Do taxes save lives?

Gareth Sutcliffe

Well put Fraser - this is a point that needs to be made again and again.

Ray

As a Christian myself (and notwithstanding my admiration for much of the good work that Christian Aid does in the Third World), this latest politically-correct canard is yet another example of how some of my fellow believers are in such a desperate hurry to be Good Samaritans that they sadly leave their critical faculties behind.

Ian C

I heard the Christian Aid man justifying this extra-ordinary piece of 'thinking' on R5 late last night. It is all based on about two or three layers of extrapolations of work done by on two "highly respected" academics whose 'work is accepted by the World Bank' etc. etc. Another piece of academic rubbish used by a charity to justify their existence, that the real world should ignore It is well known for its political aspirations as so many of the larger charities have become and sounds like another peice of socilaist clap-trap justifying nicking money from, in this case, companies in, or operating in, the Third World. Bizarre.

Austin Barry

So, 'We predict that illegal, trade-related tax evasion alone will be responsible for the deaths of some 5.6m children under the age of five between 2000 and 2015,' says Christian Aid director Daleep Mukarji". To paraphrase Frankie Howerd: Tosh and thrice Tosh.

Bean Counter

This report is desperately, disastrously wrong. The very idea that a parallel exists between the body that sets dull accounting rules and the planned extermination of the world's poor is shocking.

The entire report is predicated on the idea that governments use money responsibly, whereas companies use it to get up to no good. Not a great deal of evidence there, notably in the poorest nations on earth.

'Three cheers' for the rule of law and open, transparent rules under which companies may operate.

'Yah-boo-sucks' to corporate blackmailers masquerading as disciples of Christ who seek unilaterally to decide what is and is not 'acceptable' or 'moral' for a company or indeed an individual to do, irrespective of the law.

Ed

By the same logic of diverting money that could be spent on food, water and medicines for children, then I and my friends are directly responsible for killing children when I choose to buy the latest LCD TV rather than making do with my old style TV. Whole families are wiped out when I upgrade my car.

When will I be arrested for this senseless slaughter?

Ed

madasafish

>Bean Counter
Of course Governments use taxtaion monies wisely and responsibly.

We all know that.

We fund 2 wars, help BAE bribe people to sell weapons, spned billions on Olympic Games etc.

None of that money is wasted on the poor.

John W

It has been clumsily made, and indeed made by people who obviously don't have the strongest grasp of economic fundamentals (you're not the only one Fraser), but they do have a point.

Allow me to explain in more palatable language. Large multinational corporations often use their monopolistic powers in the locales of developing nations to distort the free market and turn the liberating benefits of trade into exploitation. One particular area they do this in is escaping the costs incumbent on a society due to their presence. In our fine free market, liberal democracies this public cost is paid through taxation, the state acting as an imperfect mechanism to remedy this fundamental problem. Indeed taxation in this situation is part of the rule of law upholding private property and individual liberty.

By avoiding paying tax in developing nations, MNC's are undermining the free market, exerting an untold degree of monopolistic power and damaging a part of the private property owned by the citizens of those nations.

Taxes save lives - sometimes.
I'm sure Jesus would have said the same thing.

John W

It is the amateurish (in its most negative sense) economist who merely thinks tax=bad, no tax=good.

If you are going to invoke trade as a beneficial practice, please be aware of the reasons it is held to be so at the very least.

J H Holloway

I spend quite a lot of time deep in the Guardian's CiF section, and there's a line of thinking - including Polly Toynbee - that says not hiking taxes on something should be regarded as a 'tax break'.

For example, not increasing fuel duty this autumn would be regarded as a tax break which is either 'undesirable' or 'something we should be grateful for'.

You can only wonder at what point these people think tax should peak

dearieme

I've just about given up donating to charities - and that's pretty much the reason.

Tim Worstall

Well, the incidence of corporation tax is actually mostly upon the workers in the form of lower wages. 70% of it according to the Congressional Budget Office. But yes, the main point still stads. People pay taxes, not companies.
I'm rather kicking myself for not spotting that obviouos objection to their argument.....

Scary Biscuits

Christian Aid should change its name to Material Aid.

Ray, the Christian Aid trendies are in no hurry to be Good Samaritans. That one from the bible (Luke 10) put his hand in his own pocket. This crowd want to put their hands in yours.

Ray

Scary Biscuit - a good (and very witty) point.
I guess that's why so many of these 'Good-Samaritans-in-a-hurry' are also Labour Party activists whilst the more discerning Christians amongst us are Tories (Ecclesiastes 10:2)

Trumpeter Lanfried

The give-away is their reference to 'tax DODGING, both legal and illegal' (my emphasis).

I hope the people who write this stuff are not guilty of (legal) tax 'dodging,' for example by claiming their personal allowances.

Richard Murphy

There's always an excuse for greed. Ample are on display here.

There's always an excuse not to do the right thing.

There's always an excuse to walk on the other side.

You clearly know them all.

Christian Aid is taking a bold and courageous step. It is chosing to walk with those who need tax revenue to build states free of corruption; to build representative democratic systems; to uphold the rule of law; to close the tax havens where corrupt rulers put their money in western owned banks.

It's saying tax provides sanitation and education and roofs over heads. Things that every parent wants for their child. It's saying that representation is not possible without taxation. We know this is true.

It's not saying this is the only problem in the world.

It's not saying this will solve every problem in the world.

It's not saying all tax systems are good.

It's not saying all governments are good.

It's not saying all companies are bad.

It's certainly not saying there's anything wrong with profit.

But it's saying there is a choice to be made here. A choice between paying tax or not. Of manipulating the system or not. Of using a tax haven, or not.

It's pointing out that this is a choice that literally has life and death consequences.

The comments made here seem to deny that this choice exists. Christian Aid is recognising the reality that it does and its implications. And it's saying that because this choice is real, is being made and has these consequnces it's wrong to be in denial about it.

It seems that almost all commentators here are suffering from that denial.

Why is that?

Richard Murphy FCA

Disclosure: I contributed to the Christian Aid report.

Richard Murphy

As if evidence were needed that transfer pricing abuse happens, note this:

http://www.thanhniennews.com/politics/?catid=1&newsid=38454

Richard Murphy FCA

Bean Counter

Richard. As one of the ‘right who are out in force’ you kindly mention in your blog, and as a mere ACA, I beg to raise a couple of points.

Can I be absolutely clear that I have no problem whatsoever with the rule of law and the need for democratically elected representatives to levy the taxes required to allow a given society to function properly. That’s the easy bit; the debate arises as to how much tax is enough, and how else the needs of a society can be met.

There is no doubt that vast areas of the world are in dire trouble and that the material needs of the majority of the world’s population are not met. So why does Christian Aid exist if the apparatus of government has so demonstrably failed to solve the problem in nation after nation? How will giving despotic regimes stronger tax-raising powers undermine despotic regimes? I have no answer to this, and I’m not sure Christian Aid does either.

It’s an ugly fact that greed is a part of our nature; absent greed, we might have ducked slavery, but we would still be dying of diseases long since conquered; climate change might be less pressing, but only because we would be living as subsistence farmers without the means to measure the carbon content of the atmosphere. In any event we wouldn’t be in the enviable position of being able to debate the problems of the world’s poor from the vantage point of wealth and security - we’d be part of the problem. Countless millions have died in the third world throughout history without our even being aware of it, let alone being able to help. This is a tragedy, but no less true for being so.

I would hope that ‘doing the right thing’ troubles no-one on this forum of right wing headbangers. The problem is ensuring that everyone has a common understanding of what ‘right’ is. ‘Right’ (like ‘fair’ and ‘just’) is one of Sir Humphrey’s irregular verbs - ‘I get a caution, you get 18 months for good behaviour, he gets his hand chopped off’. We need clarity.
If you choose to pay more tax than the rules require, by all means do so, but please don’t criticise an individual or company that quite legally pays only the tax required under law. Does Tax Research LLP (commendably tax efficient structure) choose to overpay tax?

Let me be absolutely clear – companies and individuals who act illegally should without exception be pursued and punished to the full extent of the law. This includes illegal structures set up and supported by the accounting profession, of which there are too many examples.

This is completely different from ‘making a choice about whether to pay taxes’. If the system is deficient (either in content or enforcement), I’m struggling to blame the companies for that. If a tax inspector can choose to invent an idea of ‘right’ that is not reflected in any law or regulation, how on earth can anyone comply? Is this ‘a choice to be made’ or the path to tyranny?

Dave

<<"Problem is, companies do not pay tax. Only people do. Every penny companies earn comes from people - the more the tax companies pay, the higher the goods prices and the less customers have in their pocket.">>

This is just profoundly untrue - many of these companies make billions which go to directors and shareholders etc. More tax would can also mean lower wages for the filthy rich, and reduced dividends.