tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8993615971333537173.post4266312886256103548..comments2024-01-26T16:33:37.692+00:00Comments on plumbum: Inexpert tax expertsPaulBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16861432701458977844noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8993615971333537173.post-90263658816341422012012-03-06T15:08:52.426+00:002012-03-06T15:08:52.426+00:00Ryan, seeing as you have removed your post, I have...Ryan, seeing as you have removed your post, I have removed my criticism of this reply - but I have some reservations about your post on mansion taxes....<br /><br />LukeLukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14014996272817759191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8993615971333537173.post-18314302692376631012012-03-06T13:34:29.613+00:002012-03-06T13:34:29.613+00:00This comment has been removed by the author.Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14014996272817759191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8993615971333537173.post-12324071899683305482012-03-06T08:42:39.770+00:002012-03-06T08:42:39.770+00:00Dear plumbum,
Interesting blog. When writing the ...Dear plumbum,<br /><br />Interesting blog. When writing the blog I did realise (but didn't write) that the remaining £30.7 billion was a tax liability, which would come from a £61.4 billion taxable income on those on £150k plus. The problem is that the static calculation to £6.1 billion ignores any behavioural changes. We know that in the 1980s the taxable income elasticity for high earners was 0.46. The IFS worked out that using this figure, the current 50p rate would be losing us money (I have not done my own analysis to check this, but they are usually quite accurate). In my view, given the increasingly globalised nature of the world, there are good reasons to expect this to be higher and so the behavioural effect to be even bigger.<br /><br />As for my critique of Richard Murphy, he has got it wrong on so many levels it's difficult to know where to start. Firstly he mistakes the tax liability for income. Then he takes 10% of it off, when in fact even if everyone's whole income was taxed by their marginal he should have taken 20% off.<br /><br />Ryan Bourne<br />CPSRyanBournehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13760596401157572039noreply@blogger.com