Gordon Brown today delivered what must go down as one of the most predictable Pre-Budget Reports on record. Good. This is as it should be and was a sterling performance. As you might expect, Richard Murphy is both scathing and penetrative in his compelling analysis around this and related topics. Excellent. Hang on. This is a contradiction don’t you think? Absolutely not. It has precedence in history.
In pre-19th century Britain, the notion of slavery was considered acceptable. Yet today we know it to be an abhorrent practice. We credit Wilberforce for this insight but few of us examine his struggle to start the process of ridding the world of slavery. 1787-1807. It would be another 24 years before slavery would be abolished across the Empire. As we approach 200 years since slave trading was abolished, we still haven’t completely eradicated this scourge to humanity. Poignant.
If I try and imagine what it was like to be a commentator at the time Wilberforce made his voice known, I can see all sorts of parallels with today’s battle over tax avoidance. From The Observer:
The idea of abolishing this fundamental part of the economy seemed outrageous and impossible. Why did it happen?…Today scholars stress the role of civil society…They pioneered the tactics of the modern pressure group with petitions, boycotts, mass rallies, public debates, legal injunctions and parliamentary action. In 1792 some 13,000 residents of Glasgow put their names to an abolitionist petition.
The difference today is that we have a whole battery of new communications tools with which to achieve the same ends.
Three years after Richard’s submission to the Treasury on the issue of domicile and we are engaged in a fascinating debate on the topic. This is the first debate of its kind I’ve seen (correct me if I’m wrong someone.) It would not have happened a year ago because no-one was using the technology. We do today because it provides a simple means of expression about things about which we’re passionate. All agree the taxing statutes have got this wrong and it has to go. We just don’t agree how to get there. As far as I am concerned, this is both a useful and healthy thing.
Here’s what I think might happen next. Some smart person will splice together clips from the Live 8 gig. These will include shots of Bono and others, possibly interspliced with news footage of Bono’s good works. At the end, this equally smart person will create a caption – something like:
“Do you dream of leading the life of stars like Bono? If so then you’ll have to reconcile the fact that while he’s singing in the name of doing good, he’s paying virtually no taxes. Every time you buy one of his records, you’re paying a person who likely pays less tax than you. Doesn’t that strike you as hypocritical? Doesn’t that seem a little unfair? Demand Tax Justice for all.”
And then issue it on YouTube. Who knows might pick up on it? Or how far it might spread? Think I’m dreaming? Check out this performance, read the stats and comments. Interesting don’t you think?
It’s the modern day equivalent of appealing to public opinion. It is one of the reason I really want to see Julian Hatt mobilise interest inside HMRC about this medium. Now to the big question.
Does this mean that domicile will go as a taxing concept. Absolutely. What evidence have I got? Gordon Brown had a crack at a number of issues. Including my personal bugbear example – Stamp Duty Land Tax avoidance. He started to nibble at abusive tax schemes. He even went as far as signalling a GAAR with a TAAR. Not that many have noticed so far.
Richard has every reason to be optimistic. Change is happening. The passage of time does not alter what appears to be a human characteristic none of us can ignore because it is constant. We change over time, look back with the benefit of hindsight to appreciate that our thinking has changed. Sometimes we scratch our heads in disbelief.
What perhaps none of us has appreciated is that each profound change happens because of a change in social awareness. Don’t ask me why but It also brings with it unfounded economic fear. We know that to be true so can apply the lessons of the past when faced with arguments about dire economic consequences from important changes in taxation and fiscal policy. It is about having our self-interest expressed in terms that make sense to us because our perceptions about the world have changed. We know that to change requires a change in social awareness. Sometimes this works against us. But we usually recognise that and change direction. It is always for the better in the long term. Look only at recent history and ask yourself. Would you swap what you have today for what your parents had?
I believe this medium is facilitating fundamental shifts in our attitudes about many things. Including taxation as both policy and a means to facilitate a civil society. I am far from alone in this regard. To get a flavour, I’d recommend checking out the various Manifestos Hugh is accumulating. They are truly innovative and impressive.
I’m sure Richard needs no persuasion from me to continue his campaign. Now might be the time to move it to a higher, different and more appealing gear.
Technorati Tags: CSR, ethics, gapingvoid, HMRC, tax justice, tax gap
