And the winners will attract even more business, and rates revenue from it. Which allows voters to draw negative comparisons with boroughs which don't have successful business policies.
Successful business policies may revolve around having the right infrastructure - rail/road which would be outside the scope of a Council to influence. How many motorways are there in East Anglia ? One at a push and that only goes N/S.
i think your last comment is bang on and seems to be getting overlooked
if all these businesses relocate and end up paying lower taxes then wont that mean at national level there is alot less money coming in and either has to be made up from other sources or will result in more cuts to services
Lower taxes = more business= more tax take. The incentive is that they keep all the gain from increasing the tax take
Successful business policies may revolve around having the right infrastructure - rail/road which would be outside the scope of a Council to influence. How many motorways are there in East Anglia ? One at a push and that only goes N/S.
But he's just invented an infrastructure commission to deal with that - and take any blame away from central government. Business rates isn't only about big business either - the odd new local pub or guest house, or shop benefits without adding to local overheads.
He's also nicked another Labour idea, and is using local authority pension funds to finance, i think it was 7 billion, in added infrastructure spending. He's borrowed two Labour policies, and offered the infrastructure investment , Corbyn was going to print money for, on top.
Everyone that has been interviewed on TV today seems to think it a good thing, and looking locally I think it would benefit us a great deal.
We have a town centre that has been in horrid state of decline for years and now we might be able to reduce rates to entice people to fill retail units and offices. This would make a massive difference, with a series of positive benefits for everyone who lives here.
Given that 40% of businesses fail in 2 years and 50% in 5, then your relationship needs some tweaking.
Any increase in numbers of businesses, or their expansion, that produces more tax than whats lost by cutting taxrates, is a gain. Even freezing taxes might be attractive to business. I woudl imagine there's scope for local variations too - if say you want to do something about empty high street shops?
Lower taxes = more business= more tax take. The incentive is that they keep all the gain from increasing the tax take
in theory thats fine , in the areas that dont have the infrastructure to support or attract that extra business or where the economy may be at saturation point then do they just put up with lower funding because they have been undercut by neighbouring councils ?
as others have said there will be winners and losers from this and personally i dont think local services should be dependent on the whims of business
It's like right-wingers have a blindness and cannot see the other important aspect of business success, the public!
Businesses don't need low taxation, they need a populace with money to spend. How does shifting the burden of taxation onto the majority allow business to thrive? Who is going to buy their products/services?
Low tax is like low wages, it's what business wants but it will inevitably destroy them within a few years.
The consequences of taking too much out and not putting enough back in will make the whole thing collapse. It's like vulture capitalists are in power.
It's like right-wingers have a blindness and cannot see the other important aspect of business success, the public!
Businesses don't need low taxation, they need a populace with money to spend. How does shifting the burden of taxation onto the majority allow business to thrive? Who is going to buy their products/services?
Low tax is like low wages, it's what business wants but it will inevitably destroy them within a few years.
The consequences of taking too much out and not putting enough back in will make the whole thing collapse. It's like vulture capitalists are in power.
What happens to a consumer society when there are so many with not enough money left to consume anything but the basics?
Everyone that has been interviewed on TV today seems to think it a good thing, and looking locally I think it would benefit us a great deal.
We have a town centre that has been in horrid state of decline for years and now we might be able to reduce rates to entice people to fill retail units and offices. This would make a massive difference, with a series of positive benefits for everyone who lives here.
The reality of what the Conservatives are planning is simply more support for BIG businesses at the expense of all other businesses.
It's inevitable that big business will get what they want, and the burden will be dumped on every other business at the small/medium end. Also the council tax payer...
BIG business doesn't innovate, they consolidate. By fair means or foul.
Small businesses stand to benefit just as much. I bet every council has loads of smaller offices and retail units to fill then massive HQ style buildings.
That said, why wouldn't you seek to attract a huge corporation to your area when it then leads to loads of jobs in the area?
I hope that either small business rate relief will continue or that this will come with a major revaluation of business rates such that out of town shopping centres pay enough and that town centre premises rates are reduced in line with how shopping habits have changed in recent years.
...but only if the locals agree to have a mayor even though they rejected that notion in numerous referenda held a few years back.
...and if they roll over and agree to that local businesses will get to vote on any proposal to raise the rates...hmmm...so now we are enfranchising organisations.
...but only if the locals agree to have a mayor even though they rejected that notion in numerous referenda held a few years back.
...and if they roll over and agree to that local businesses will get to vote on any proposal to raise the rates...hmmm...so now we are enfranchising organisations.
Any idea how getting businesses to vote will work? Will it be One Business One Vote or will their influence be weighted in terms of how many employees they have, how much rates they pay or how much their turnover is?
Small businesses stand to benefit just as much. I bet every council has loads of smaller offices and retail units to fill then massive HQ style buildings.
That said, why wouldn't you seek to attract a huge corporation to your area when it then leads to loads of jobs in the area?
We have a few multinationals headquartered where i am. It's not all positive. Yes they do soak up some of the unemployed. But that's countered by the demand they place on housing. They bring in others from outside the area so the population dramatically increases. With all the local pressures you'd expect.
One of these multinationals seems to be in an unhealthy relationship with the local council. Who seem to be letting them dictate local government policy, particularly on transport. There's also a common desire by several of these multinationals to hold large events that draw in huge swarms of extra people. That's not a bad thing in its self. But it's a bit of a coincidence that they all seem to do it on the same day. Also worth pointing out that one of these large multinationals is famous for avoiding tax.
The Tories will be taking away funding in most cases and allowing these business rates to compensate. I doubt there will a huge difference in council budgets. Most will still be broke.
The Tories will be taking away funding in most cases and allowing these business rates to compensate. I doubt there will a huge difference in council budgets. Most will still be broke.
Yet there will always be money to give the chief executive a payrise and those vanity projects have to be funded somehow.
The biggest impact, however, could be to show that Osborne's Conservatives are pro-devolution while Corbyn's Labour are for centrist state control.
If they were pro devolution they'd be seeking to create a federal UK with counties/regions having similar powers to Scotland/Wales/NI, and with everyone on an equal footing.
Offering special deals of varying detail to different bits of the country, with Parliament always in position to overrule and dictate, is a poor excuse for devolution.
If they were pro devolution they'd be seeking to create a federal UK with counties/regions having similar powers to Scotland/Wales/NI, and with everyone on an equal footing.
If you give the English regions the same (or "similar") powers as Scotland, Wales and NI then doesn't that just diminish the devolved assemblies and not give England any national identity? You would be saying to Scotland that they are equivalent to Yorkshire or East Anglia and that England doesn't exist.
Comments
Lower taxes = more business= more tax take. The incentive is that they keep all the gain from increasing the tax take
But he's just invented an infrastructure commission to deal with that - and take any blame away from central government. Business rates isn't only about big business either - the odd new local pub or guest house, or shop benefits without adding to local overheads.
He's also nicked another Labour idea, and is using local authority pension funds to finance, i think it was 7 billion, in added infrastructure spending. He's borrowed two Labour policies, and offered the infrastructure investment , Corbyn was going to print money for, on top.
We have a town centre that has been in horrid state of decline for years and now we might be able to reduce rates to entice people to fill retail units and offices. This would make a massive difference, with a series of positive benefits for everyone who lives here.
Any increase in numbers of businesses, or their expansion, that produces more tax than whats lost by cutting taxrates, is a gain. Even freezing taxes might be attractive to business. I woudl imagine there's scope for local variations too - if say you want to do something about empty high street shops?
in theory thats fine , in the areas that dont have the infrastructure to support or attract that extra business or where the economy may be at saturation point then do they just put up with lower funding because they have been undercut by neighbouring councils ?
as others have said there will be winners and losers from this and personally i dont think local services should be dependent on the whims of business
Businesses don't need low taxation, they need a populace with money to spend. How does shifting the burden of taxation onto the majority allow business to thrive? Who is going to buy their products/services?
Low tax is like low wages, it's what business wants but it will inevitably destroy them within a few years.
The consequences of taking too much out and not putting enough back in will make the whole thing collapse. It's like vulture capitalists are in power.
What happens to a consumer society when there are so many with not enough money left to consume anything but the basics?
Mass unemployment, a spiral into greater and greater economic failure.
I assume a swing in political leanings like we have seen in the past.
Exactly.:)
Nothing. Some consume more and some consume less. Paying lower business rates enables businesses to lower prices.
It's inevitable that big business will get what they want, and the burden will be dumped on every other business at the small/medium end. Also the council tax payer...
BIG business doesn't innovate, they consolidate. By fair means or foul.
That said, why wouldn't you seek to attract a huge corporation to your area when it then leads to loads of jobs in the area?
...and if they roll over and agree to that local businesses will get to vote on any proposal to raise the rates...hmmm...so now we are enfranchising organisations.
Any idea how getting businesses to vote will work? Will it be One Business One Vote or will their influence be weighted in terms of how many employees they have, how much rates they pay or how much their turnover is?
We have a few multinationals headquartered where i am. It's not all positive. Yes they do soak up some of the unemployed. But that's countered by the demand they place on housing. They bring in others from outside the area so the population dramatically increases. With all the local pressures you'd expect.
One of these multinationals seems to be in an unhealthy relationship with the local council. Who seem to be letting them dictate local government policy, particularly on transport. There's also a common desire by several of these multinationals to hold large events that draw in huge swarms of extra people. That's not a bad thing in its self. But it's a bit of a coincidence that they all seem to do it on the same day. Also worth pointing out that one of these large multinationals is famous for avoiding tax.
Yet there will always be money to give the chief executive a payrise and those vanity projects have to be funded somehow.
If they were pro devolution they'd be seeking to create a federal UK with counties/regions having similar powers to Scotland/Wales/NI, and with everyone on an equal footing.
Offering special deals of varying detail to different bits of the country, with Parliament always in position to overrule and dictate, is a poor excuse for devolution.
I entirely agree.
If you give the English regions the same (or "similar") powers as Scotland, Wales and NI then doesn't that just diminish the devolved assemblies and not give England any national identity? You would be saying to Scotland that they are equivalent to Yorkshire or East Anglia and that England doesn't exist.