The Treasury has released the infromation about Inheritance Tax and apparently it "proves" the changes in the pre-Budget report were not stolen from the Tories - or more correctly shows that IHT changes were going to be made anyway irrespective of the Tory policy.
However, if you read the release it actually doesn't prove anything. What it says is that the Chancellor was given an "advice" paper about IHT (he gets given advice papers all the time). That the paper was "under discussion" (he read the paper and and was talking to someone about it). That Treasury officials were told to draw up final "proposals" (not made a decision yet, wanted to see further analysis first).
5 comments:
My naive interpretation of the FoI release:
1) We thought of it ages ago
2) We're not going to show you the proof
3) So there.
4) Erm.. Thats it.
The Treasry/Brown arguent is clearly tosh. The letter was first sent to ministers in March 2007 as "pre-Budget advice", ie advice before the March 2007 Budget. Since it didn't appear in that Budget (the normal place for new tax raising measures - PBR's are usually reserved for emergency measures) it is safe to say that it was rejected.
It was then circulated prior to the Pre Budget Report (i.e. the Autumn Statement) as part of a package of measures to be considered - it sounds like the Treasury has many of these measures under consideration.
If the government had been working seriously on the idea it would have been held over until the Budget in March 2008, but was clearly announced as a spoiler.
Until 2002, the PBR contained no changes in tax legislation, then it started listing anti-avoidance measures (see under the press notices on each years PBR micro-site - there is usually a notice about protecting tax revenues). There were also some announcements of changes in alloances and rates, but intil 2006 they were all effcetive from the following Budget (which is why the 2006 fuel duty increase and air passenger duty was botched).
The fact that such a substantial tax concession has been announced at the PBR and not the Budget is quite extraordinary, which is why it is a spoiler.
You absolutely need to pursue this one Dizzy.
Could be dynamite.
That said, you'll know as well as anyone how elusive the govt. will be.
Don't let it fizzle out.
I liked the way he said "will show" cos I remembered an episode of yes prime minister when sir humphrey explained the real purpose of "minutes" to explain what the minister wanted to say not what he actualy said.
Regrettably, the weakness here is not the answer but the question. the Treasury does not have to prove that it intended to reform IHT, only that it was planning to, which is much easier.
The Treasury, I imagine, has an IHT department which does nothing but plan potential reforms. If it can dig out the papers that examine the trust fund IHT loophole the eventual policy will be in there somewhere.
Post a Comment