Notes on the Front

Commentary on Irish Political Economy by Michael Taft, researcher for SIPTU

Programme for Government 2: Welcome to the New Low-Tax Model, Same as the Old Tax Model (Only Worse)

During the campaign, Fine Gael accused Labour of being a high-tax party, based on some artful manipulation of numbers. The fact is that is there was little difference between the two parties over the amount of taxation they proposed to raise up to 2014 (Fine Gael proposed to raise €2.7 billion while Labour intended to raise €2.9 billion – and both of these were less than Fianna Fail’s target of €3 billion).

And therein lies the problem; for both parties signalled during the campaign that they would maintain the low-tax model. Indeed, it could turn out even more low-tax than it was before. This will put downward pressure on future spending on public services, investment and income support.

Low Tax 1 What are the comparisons with other EU states? Using the Fianna Fail tax projections (which both Government parties accepted during the campaign) we find the following: namely, that Irish taxation, as measured as a % of GDP, will continue to remain low and lag European norms.

But we should bear in mind that by 2014 we will be making more interest payments. When we factor this in we can see how really low our new low-tax model will be. For instance, in 2007, Ireland had to raise 1.4 percent of GDP in taxes to make interest payments; in 2014 we will have to raise 5.5 percent of GDP in taxes to make interest payment. So when we remove the amount tax earmarked for interest payments, what do we have left?

Low Tax 2 The amount of tax available for public services, investment and income support falls considerably. And it should be borne in mind that by 2014 the state will have to absorb higher unemployment and related payments than prior to the recession (the EU Commission estimates that Irish unemployment will still be in double figures) and increased pensioner payments. This raises questions about how we are going to fund public services, investment and other income supports in addition to higher unemployment and pensioner expenditure.

Of course, there is the perennial question of whether we should use GDP or GNP (or GNI) as the comparator. This debate can sometimes become scholastic. Let’s cut across this by examining a more precise measurement – Government revenue per capita in 2012 as projected by the EU Commission (for Ireland I use the Fianna Fail budgetary projections which will be adhered to by the new Government)

Low Tax 3 Ireland would have to raise Government revenue (primarily taxation) by over 20 percent just to reach the average EU tax revenue per capita. However, when we exclude interest payments – which allows us to focus on how much tax revenue is raised per capita for spending on public services, investment and income support – we find that Ireland would have to raise taxation by over 27 percent.

That’s how low tax is falling in our low-tax economy.

Unless the new Government has a radical re-think of policy post-2012, we will find ourselves raising less and less tax to cover public services, investment and income support, while falling further and further behind European norms.

6 responses to “Programme for Government 2: Welcome to the New Low-Tax Model, Same as the Old Tax Model (Only Worse)”

  1. Joe Holt Avatar
    Joe Holt

    Gilmore’s assertion that no one earning less than €100K per annum should pay more tax struck a raw nerve. Many of is would give our right arm for a job paying one third of this. It shows where his priorities lie. Equality and egalitarianism are well down the line.

    Like

  2. tom Avatar

    As well as seeing that the EU average tax is much higher, it would be interesting to get some sense of how the average euro tax take is spread out – it is a hard sell at the moment to tell people they are under taxed.
    Is there any rough guide to how much is typically raised in income tax, vat, local taxes etc.
    It would be particularly interesting to see how much of the difference comes in corporation tax – the general consensus that we muct protect our 12.5% rate at all costs might be challenged if it turns out that we must all pay a substantial penalty in order to do so.

    Like

  3. Michael Taft Avatar

    Joe – the point you make is well taken. It is curious that a couple on €180,000 a year is guaranteed ‘no tax rise’. However, the key metric is not so much the ‘marginal tax rate’ (the rate at which you pay for every extra Euro you earn) but rather the ‘effective tax rate’ – that is, the amount of tax you pay as a proportion of your income. You can raise the latter without touching the former – mostly through removing inequitable tax reliefs, allowances and exemptions. The new Programme commits itself to removing tax shelters (and Ireland ranks high in tax shelters). Hopefully this will happen.
    Tom – I will shortly be doing up such a comparison based on per capita revenue, broken down by income tax, PRSI, VAT and corporate tax rate. Then we’ll be able to see where Ireland falls down.

    Like

  4. Billy O'Mahony Avatar
    Billy O’Mahony

    Two very quick points:
    1. As everyone knows our large exporting FDI sector artifically inflates our GDP figure; Would it not be more accurate to take Govt. Revenue as a percentage of GNP.
    2. Another factor which is currently inflating our GDP figure is our massive borrowings. If we had more sustainable borrowing levels (such as those of the countries you are comparing us to) the GDP/GNP figure would be lower making the % govt revenue figure look a higher and more in line with the comparison countries.
    Accounting for both these would make the denomintor figure a lot smaller and thereby make us look like a more highly taxed economy.

    Like

  5. Billy O'Mahony Avatar
    Billy O’Mahony

    One more point or query rather. Can you clarify what you mean by “Government Revenue”? Is this “Exchequer Revenue”? If so then it omits not only about 9bn of PRSI; but also omits rates & motor tax, accounting for a further 3bn or so.
    That is from Seamus Coffey’s blog post http://economic-incentives.blogspot.com/2010/10/low-tax-economy.html
    I do enjoy your blog by the way keep up the good work!

    Like

  6. Michael Taft Avatar

    Billy, thanks for the comments – and I’m glad you referred to Seamus’s blog which is excellent.
    On the the first question – the ol’ GDP vs. GNP debate – you might be interested in this post I did on Progressive-Economy: http://www.progressive-economy.ie/2011/03/how-not-to-read-taxation-statistics.html
    It doesn’t attempt to resolve that important debate but it introduces a new measurement – Government revenue per capita. This is not ultimate measurement but tries to put the debate in perspective.
    I’m not sure what you mean by suggesting our massive borrowing boosts our GDP but I think I do. There’s a number of ways to construct this – but I’ve always viewed our massive borrowings as subsidising the collapse in GDP, partly brought on by Government deflationary/austerity measures.
    Regarding Governent Revenue – that refers to all revenue the Government accumulates at all levels of Government: national, local, income tax, PRSI, etc. It also includes a small element of non-tax revenue such as dividends from public enterprises, etc.

    Like

Leave a comment

Navigation

About

Commentary on Irish Political Economy by Michael Taft, researcher for SIPTU