I recently commented on how terribly ghastly being asked to pay back some money was for our beloved parliamentarians. I obviously didn’t realise just how terrible it was, but it seems to be causing some sort of mental aberration in Frank Field. Still using the defence that as he only claimed 30 to 50 % of what he was allowed to it must all have been utterly required for his parliamentary duties. He then goes on to say:
“Robert Verkaik in today’s Independent goes further. He argues that Sir Thomas Legg’s decision is not akin to retrospective changes to the criminal law, but to the changing of tax loopholes or windfall charges on corporations who have benefited from unintended legislative consequences.
The charges arising from the closing of tax loopholes, however, are never retrospectively imposed.”
Ok, once you’ve stopped laughing. I’m sure you can see the terrible effects the stress of having to pay back some money must have had on this poor poor man. The wind fall taxes certainly weren’t retrospectively imposed after the profits were made, the changes to VED in 2008 also obviously weren’t retrospective, and the tax man will never come after you years after you’ve made a mistake on your tax and had it seemingly approved and ask for it all back, plus interest. Oh and this Government has never argued:
“that retrospective taxation requires carefully scrutiny for its justification, but it is capable of being justified by sufficiently strong arguments.”
Obviously the only sensible way forward out of this mess is to create another bit of “non-retrospective” law to let them all off the hook and pay them suitable compensation for the mental anguish that being forced to lift their snouts biefly from the trough brief has obviously caused.
Update Anna Raccoon also points out the
‘pre-owned asset tax’ amongst others none of which could possibly be construed as retrospective tax or legislation, as those are bad.
