Select Committee on Treasury Written Evidence


Memorandum submitted by the Confederation of British Industry

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

  1.  On balance, there was very little in the Chancellor's Spring statement that might help business competitiveness and stimulate investment. While the CBI welcomes a number of measures, the Chancellor has failed to heed CBI warnings about the effect of high taxes and help UK business in this era of globalisation. Both taxes and spending are forecast to rise beyond what he predicted only back in December.

  2.  Some of the announcements (and re-announcements) of this year's Budget Report were welcome and will provide some benefit to both business and the UK economy in the areas of:

    —  Freezing of main road fuel duties until September.

    —  Introduction of REITs.

    —  Extension of the R&D tax credit.

    —  Progress on the deregulation agenda.

    —  A promise to maintain dialogue on simplifying the corporation tax system.

    —  Promises of public sector pay restraint.

    —  Introduction of vehicles to improve funding for SMEs.

    —  Overhaul of UK Trade & Investment and City of London Strategy.

    —  Proposals to improve procurement in PFI contracts.

    —  Increase in long-dated gilt funding.

    —  Additional funding for schools.

  3.  However, business will have some major reservations:

    —  Failure to reduce the business tax burden.

    —  Failure to restrain public spending over the next two years, ahead of the restraint pencilled in for the 2007 Comprehensive Spending Review.

    —  Abolition of tax benefits available under the Home Computer Initiative.

    —  Failure to address tax anomalies, specifically to help SMEs.

    —  New "anti-avoidance" measures which may exceed countering genuine "abuse".

    —  Large increases in duty on rebated fuels from September 2006.

  This analysis is set out as follows:

    —  An overview of new measures with a specific fiscal impact.

    —  CBI views on specific areas of policy.

    —  An overview of the projections for the economy and public finances.

    —  An analysis of international tax comparisons.

 (A)   An overview of measures with a specific fiscal impact

  4.  Table 1 sets out the impact of the new policy announcements in terms of revenue transfers between the state and other parts of the economy. For business, the only measurable tax "benefits" came from the freezing of the main road fuel duties for six months and the extension of the R&D tax credit. The cost to the Exchequer from the Climate Change Levy reflects the signing of Climate Change Agreements in January 2006, rather than a reduction, and ignores the distributional impact within British business. The introduction of REITs is expected to raise revenue in the near-term through the up-front conversion charge. The headline business tax rise is a net £127 million over the next three years, excluding any impact on legitimate business activity of measures introduced under the "anti-avoidance" banner.

Table 1

TOTAL IMPACT OF BUDGET
Approximate £ million yield (+) or cost (-) to Exchequer relative to baseline1 2006-072007-082008-09
Extending the R&D tax credit0 -15-15
Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs)+35 +155+130
Changes to Climate Change Levy-20 -20+-25
Fuel Duty Measures2-98 +75+80
Other Business tax measures3-20 -50-85


Measures directly affecting business
-103+145 +85


Personal taxes, tax credits and benefits
-153+80-10
Other tax measures4+295 +760+630
Spending measures-420 -5700


Total Impact
-380 +415+705

1  The baseline includes up-rating many duties and levies in line with inflation. Hence the exchequer "loses" for example by freezing main road fuel duties for six months, even though there is no actual cashflow benefit to business.

2  Including increased rebated fuel duty and a half share of the main fuel duty freeze.

3  Including: changes to venture capital schemes; changes to group relief in corporation tax; film tax reliefs; aggregates levy freeze; water efficiency capital allowances; landfill tax credits.

4  Measures described as "protecting tax revenues".

  5.  The CBI was disappointed that the Chancellor failed to take the opportunity to reduce the business tax burden by getting a tighter grip on public spending. The removal of tax anomalies and other measures to promote enterprise (SMEs), which would have had near-negligible cost for the Treasury, were not taken up. Instead, business has seen a number of revenue-raising measures with only modest measures to support business competitiveness, resulting in a higher tax burden.

Table 2

BUDGET REPORT MEASURES: CBI REACTION
Measures that the CBI welcomedMeasures of concern to the CBI Measures that the CBI was disappointed not to see included
Freezing main road fuel duties for this year.
Draft legislation to introduce Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs).
Extension of the R&D tax credit, support for science and innovation.
A promise to maintain dialogue on the corporation tax system.
Commitment to an average pay settlement of 2.25% in the public sector.
Introduction of Enterprise Capital Funds and enhancements to the Enterprise Investment Scheme.
Overhaul of UKTI and announcement of the City of London strategy.
Proposals to improve procurement in PFI contracts.
Increase in long-dated gilt funding.
Additional funding for schools.
Further increase in government spending and taxation relative to the December PBR projections.
Further large increases in duty on rebated oil and gas.
Computers loaned by employers to be taxed as a benefit in kind.
Increase in the climate change levy.
Further "anti-avoidance" measures, which may go beyond countering genuine abuse.
Reduction in the business tax burden.
Commitment to a firmer grip on public spending.
Removal of anomalies in the tax system and other measures to promote enterprise (SMEs).
Report on the administrative cost of regulation imposed on business.


 (B)   Views on specific areas of policy

Corporation tax

  6.  While companies will instinctively welcome the government's commitment to further dialogue, any reform would have to enhance the tax competitiveness of all business sectors to protect our economy's place in the global pecking order. By contrast, further uncertainty and change in the tax system, without achieving a reduction in the total business tax and cost burden, would risk making matters worse.

Enterprise measures

  7.  Despite a number of positive measures announced, the Budget was a missed opportunity to address some of the more fundamental issues preventing business growth. Following CBI lobbying, the Chancellor announced a commitment to radically rationalise the number of business support services. The government will also proceed with Enterprise Capital Funds, with a further £100 million provided over the next two years. A new 30% rate of income tax relief for investment in Venture Capital Trusts (VCTs) was announced. While this was an increase on the 20% planned rate, it was down from 40% currently provided. This change was part of a package, including:

    —  refocusing of the "gross assets test" to £7 million immediately before investment and £8 million afterwards;

    —  increasing the minimum holding period for new shares in VCTs to five years; and

    —  a doubling of the annual Enterprise Investment Scheme investment limit eligible for income tax relief to £400,000.

Better regulation agenda

  8.  The CBI welcomes the continued focus on implementing the Hampton Review's riskbased approach to regulation. We believe this can help to ensure that regulation is well targeted and result in a more appropriate public policy environment for business. The CBI would support a single and consistent statutory code that focuses on enforcement principles for all regulatory bodies. However, such a code must neither add to the complexity or cost of enforcing regulation nor constrain the flexibility of regulators in their day-to-day dealings with business.

  9.  We were disappointed that there was no cross-government announcement on the measurement of the administrative cost of regulation imposed on business. The government must remain committed to this exercise and publish detailed targets across government departments for reducing administrative burdens. HMRC, however, did report on the tax administration burden and set targets to reduce this over five years by 10% for forms and returns and by at least 15% for HMRC audits and inspections. This falls short of matching the Dutch government's 25% reduction over four years we have called for.

  10.  In terms of EU regulatory reform, the Budget has restated the measures announced during the UK's recent EU Presidency. We hope that the European Commission's proposed list of legislation that could be revised or dropped indicates a genuine policy shift in Brussels. It will, as always, be implementation that counts and that will depend ultimately on the Commission's and Member governments' resolve.

Home Computer Initiative

  11.  Reaction from CBI members has been universally negative to the announcement that tax benefits available under the Home Computer Initiative (HCI) will not be available for new agreements commencing on or after 6 April. The move was made without any consultation with employers' or employees' bodies, in contrast to the extensive consultation that preceded its creation. HCI schemes have proved highly popular since their introduction only three years ago, with more than 1,250 employers now operating them—three times more than in 2004. Figures from the Home Computing Initiative Alliance show that many more companies had intended to roll out new schemes.

  12.  Many low income employees have already benefited from the scheme, with their families gaining too—including through enhancement of their children's education and IT skills. But many of their work colleagues—along with many others—will now be denied that opportunity. Many CBI members have told us that initial roll-out has been a success, but that many more employees were expected to take up HCI schemes over the coming years.

  13.  Initial claims by the Treasury that the scheme had benefited too many higher-rate tax payers seem wide of the mark, with research by the HCI Alliance finding that 75% of employees purchasing computer equipment through the HCI are basic or starting rate taxpayers, and 59% "blue collar" workers. If is true that the HCI has been open to misuse, then the best way forward would be for the Treasury to consult with business on how to redraw the boundaries of the scheme to prevent that, rather than simply abolishing it altogether.

  14.  Employers who invested significant time and resource in setting up arrangements will now have to tell a disappointed workforce that the scheme is no longer available. Much of the investment in set-up costs will have been wasted. The abolition will also have a severe impact on IT providers who have invested heavily in HCI arrangements, and who had made this investment on the understanding that tax exemptions would remain in place for a full five years from 2004.

International trade and competitiveness

  15.  The overhaul of UK Trade & Investment and, in particular, the increased focus on China and India, will be warmly welcomed by business. UK companies need support as they seek to establish themselves and succeed in fiercely competitive overseas markets. But to help deliver these ambitions, previous ill-judged cutbacks to UKTI's budget must be reconsidered.

  16.  At the same time, Britain's financial services sector—especially London's international financial markets—is critical in providing the finance for UK companies to expand in these growing markets. We welcome the government's desire to strengthen London's position as the pre-eminent global financial centre. However, given that this success cannot be taken for granted, we wish to see action to ensure that London remains in front.

Science, technology and innovation

  17.  The CBI is pleased that the government wishes to improve the effectiveness of the R&D tax credit, subject to state aid approval from European Commission. The government intends to extend the higher rate (150%) tax credit to companies with up to 500 employees. The effective reduction in R&D costs would be between 9.5% and 15% depending on the corporation tax rate paid by the company. The CBI also supports the government's desire to extend the tax credit to companies with up to 500 employees that are not in profit.

  18.  The CBI welcomes the wider remit of the business led Technology Strategy Board (TSB) and the government's desire to make it more independent. We also support the intention to merge the health research budgets into a single fund of at least £1 billion. The intention to replace the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) with a metricsbased system to simplify the research funding for universities is very much welcomed. However, it is essential that the metrics chosen are outcome-oriented and place more emphasis on the value of conducting research of relevance to the UK economy (eg research collaboration with business, the NHS etc).

Transport and the environment

  19.  The CBI welcomes the further six-month freeze in main road fuel duties, given continued volatility in oil markets and the current level of oil prices. However, we are disappointed that the announcement does not take into account the impact of maintaining the differential on users of rebated fuels. From 1 September 2006 duty on rebated gas (used for some off-road transport) will rise by 19% and rebated oil (used heavily by some businesses in Northern Ireland) by 21%.

  20.  The announcement of freezes in the rates of the aggregates levy and air passenger duty (APD) are more welcome developments. We also welcome the creation of a new National Institute of Energy Technologies and a fund of up to £30 million to help bring forward innovative technologies that reduce natural resource use and improve energy efficiency, waste and pollution management.

  21.  The increase in the climate change levy (CCL) rates in line with inflation from 2007 will provide a significant additional burden for manufacturers on top of rapidly rising energy prices. We have seen little evidence to support claims that the CCL has been effective in delivering emissions reductions in the commercial business sector. The Climate Change Agreements (CCAs), in contrast, have been effective in achieving emissions reductions and we welcome the extension of the CCAs to heat treatment, calcium carbonate, compressed gases and kaolinitic clay sectors.

  22.  We support the emphasis on involving consumers in tackling climate change, including new measures to improve household energy efficiency and tackle private transport, specifically:

    —  £5 million earmarked for trialling of smart energy meters, which have the potential to improve quality of information on residential electricity demand and better educate consumers about energy use;

    —  £50 million to support the wider use of micro-generation technologies in social housing and schools, bringing forward the Energy Efficiency Commitment to insulate 250,000 homes and extending the Landlord Energy Saving Allowance to encourage draught proofing and insulation of hot water systems; and

    —  reform of the vehicle excise duty (VED) banding structure, including reducing to zero the rate for cars with the very lowest emissions and introducing a new top band for the most polluting cars.

Property and planning

  23.  The modest increase in the residential stamp duty threshold to £125,000 from £120,000 will do little to reduce the transaction costs for first time buyers, especially in the southern regions of England. There was no announcement on the outcome of the Planning Gain Supplement consultation, which remains a concern to business.

  24.  The CBI welcomes the move to include legislation for REITs in the 2006 Finance Bill. Whilst the reduction in the required distribution rate to 90% and the interest cover ratio to 1.25, it remains to be seen if the overall structure will provide the right operating framework. Given that the Treasury expects to raise £320 million from REITS over the next three years, as a result of setting an up-front 2% conversion charge, there are questions about whether the net result will be to encourage greater investment in property.

"Anti-avoidance" measures

  25. The Budget documentation under the section "protecting tax revenues" introduces a package of measures described as "tackling tax fraud and avoidance". The Treasury expects these to raise revenues of just under £1.7 billion over the next three years. Whilst we have no objection to the countering of "missing trader fraud"—a VAT evasion issue—the CBI will be examining the detail of the remaining measures when the Finance Bill is published. We will lobby against any aspects of these measures, which go beyond straightforward countering of genuine "abuse" and do not adhere to the five policy principles we set out in our Budget 2006 submission.

Gilt financing arrangements

  26.  The Chancellor announced that in future the share of long-dated gilts would rise from just under half to around two-thirds of total issuance, though total issuance was slightly lower than had been expected. Whilst this will help to ease the pressure on pension funds, it amounts to no more than a short-term partial fix which will provide the Exchequer with lower debt servicing costs.

  27.  We would like the government to undertake a serious examination of the regulatory pressures that encourage increasingly risk-averse investments by pension funds. These regulatory pressures—most recently the vicious cycle of increasing deficits due to forced buying of long-dated gilts—actually undermine the stated goal of more secure retirements.

Public sector pay and pensions

  28.  We welcome the Chancellor's promise to clamp down on public sector pay inflation, with settlements expected to average 2.25% next year. The public services need to show the same degree of wage restraint being seen in the private sector whilst improving productivity, which continues to lag the private sector. However, the public sector retirement age issue has not gone away and it is very disappointing that no mention was made of this.

Private finance initiative

  29.  The CBI welcomes the Treasury's proposals to improve procurement in PFI projects, as too much money is being wasted on delays and action is overdue. In particular we are keen to support the new Partnerships UK Operational Taskforce in its work on the operational phase of PFI projects. Business welcomes the continued commitment to PFI investment and would like to see an increased role to work in partnership with government.

Gershon efficiency review

  30.  Business believes that progress on the Gershon efficiency review has been patchy. Ninety per cent of businesses do not believe that the government will meet their targets. The government now claims to have saved £6.4 billion as of December 2005. However, the National Audit Office has cast doubt on the previous £4.7 billion figure of September 2005, given the difficulties in measuring efficiency savings. Some progress has clearly been made, such as in the appointment of professional finance directors in government departments, but it has been slow—only 60% of these are now in post. Despite the loss of some posts (the government claims a 40,391 reduction), overall civil service numbers have not been reduced. The growth in civil service numbers has merely been slowed.

  31.  Business is keen to see much greater use of shared services to drive efficiency. For example, the new Ministry of Defence HR contract with EDS, Liverpool Direct and the reforms of the Teacher Pensions Agency show the way. The Government should also improve on the current level of skills and abilities within departments to ensure delivery. Existing programmes such as the Departmental Capability Reviews and the Professional Skills for Government programme are simply not adequate for this purpose.

Skills and training

  32.  The additional funding for schools is welcome, but must be focused on raising the number of school-leavers with adequate literacy and numeracy skills. If the UK is to compete in the global market place we need to improve our skills base—but we produce far too few students with high quality maths and science skills. The announced recruitment and training of science teachers is therefore welcome. Currently a quarter of schools do not have physics specialists and 37% of science departments use teachers from other subjects to teach science.

  33.  The CBI also welcomes the confirmation that the government intends to take forward recommendations in the Foster Report to reform the FE sector, but delivery will be key—details will be announced in a White Paper expected at the end of March. Removing funding from failing further education courses and colleges is a step in the right direction and business will help identify which courses make the grade.

 (C)   Projections for the economy and public finances

  34.  The new Treasury forecasts were announced, although there were no changes of note from the December Pre-Budget Report. The Chancellor still expects economic growth for this year of 2.0-2.5%, rising to 2.75-3.25% for 2007 and 2008. We are sceptical that these forecasts for 2007 and 2008 can be met, for two reasons. Firstly, we view the degree of spare capacity in the economy as relatively modest, precluding two years of above-trend growth. Secondly, in the near-term we have doubts about the ability of consumer spending and business investment to grow as robustly as the Treasury expects. As a result, the CBI forecasts GDP growth of 2.3% this year and 2.5% next.

  35.  Based on the associated forecast for tax revenues, the Chancellor expects his "golden rule" to be met in this current cycle. The CBI, however, remains less sanguine about the state of the public finances.

  The Chancellor still expects to meet his "golden rule" on his extended economic cycle running from 1997-98 to 2008-09 by a margin of £16 billion. However, if we exclude the Annual Managed Expenditure margin, which may be required for contingencies such as further spending in Iraq, the "effective" margin on the "golden rule" is lower.

    —  He is also now forecasting higher borrowing for both 2005-06 and 2006-07 than he was in December. This is partially offset by expected improvements to other fiscal years including 2007-08, although this is helped by the robust growth forecast about which we have doubts.

    —  Public sector net borrowing over the 2004-05 to 2006-07 period is £3.4 billion higher than the December projections.

  36.  We are disappointed that the Chancellor has again failed to get a tighter grip on public spending ahead of the Comprehensive Spending Review window commencing in 2008-09. The tax burden will continue to rise rather than be reduced on the government's projections, which will erode the UK's international competitiveness further. In the year ahead it will be 38.0% of GDP—the highest since 1985-86. It is projected to level off at 38.7% of GDP by 2008-09—up from 38.5% of GDP in the December PBR—which would be the highest since 1984-85.

Table 3

THE BUDGET AND THE PUBLIC FINANCES1
£ billion2004-05 2005-062006-07 2007-082008-09 2009-1012010-11
HMT forecast of PSNB2—
December `05
38.8 37.033.531 262322
-March 06
39.7 37.135.9 302524 23


-Change
0.9 0.12.4 -1-11 1


Of which: Rise in planned
spending2
3.73.32.2 233 5
Fall in projected
revenues3
-2.9 -3.10.2-3 -4-3-3


Due to Economy
- -2.0-0.6 -0.3
Due to Budget decisions4
- -0.4-0.4 -0.7

1  For 2007-08 onwards, figures are available to the nearest £ billion. Some calculations may be affected by rounding.

2  Spending and revenue figures are equally biased upwards due to data revisions, for example the inclusion of the BBC—however, these modest impacts are offsetting, so have no impact on the borrowing data.

3  A negative figure implies a rise in revenues.

4  A positive figure implies a negative yield to the Exchequer. (See Table 1 for a breakdown.)

 (D)   International tax comparisons

  37.  The CBI Budget 2006 submission urged the Chancellor to reduce the UK business tax burden to help business competitiveness and to stimulate investment. We highlighted that not only had the rise in the UK tax burden since 1997 exacerbated the pressures facing business, but that this was at a time when our competitors were taking tax competitiveness seriously and reducing taxes. The net result has been a deterioration in the UK's international tax competitiveness, which is set to worsen on current government plans.

Business tax burden

  38.  Latest international comparisons are only possible for 2003, for the "basic" business tax burden comprising profits taxes, employer taxes, business rates, and business transport taxes. [33]

  39.  On this basis, the UK burden was then 8.5% of GDP—above Ireland (7.4%) and the US (6.9%). Interestingly, profits taxation in Ireland raised 3.8% of GDP compared with our 2.8%, "despite"—though arguably because of—its very low corporation tax rate (Note Ireland reduced its corporation tax rate to 12.5% in 2002 from 38.5% in 1996).

  40.  If this measure of the burden were pushed up to 10.2% of GDP by 2006-07, as government plans imply, it would overtake the Netherlands (8.6%) and Germany (9.0%), leaving France (12.4%) as the only one of our top five trading partners with a higher burden on this measure. Considering that even France reduced its corporation tax rate to 34.4% in 2005, the current UK standard corporation tax rate of 30% is no longer so competitive.

Table 4

MAJOR BUSINESS TAXES AS % GDP (2003)
USGermany FranceIreland Nethlds. UK UK 06-07
Business profits taxes2.1 1.72.53.8 2.92.83.9
Employer NICs & payroll taxes (ex Government) 2.96.08.5 2.13.93.0 3.5
Business rates and similar taxes1.7 0.30.50.3 0.61.61.7
Business share of road fuel and vehicle duties 0.21.10.8 1.21.11.1 1.1
6.99.0 12.47.4 8.68.510.2


  Source:   OECD Revenue Statistics (2005) UK 2006-07 is CBI estimate based on Budget Report 2006 figures.

Total tax burden

  41.  Between 1996 and 2004, the average overall tax burden of the OECD group of 30 countries barely changed, to end at 36.3% of GDP. Over the period 11 countries cut their tax burdens, including every G7 member except the UK, as well as key UK trading partners Ireland and the Netherlands. While the UK raised its tax burden over that time, 15 other OECD members cut theirs, including all of the six other G7 states. As a result of the various shifts, the UK tax burden has moved from being clearly below the OECD average (34.7% of GDP versus 36.2%) to barely below it (36.1% versus 36.3%).

  42.  The UK has slipped from having the 12th lowest tax burden of the 30, to the 16th lowest—along the way being "overtaken" by Germany and Canada amongst others. This deterioration in the UK's international tax competitiveness has seen it slide down the OECD tax table from a "low-to-medium tax" economy to a mid-table "medium tax" economy.

  43.  Through to 2007-08 if the other OECD countries held their total tax burdens at 2004 levels, while HM Treasury's target was met, the UK would fall to 19th place with total taxes accounting for 38.5% of GDP. The UK tax burden would be around two percentage points of GDP higher than the average, four points higher than Germany and half as much again as in the US.

Table 5

TAX REVENUES AS % GDP (COUNTRIES LISTED BY 1996-2004 CHANGE)


Total tax burden Rank out of OECD 30
Change in
burden
1996120042 2007-0831996 2004
Slovak Republic38.330.8 187 -7.5
Greece40.235.7 1915 -4.5
Hungary40.737.7 2019 -3.1
Finland40.744.3 2826 -3.0
Canada35.933.0 1410 -2.9
United States28.325.4 54 -2.9
Ireland32.930.2 96 -2.7
Poland36.834.2 1711 -2.7
Netherlands41.639.3 2220 -2.3
Luxembourg42.640.6 2421 -2.0
Germany36.534.6 1612 -1.9
Japan26.525.3 43 -1.2
Italy42.742.2 2523 -0.5
France44.143.7 2625 -0.4
Denmark49.849.6 2929 -0.2
Sweden50.450.7 3030 -0.2
New Zealand35.035.4 1314 0.3
Austria42.442.9 2324 0.5
Belgium45.045.6 2728 0.6
Switzerland28.329.4 65 1.1
Czech Republic36.537.6 1518 1.2
Australia30.431.6 79 1.2


United Kingdom
34.7 33.138.5 12161.4


Mexico
16.7 18.511 1.8
Portugal34.437.1 1117 2.7
Spain31.535.1 813 3.6
Norway41.144.9 2127 3.8
Korea20.024.6 22 4.6
Turkey25.431.1 38 5.6
Iceland33.341.9 1022 8.6


OECD Average
36.2 36.3 0.1


  1  For Slovakia, the 1998 figure is used.

  2  For Greece, Poland, Japan, Australia and Portugal, the 2003 figures are used.

  3  HM Treasury Budget Report 2006, this would leave the UK 19th if all other countries' burdens were left unchanged.

  Source:   OECD Revenue Statistics 2005.

CBI Economic Analysis Group

27 March 2006






33   It is extremely difficult to add in an appropriate share of property transfer tax, miscellaneous green levies, etc. However, these are in any case comparatively unimportant. Back


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2006
Prepared 2 May 2006