Letter: Fiscal policy befitting a world of globalised competition
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: You are no doubt right (leading article, 30 September) to point out certain basic tenets about prudent taxation. What is missing, however, from the entire debate concerning taxation is a realisation of changed context in which macroeconomic policy must speak in a world of globalised competition.
It was possible through much of the post-war period to follow Keynesian rules of fiscal policy. Keynes saw the problem of the capitalist economy as lack of effective demand which could lock it into a stable position of below full employment. To remedy this he advocated use of fiscal policy - taxation as well as expenditure - to ensure that demand stayed high. Much of this policy was directed towards keeping consumption high. Redistribution instincts chimed happily with needs of full employment.
Today, though we still have a recession, it would be folly to see the British economy's problem as stemming from a lack of effective demand. Even out of the recession, we are unlikely to achieve a level of unemployment below two million. This is because the problem is not lack of demand but exactly the opposite, inadequate supply. Our chronic trade deficit and the present high level of public sector borrowing requirement indicate over- consumption as the problem. The counterpart of this over-consumption is insufficient investment. In a globalised context, there is always a demand for exports if we are competitive. To be competitive we must invest more.
Thus, the first priority is to redirect fiscal policy away from its pro- consumption bias. If, in addition, we should like to preserve the redistributive stance, as I certainly would, it must be consumption at the upper end of the income scale that must be taxed. One way to do this would be to adjust income
tax by allowing for deduction of savings, so that it becomes an expenditure tax. A progressive expenditure tax has a lot to recommend itself.
The current debate has unfortunately polarised as between direct (ie, income) taxation and indirect taxation (ie, value added tax). But even here it is a fallacy to view taxation in isolation from the structure of income entitlements. By increasing entitlements for those at the bottom, but using a broader based VAT, the fiscal structure may be left redistributive while enhancing revenue. It is a second best, of course, but in economic debates crippled with political cliches, one often has to move by subterfuge.
Yours sincerely,
MEGHNAD DESAI
Centre for the Study of
Global Governance
London, WC2
30 September
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments