Dizzy has blogged, in uncannily similar terms to that which I was going to, about this economically illiterate attack on Fidelity Investments’ donations to the Conservative Party. (Update:)Also over there, and more relevant to this post, was this piece on the Unclaimed Assets Bill.
It comes after last week’s coverage of HM Revenue & Customs’ plans to help themselves to your bank account without even asking a judge first. These proposals have actually been around for a few weeks, but were only picked up by the Torygraph and others last week. Bear in mind that in dealings with HMRC, the burden of proof has for a long time been on the taxpayer, and this latest turn of the statist ratchet does not come as such a surprise.
What underpins these two positions is that those behind them assume an unassailable moral case for taxation that justifies some pretty fundamental attacks on our freedom to own property. Tax goes to pay for schools’n’ospitals doesn’t it? It goes to help the “most vulnerable in society”. No it doesn’t – it goes to the state. If the “most vulnerable” are lucky they might see a fraction of it, though some of it might be spent on projects actually aimed not at the most vulnerable, but at the loudest or to pay off those who threaten the cause the most damage because of their “circumstances”. If they’re unlucky the poor won’t see a penny, or they will remain stuck like a spider in the bathtub of the welfare state that hits them with a 70% marginal tax rate should they attempt to climb up the side. Of course, there are some examples where the system works well, and I could certainly highlight a few in my own fair borough if you were interested.
It is high time the moral case for tax cuts was again reignited. Those dogged souls of Libertarianism cannot do this alone. Mainstream political parties (well, one in particular) cannot make all the running either – political realities will always limit how bold a party seeking election can be.
But the fight must be fought. Taxation is one of the most insidious ways in which government affects our lives. That is not to do down the work of schools’n’ospitals, policing or defence, but of recognising that tax is a tool to be wielded sparingly and which imparts a heavy moral obligation on those using it. Taxation says that you are not trusted to spend your money “wisely” (to which the response could be “so what if I can’t?”), but more audaciously, that politicians (and, yes, I am a junior member of that cadre) know better, and can use your money to better effect to help the poor than you could by donating to your favourite charity / health or unemployment insurance scheme / own family’s welfare.
Oh, I could go on, and probably will in future. But for now, I must do some proper work. And don’t forget your second self-assessment payment on account at the end of this month!
