about a sliding marginal tax, 80% on income >£2m, 70% >£1m, etc? RT @sunny_hundal http://t.co/X5DbmJft

  46. ben ssssss

    Telegraph splashes with "influential" report saying 50p tax costs us £1bn. Report is hilariously bad http://t.co/Qe2ug9oJ

  47. Heather

    Agreed: RT @JamieFro: Brilliant dissection of the Telegraph's 50p tax rate story by @sunny_ hundal http://t.co/G2LFaTiw

  48. Kevin Warnes

    Nice one!“@OtherTPA: Hilariously embarrassing report against the 50p tax rate http://t.co/xecyOFhg (via @libcon)”

  49. Nick L.

    The Tele's £1bn fact. btw, how about a sliding marginal tax, 80% on income >£2m, 70% >£1m, etc? RT @sunny_hundal http://t.co/X5DbmJft

  50. Polly Worthington

    Oops. RT @libcon The hilariously embarrassing report against the 50p tax today http://t.co/JcCRYEM8

  51. Janet Graham

    The hilariously embarrassing report against the 50p tax today http://t.co/LGu24Yxj

  52. Tony Breen

    The hilariously embarrassing report against the 50p tax today | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/DPTxTJ8C

  53. Brnch Sec Ruth H

    “@FalseEcon: The hilariously embarrassing report against the 50p tax today http://t.co/WUrVnRlu (via @libcon)”> unbelievable.

  54. Report says 50p tax doesn’t deter ‘talent’ | Liberal Conspiracy

    […] may have also come across piss-poor reports against the 50p tax that were very likely written by an A-level Economics […]

  55. Katie Noonan

    The hilariously embarrassing report against the 50p tax today | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/Od9zMgAF via @libcon

  56. Our World Our Say

    No, really. Maintaining the 50p tax rate might possibly be slightly problematic for some reason: http://t.co/jfC9CX6k

  57. Tax Justice: It’s actually pretty simple | ourworldoursay

    […] Hundal does a good job of debunking the ludicrous ‘evidence’ behind this perspective. He doesn’t, though, tackle the (in our eyes) frankly bizarre assumption that the rich are […]

  58. mike hanson

    Who the hell funds this garbage The hilariously embarrassing report against the 50p tax today http://t.co/O2rDZKma

  59. Jamie

    The hilariously embarrassing report regarding those against the 50p tax today http://t.co/bvF8xDK6

  60. Robert Carr

    The Telegraph today say 50p rate will cost UK £1bn. But where have they got the figure from? @libcon can't find it: http://t.co/cvgVV1Zf

  61. sunny hundal

    @mjhsinclair @emmaboon independent analysis eh? Like… this? http://t.co/lnkv1Apt

  62. Paul Bigland

    @Becksterblog The anti #hs2 mob may be gulled by the CEBR. Others aren't: http://t.co/IQyzSCo3 #spinfail





Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.