In the long term we cannot consume our planet
So tax has to ultimately discourage excessive consumption
As noted in previous comments, consumption = production and either and both are economic activity. He is insisting that we should all be taxed in order to make us poorer. Not, well, yes, but think of the joyous things we can buy with the tax: he is insisting that we must all be poorer.
The charge would be on flows through bank accounts excluding those under common control
It includes corporate bank accounts, of course it does.
I readily admit: this is an idea that I have not modelled as yet. The precise rate is not clear: they would be low.
But we can have a stab at it. He says no tax below £20k in this scheme. Just for ease of calculation call that £25k as we can pretend that that is mean income, close enough for this. All of the economy is income to someone: he’s not differentiating between labour and cap[ital income here.
So, the entire burden of the £100 billion in tax must be carried by the 50% of the economy on more than mean income. Economy is £1.7 trillion, meaning that the £100 billion must be coming from £850 billion in incomes and thus the rate is 12%.
12% on bank transactions, eh?
I could have made some horrible logical error there but I don’t see it if I have.
OK, you can split it out, 6% at the business end paying out and 6% at the receiving end but that’s still 12%.
But that does really have to be the rate. Simply because he’s exempting those below (or about-ish) mean income, and presumably everyone’s first 20k or so. And thus he’s trying to raise £100 billion from something that cannot be larger than £850 billion. Actually, given that his exemption is about mean (or median maybe) income then the rate would have to be higher than that, wouldn’t it?