A fiscal fiasco
O Editorial de hoje do Financial Times traz-nos uma analise interessante sobre politica fiscal. Alistair Darling, o Ministro Britanico das Financas e duramente criticado por ter sugerido, e mais tarde se retratado, que o seu 'estado maior' levaria a cabo uma campanha contra estrangeiros ricos que vivem na Gra-Bretanha e nao pagam o fisco neste pais.

A consequencia imediata destas declaracoes foi um mal estar no distrito financeiro de Londres, que pode levar a uma saida galopante de recursos financeiros de Londres para outras capitis financeiras competitivas como Monaco e Suica, considerados 'paraisos fiscais'.


Uma licao para nossos decision-makers!

Para mais pormenores nada melhor do que beber a agua de lanho no proprio envolucro:


If you let your opponent write the script, you cannot expect to enjoy the story. This is the harsh truth for Alistair Darling from the fiasco over plans for a tax crackdown on wealthy foreigners. Tuesday’s climbdown on the new regime for residents who claim “non-domiciled” status is the latest episode in a humiliating saga that began when the government allowed the opposition Conservative party to shape its financial statement last autumn. Gordon Brown and his chancellor of the exchequer cannot afford to make the same mistake in next month’s Budget.

Under fire over plans to impose an annual charge of £30,000 on non-doms who have lived in the UK for seven years, along with changes to residency rules and offshore trusts, the Treasury has gone some way to meet its critics. Works of art for public display will not be hit, and the new regime will not require extra financial disclosures. These are welcome moves. But some basic points have yet to be settled, such as whether the US authorities will allow the charge to be creditable against US tax and about the treatment of trusts. These unanswered questions are unacceptable in a tax that is due to take effect so soon.

The shambles has much in common with the botched reform of capital gains tax. In both cases, there was too little thought about how the changes would work in practice. Announcing the moves before consulting produced uncertainty, making it harder for individuals to plan their affairs. Meanwhile, the Treasury has looked too weak to make the argument in principle for reform.

In the midst of this mess, Mr Darling must use the Budget to carry out some repairs to the government’s damaged reputation.

He should draw on outside expertise to adopt a new set of fiscal rules to replace his predecessor’s self-imposed limits, which have lost credibility. He also should tackle the fiscal deficit, preferably by lowering growth in public spending but otherwise by a phased, multi-year tightening of fiscal policy.

Third, Mr Darling should aim for simplicity. This is difficult, since a genuinely simpler fiscal regime involves an underlying clarity about the purposes of the tax system. Fourth, though it is an advance on the Blair-Brown years that the prime minister’s office takes part in pre-Budget discussions, Mr Darling must make sure that tax policy is written not in Downing Street but in the Treasury.

The government’s claim to competence has been so discredited that Mr Darling’s Budget cannot alone recover it. But it should be a start.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008