In the final instalment of our new mini-series on families and tax, the authors explore how errors in the current arrangements might be fixed.
Posts Tagged: Nigel Lawson
In the first instalment of our new mini-series on families and tax, the authors look back to where Nigel Lawson’s 1988 reforms went wrong.
Chloe Westley: Enough talk of tax rises from Tory Ministers. Let’s have tax cuts instead. Or else what are they for?
The Conservatives are not going to win the hearts and minds of the British people by proposing Labour-lite policies. There must be something different on offer.
Money would go from one person through a bureaucracy to another person in the same household – who probably holds a joint bank account with the first person.
By inflicting such pain, Corbyn has compelled a discussion. But the Jewish contribution to Britain should not be reduced to mere political calculation.
The Government should return to the approach championed in 1988, and abandon the practice of punishing landlords.
Bonar Law’s words in 1922 apply to the present leader: “The party elects a leader, and that leader chooses the policy, and if the party does not like it, they have to get another leader.”
Higher taxes. Social insurance. New Commissions. Reforming NI. Debate on health and social care gathers pace.
But the collapse of the Tory manifesto social care plan, plus the Government’s lack of a workable Commons majority, all but rule out radical change to the system.
Plus: We need a Housing Minister who will do for new homes what Michael Heseltine did with development corporations in the 1980s.
And here’s the thing: Banks knew it. Farage knew it. But they didn’t care. Their primary objective was to be seen to lead the campaign, not to win it.
Ignoring the family unit means pressures on benefits – and burdening some poorer families with the highest effective marginal tax rate in the developed world.
He warns the House of Lords that amending the Article 50 Bill would exceed their constitutional remit.
They can wring their hands one day and ring the bells the next – or vice-versa. After all, they rejoiced when sterling joined the ERM. We know how that one ended.
The group wants a Hard Brexit. Either way, the Government should move Article 50 before next spring is over.
The EU referendum result marks a posthumous triumph over his old opponent, Edward Heath. Or does it?