LIVE / Decision day in the tax debate?

Deputy Goy’s TRP tax idea is rejected 5-32, with three abstentions.

After a short comfort break, States members are back to debating Deputy Goy’s amendment around requiring a minimum tax contribution from households living in properties within the top 10% of TRP values.

‘One of P&R’s justifications for introducing GST is the wealthy households who currently contribute little or nothing through income tax would pay consumption tax instead,’ says Deputy Goy. ‘But why do we need to slap the entire island with GST just to capture the contribution we’ve failed to capture in the first place? Why not address the under-contribution directly? And this is what this amendment is proposing.’

Deputy Rhona Humphreys, responding in debate, says ‘some in this Assembly have spoken already about the danger of even talking about wealth taxes.’

‘Before this debate, I gave up an afternoon to meet with Deputy Goy and Locate Guernsey to go through their work and the model and the value these people bring to the island. Sadly, it didn’t change or affect any of the amendments that Deputy Goy has brought.’

Deputy Goy’s next amendment is to investigate requiring a minimum tax contribution from households living in properties within the top 10% of TRP values.

There was attempt not to debate it, with the Bailiff deeming it to go beyond the original proposition, but the vote was tied 18-18 and so it will be discussed...

That took a while in the end, but Deputy Goy’s amendment around looking at new charges for expensive and powerful cars has been rejected 7-31, with two abstentions.

Deputy Goy said new charges based on the power output of vehicles would be easy to administer. Environment minister Adrian Gabriel disagreed, while P&R president Lindsay de Sausmarez said the right moves were already being made on motor taxes as part of the wider tax package.

Another one from Deputy Goy up next...

It’s another amendment from Deputy Goy - this time about cars.

It calls on the States to investigate the introduction of higher one-off and annual charges on the most expensive and most powerful vehicles purchased for use on Guernsey’s roads.

Defeat for Deputy Goy’s amendment 37, which called for the States to look at a higher rate of document duty on high-value property.

He said he was simply asking P&R to investigate it, but members voted it down 8-28, with three abstentions.

‘I think we should work on these things in a steady fashion, evolving it,’ said Deputy Steve Williams. ‘Anything overdramatic, I think will have a phenomenally dramatic effect on the marketplace. And that would be my personal view, so I won’t back these percentages.’

This amendment, seconded by Deputy Aidan Matthews, calls on P&R to investigate the introduction of a higher rate of document duty on purchases of property exceeding £2.5m.

Deputy Inder calls it a budget amendment, but once again, we’ve got a bit of debate on this one.

The first vote of the day goes against Deputy Goy, but he did generate some debate with this open market amendment.

Members voted it down 3-29, with six abstentions. On to his next one...

From our senior reporter Matt Fallaize:

By the end of today - the sixth day they’ve been at this - the States will have voted on P&R’s proposed tax package. Deputies have decided to sit today for as long as it takes to conclude, but with speech limits in place the final vote may well be no later than mid-afternoon.  

The package has picked up a few relatively minor amendments along the way this week, but the core remains as P&R recommended: 3% GST, new motoring taxes, reductions in income tax and social security contributions, and public spending reductions of £20m a year - all by 2029, when this States term will end.

All of the alternative routes proposed in amendments have fallen short of a majority, mostly by very clear margins. They included raising income taxes, deferring for a year or more any decision on the biggest tax changes, and putting the whole thing to a referendum. 

All the voting indications so far have been that P&R’s proposed package is heading for approval, perhaps with a smaller majority than the senior committee would have liked. I wrote yesterday that they were 2-0 up with half an hour to play.

But is GST, etc. now almost certain or could P&R still snatch defeat from the jaws of victory?

There are 40 members, each with one vote of equal weight. If every member votes pour or contre, the key number is 21, because these proposals require a simple majority to be approved. But the key number changes if one or more deputies abstain, voting neither pour nor contre, and an abstention or two is a real possibility.

If I was a betting man, I’d put money on the following 19 deputies voting in support of P&R’s package:

Yvonne Burford
Lindsay de Sausmarez
David Dorrity
Steve Falla
Sarah Hansmann Rouxel
Rhona Humphreys
Sasha Kazantseva-Miller
Marc Laine
Ross Le Brun
Munazza Malik
Paul Montague
Andrew Niles
George Oswald
Charles Parkinson
Sally Rochester
Tom Rylatt
Gavin St Pier
Jennifer Strachan
Steve Williams 

I understand that one deputy, Neil Inder, is most likely to abstain, or if he doesn’t abstain to vote against P&R’s package. If he abstains, which would reduce the number of total votes to 39, P&R will need 20 votes for its package to be approved. If he votes against, keeping the total number of votes at 40, P&R will need 21 votes for its package to be approved.

If I am correct about my list of 19 above - of virtually certain supporters of P&R’s package - the senior committee is looking for one or two more votes to get to 20 or 21.

Tina Bury’s voting so far indicates that she will be a (reluctant) vote for P&R’s package, but that is far from certain.

John Gollop has a long history of speaking in favour of tax rises, but as Tina Bury herself said yesterday - somewhat ironically - you can never be sure about John Gollop’s vote until he presses the button.

Moving down P&R’s list of potential votes, next are probably Adrian Gabriel and Marc Leadbeater, both of whom are politically and temperamentally inclined to want to support this P&R. But Adrian Gabriel has indicated continuing reservations about GST (he unsuccessfully proposed an amendment to raise income tax instead) and Marc Leadbeater has said he believes P&R is trying to move too far, too soon on big tax reforms (he unsuccessfully proposed an amendment to make smaller changes now and defer the rest for reconsideration a year from now).

I can’t see any other member voting for P&R’s package.

In summary, as the final day of debate starts, this is how things look. 

If Neil Inder abstains, P&R needs one more vote to get its package across the line, and if he votes against P&R needs two more votes to get its package across the line, and if those one or two votes are there at all they belong to Tina Bury, John Gollop, Adrian Gabriel or Marc Leadbeater. 

That’s how I see it anyway.

Will we get a decision today?

States members are back debating at the Royal Court, starting at the slightly earlier time of 9am as they aim to reach a conclusion on P&R’s tax reform proposals.

We’ve picked up where we left off last night with debate on Deputy David Goy’s amendment 36.

He wants the States to investigate requiring a minimum tax contribution from future purchasers of open market properties who are shown to have considerable wealth.