Tax Arrangements

A very good letter by Ed Le Quesne a few weeks ago. I've only just got round to commenting on it.

The only really strong point that could be mustered against it would be if there were actual legal contracts in place. If there were - like the contracts that existed with States Loans, which used to fix the upper rate of interest payable - contracts on income tax, signed by both parties, agreeing to a fix sum per annum, then it would be more difficult to break (although not impossible - just look at how covenants can be overturned by the States!).

But do such contracts exist? Or were the sums involved fixed by a "gentleman's agreement", over a handshake, and perhaps a glass of wine?

Perhaps John Christensen, who seemed to be privy to various haggling on the subject during the seventies and eighties, could let us know?


From Ed Le Quesne.

I DON'T accept Senator Le Sueur's statement that it is immoral to change the tax arrangements for wealthy residents.

It would be immoral to back-date any changes, but I am sure there would be strong support for him saying in his Budget speech in December something like: 'From 2009 the taxes paid by all wealthy 1(1)K residents will be assessed on the same basis, whatever may have happened in the past.'

It fits in with the 20% means 20% taxation of wealthy Jersey people which is being phased in, and may need a similar phasing-in period.

If Senator Le Sueur omits to say it, I hope another States Member will bring a Budget amendment to the same effect.