FWIW, here are my three takeaways from #JeremyHunt's interview in the Times:
1. Welcome emphasis on encouraging over-50s back to work. This is long overdue, and will need more than just exhortations and gimmicky 'MOT' schemes, but he seems to get this...
thetimes.co.uk/article/jeremy…
1. Welcome emphasis on encouraging over-50s back to work. This is long overdue, and will need more than just exhortations and gimmicky 'MOT' schemes, but he seems to get this...
thetimes.co.uk/article/jeremy…
2. 'Putting sound money before Tory ideology' is a good line: if badly done, tax cuts could keep #inflation high and add to pressure on interest rates.
But still wrong to rule them out: well-targeted cuts could help with both demand and supply, boosting growth without inflation.
But still wrong to rule them out: well-targeted cuts could help with both demand and supply, boosting growth without inflation.
3. Prioritising cuts in business rather than personal taxes is not a bad idea: could do more for supply-side performance, with less risk of inflation.
The distinction between the two is blurred anyway: the burden of corporate taxation is ultimately borne by real people.
BUT...
The distinction between the two is blurred anyway: the burden of corporate taxation is ultimately borne by real people.
BUT...
The rhetoric here is hard to square with what Jeremy Hunt is actually doing: hiking corporation #tax from 19% to 25%, ending the 'super deduction' on capital spending, and extending so-called 'windfall taxes', all of which are damaging business investment.
Hunt's vision now seems limited to *redistributing* the burden of corporate taxation, by hinting at cutting taxes that are less/not dependent on profitability (business rates and employer NICs), while raising those that are.
This is not unreasonable, but we need a proper debate!
This is not unreasonable, but we need a proper debate!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
