Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

David Prosser: Plenty more headroom on taxing the banks

Friday 22 October 2010 00:00 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Outlook Just as the Chancellor promised, the legislation paving the way for the new levy on banks' balance sheets was published yesterday – and, just as he promised, the charge is designed to extract the "maximum sustainable tax revenues" from the City.

Just one problem – there is no agreement on what "maximum sustainable" means. Mr Osborne's view – that an annual take of £2.5bn is as much as he can get away with without driving banks abroad – is right at the bottom end of the range of suggestions. Compare it, for example, with the demands of the Robin Hood Tax Campaign, which is at the other extreme, with a call for a newannual tax of £20bn on the City.

Let's say this for the Chancellor – his desire to keep the banks in Britain is not going to be thwarted. When this levy was first unveiled six months ago, the banks breathed a sigh of relief. And since then they have secured some additional concessions such as a lower tax charge on savers' deposits on their balance sheets, even where these deposits are not covered by a state-backed compensation scheme.

So relaxed is the British Bankers' Association about the new charge that its only criticism now is that British institutions might be caught out by double taxation, as other countries introduce their own levies. If that is the worst of the banks' complaints, it seems safe to say that Mr Osborne could have been braver.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in