Notes on the Front

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

Programme for Government 3: Troubling the Peaceful Sleep of the Corporate Sector

A number of commentators have referred to the rejoicing of Fine Gael and Labour TDs (even if some were disappointed by Cabinet appointments or lack of).  There is another constituency which can also be particularly pleased – the corporate and business sectors. They have been exempted from making any contribution to repairing the public finances or providing resources for badly needed economic and social investment.

This shouldn’t be too surprising – the role of this sector rarely featured in the election debate. Still, with all that talk about ‘burden-sharing’ and ‘sharing the pain’ and ‘everyone making a contribution’, there might have been some anxious nights among corporate executives. But not to worry, the Programme for Government has allayed all fears. It specifically commits the new government to:

  • Keeping the corporate tax rate at 12.5%
  • Maintaining the standard 10.75% rate of employers PRSI

Whatever about the tax rate – which is now such a sacred cow we must bring the best of our harvest as offerings – the reference to employers’ PRSI is curious. In any event, employers’ PRSI for part-time, low-paid workers is to be halved for the next two-and-a-half years.

The Irish corporate and business sector makes the least contribution to public finances than almost all their counterparts in other EU-15 countries. In the Eurozone in 2008, the combined receipts from the combined corporate tax rate and employers’ PRSI reached 10.6 percent of GDP; in Ireland it reached 6.2 percent. We’d have to raise the corporate/business contribution to public finance by billions just to reach the Eurozone average.

Corporate Sector The employers’ PRSI rate, in particular, is low by EU standards. This is from a study that attempted to measure the effective rate of employers’ social insurance contributions. As can be seen, Ireland ranks at the bottom (with the UK, the two Anglo countries with the weakest social insurance systems). Irish employers’ PRSI would have to double to reach the EU average.

But anyone raising these points will be met with a tsunami of shock and horror. How can anyone propose imposing more costs on the business sector? This would harm competitiveness, lose jobs, drive enterprises into liquidation and spin the earth of its axis. Of course, this ignores the relative health of the corporate/business sector as a group (accepting that many businesses are under pressure – mostly from the austerity measures imposed by Government policy). For instance, Eurostat finds that in 2009:

So how can the Government get out of this commitment? By simply building on social insurance (it could also introduce a temporary corporate levy but that would take some courage). For instance, why shouldn’t employers’ pay half of the proposed mandatory health insurance packages? This might involve a new 2 percent social insurance levy for employers.

This would hardly affect our export competitiveness. According to the Forfas data, such a levy would amount to 0.2 percent of the turnover base of our manufacturing and internationally-traded services sector.

We’re going to have to start thinking brave thoughts, outside the box, taking on the dismal consensus and vested interest groups.

We’re going to have to start troubling the peaceful sleep of the corporate sector.

6 responses to “Programme for Government 3: Troubling the Peaceful Sleep of the Corporate Sector”

  1. Cian Avatar

    Your figures for profits as a share of value added are biased by money being passed through the country in an attempt to avoid tax, are they not? Making the ‘real’ figure likely to be far closer to the EU 15 average.

    Like

  2. Michael Taft Avatar

    Cian – yes, you are right to point out that ‘passing through money’ skewer our statistics. But its not just profits that get skewered, but value-added and gross output figures as well. Indeed, we have yet to calculate the full impact of multi-national accounting practices. However, the Eurostat calculation I refer to at least excludes financial companies, which would eliminate that area of skewer. The other big one – Chem/Pharms – are still in those figures but an admittedly back-of-the-envelope estimate using EU Klems data suggests that the degree of skewer might lower the hare of profits in value-added by two percentage points, max. However, I am open to correction.
    This is a big issue – especially as we rely on GDP and its components to give us an idea of the economy’s health. I will be poring into these numbers in the weeks ahead; both on this blog and over at Progressive-economy.ie

    Like

  3. liam Avatar

    Hi Michael,
    I came across this via the Naked Capitalism blog.
    http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2011/03/12/why-dont-all-major-unions-own-banks/
    Would this be something unions here might consider?

    Like

  4. Radler Avatar

    Michael, its an iron law of economics that the more you tax something, the less of it there is.
    Increasing taxes on jobs in the teeth of an epoch-defining jobs crisis is possibly the dumbest we could do right now.

    Like

  5. Tomboktu Avatar

    @Liam, there is a motion on Congress setting up a not-for-private profit bank on the agenda of the PSEU annual conference next month. A motion that can be adapted for use in other Irish trade unions has been posted on cedar Lounge Revolution: http://cedarlounge.wordpress.com/2011/01/22/that-co-op-bank-idea/

    Like

  6. liam Avatar

    Thanks Tomboktu
    I’ll watch that with interest.
    Liam

    Like

Leave a reply to Radler Cancel reply

Navigation

About

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