Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

B892 - The Alternative Tax (Repeal) Bill (Resubmission) watch

    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    B892 - The Alternative Tax (Repeal) Bill (Resubmission), The Hon. Jammy Duel MP, The Hon. Nigel Farage MEP MP

    The Alternative Tax (Repeal) Bill 2016


    A
    BILL
    TO


    Repeal The Alternative Tax Act 2015 – V867
    BE IT ENACTED by The Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, in accordance with the provisions of the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, and by the authority of the same, as follows:-

    1 Repeal

    V867 - The Alternative Tax Act 2015 will be repealed.

    2 Extent, Commencement & Short Title

    1) This Act extends to the whole of the United Kingdom
    2) This section comes into force on the day on which this Act is passed.
    3) This Act may be cited as the Alternative Tax (Repeal) Act 2016



    Notes

    While the reasons for repealing the tax below stand, the last attempt at repeal was rejected by some people after hearing false promises of an amendment to fix the problems. It has been months since the original attempted at repeal with no decent amendment being tabled, the original bill enters force on the 6th April but this repeal bill can stop the Act from hitting the poorest in society before the Act comes into force.

    The prime reason for The Alternative Tax Act 2015 should be repealed, bar being a terrible bill which helps nobody, is that when it passed it was by a single vote and based on poor costing that in no way accurately represents the true cost of the Act, in particular the true cost of the Land Value Tax. To do this we need two things, first, the total area of the land the bill will tax, for this we shall establish both an upper and a lower bound; second we require the average value of the aforementioned land. For these calculations we shall only consider England, and not the UK as a whole, as all the data needed for England is readily available so requires no real extrapolation and still sufficiently well demonstrates the failing of the Act.

    First of all, we need to know the total land area of England, 130,279 km2, or 13,027,900ha. Next we shall eliminate all rural land to establish an upper bound for the taxable land, to do this we need to know how much of England is classified as urban (what counts as urban becomes relevant later) which currently stands at approximately 10.6%[1], or an area of 1,381,000 ha (rounded to the nearest 1000 ha). Next we need to consider the value of the land, something that is easily enough done given that the Government already estimate land value in England for policy appraisal, and from this we find that the average land value in England stands at £6,017,000[2] to the nearest £1,000. This gives a total land value of £8.3tn (to the nearest 100bn) and a corresponding urban Land Value Tax of £415bn (to the nearest billion) for our upper bound for England.

    Next we shall consider the lower bound, here we have to look at what actually counts as "urban land", 6.6% of urban land consists of lakes, reservoirs, rivers and canals[1]; a further 54% is "green space"[2], i.e. parks, allotments, sports pitches, etc and, for the sake of argument, we shall define ALL of this to be publicly held and thus exempt under the bill, despite this being an absurdity, this gives us 60.4% exempt from the Land Value Tax, or in other words, a lower bound of £165bn, double initially stated, for the urban land in England alone, assuming the green space and water to be equally distributed throughout all the urban areas, note that gardens are not included in green space. This still represents an average household cost of approximately £8,000, several times greater than current council tax costs for those that pay the full rate, and even more so for those who receive council tax support, this Act would drive such people out of their homes.

    Neither the upper, nor lower bounds consider the urban land value of Scotland, Wales, or Northern Ireland. Furthermore, it does not consider agricultural land which makes up 71.3% of all land in the UK[3], or 17,369,393 ha with a land value of £21,000 per ha[2] which would give a UK wide revenue from the Land Value Tax from agricultural land of a further £18bn and force some farms out of business.

    Currently the large council tax band is band A where the average council tax is £989. The most expensive band, H, pays an average of £2968 in council tax. The Alternative Tax Bill makes every person in England worse off unless the person lives in a high-rise apartment where there is the benefit of multiple properties sharing the Land Value Tax burden.

    [1]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18623096
    [2]https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/407155/February_2015_Land_value_publica tion_FINAL.pdf
    [3]http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/AG.LND.AGRI.ZS
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    I have chosen to accept resubmission of this bill.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    I may get some stick for this, but Aye
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    Nigel Farage MEP Jammy Duel


    I took the liberty of amending the years.
    Thank you: it is a poor show on our side because both of us did not notice the mistake.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Aye.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Nay.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    If the proposers believe it should have been amended by now, why haven't they submitted an amendment instead?
    If we pass this bill, and someone attempted to pass a new, better Alternative Tax Bill there is a high chance that the people who proposed to repeal of this bill will not support it.

    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Aye.
    Really? Should we not abstain/nay and make an amendment? In fairness the righties generally don't like the idea of progresssive tax so I doubt they'd allow the submission of a new reformed Alternative Tax Bill.
    Although financial bills are not my area of expertise.

    Meh.

    Nay - I suggest an amendment, not a repeal.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by DMcGovern)
    Nay - I suggest the government get their act together and make an amendment.
    The whole premise of the resubmission is that the government said they would amend the ATA bill but nothing has happened with it. They've had more than enough time to submit an amendment.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    I have chosen to accept resubmission of this bill.
    You were wrong to until next term in my opinion albeit the actual bill has a sound basis behind it.

    ....

    For goodness sake though, take the time to format!
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by The Financier)
    The whole premise of the resubmission is that the government said they would amend the ATA bill but nothing has happened with it. They've had more than enough time to submit an amendment.
    Understandable, but a complete repeal is wrong - if the proposers believe it should have been amended by now, why haven't they submitted an amendment instead?
    If we pass this bill, and someone attempted to pass a new, better Alternative Tax Bill there is a high chance that the people who proposed to repeal of this bill will not support it.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Financier)
    The whole premise of the resubmission is that the government said they would amend the ATA bill but nothing has happened with it. They've had more than enough time to submit an amendment.
    I did write an amendment which failed, just so everyone knows.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    I did write an amendment which failed, just so everyone knows.
    Looking back over what was said in division for the original repeal, Saoirse appears to have shown a draft amendment to people that was different from the one that you wrote and was eventually submitted by the government. To rephrase what I said earlier slightly, the government said they would amend the ATA bill in a certain manner but nothing has happened in that direction.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Nay, I'm under the influence atm so not able to give a proper rebuttal but I disagree with principle of a repeal. I have no doubt that there was errors in James's initial proposal and indeed the proposed amendment that may make it unworkable, but as it passed originally the principle of the bill was accepted and so the duty of those who think it is flawed is to amend it so it works rather than to attempt to repeal it once again.

    The argument that was given is flawed in that it suggests because the average (mean) LVT would be about £8000, this means that the poorest in society (who usually pay about £1000 in council tax) would be £7000 worse off, which is a ridiculous argument because it assumes the poorest in society have an average amount of land, which they obviously do not. I accept that LVT would most likely be passed on from the land owner to the renter, but the simple fact is that the land they are renting is so tiny that the average LVT to be paid is irrelevant. Using averages in this case is at best ignorant, but more likely wilfully misleading by people who oppose LVT because it is essentially a wealth tax and they themselves are wealthy. The attempt to label it as a regressive tax that hits the working and middle classes most is appalling and should be denounced by all. I shall give a full response once I am sober.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Aye.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    I will declare that I don't like the bill that this repealed nor did I like the proposed amendment so aye.

    (Original post by The Financier)
    Looking back over what was said in division for the original repeal, Saoirse appears to have shown a draft amendment to people that was different from the one that you wrote and was eventually submitted by the government. To rephrase what I said earlier slightly, the government said they would amend the ATA bill in a certain manner but nothing has happened in that direction.
    She didn't, I asked for a draft or something to see if the bill was actually better in the amendment and she refused.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    I'm more towards nay, however I'll keep a close eye to the debate.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    While I think the speaker does a stand up job 99% of the time I do question allowing this bill to be submitted so close to the end of term, surely as rakas said it would be better to have waited till next term.

    In any case nay
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Kay_Winters)
    While I think the speaker does a stand up job 99% of the time I do question allowing this bill to be submitted so close to the end of term, surely as rakas said it would be better to have waited till next term.

    In any case nay
    The bill that is trying to be repealed comes into force on the 6th April, limiting the time to amend or repeal the bill before the poorest in society see a substantial increase in annual taxes.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DMcGovern)

    Nay - I suggest an amendment, not a repeal.
    An amendment was tried and failed, and believe me when I say that I did try very hard.

    However, this bill loads some very undeserving people with a huge bill every year at the tune of 5% of their land's value, which for people living in cities, is just too heavy a burden for them to bear. Not all opf the tax will be passed on, that's granted, but thousands of pounds will. This isn't progressive, and it isn't needed. I'd rather we worked to cut council tax and business rates along with increasing the minimum wage and just repeal the damned ATA altogether, it's not worth the farce.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    The bill that is trying to be repealed comes into force on the 6th April, limiting the time to amend or repeal the bill before the poorest in society see a substantial increase in annual taxes.
    The ATA won't affect the "poorest" in society though, and they'd be safe, however it'll be a huge burden for the lower middle class millennials who are renting.
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: March 27, 2016
Poll
Who is your favourite TV detective?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.