So, a question: should the group have been able to enjoy £103 million of tax subsidies for its losses because other companies in the Arcadia Group were presumably able to offset these against liabilities owing?
Is there good reason why the state should support continually loss making companies in this way?
Is a time limit on the number of years during which losses will be supported appropriate?
Would this sum have been better used helping clear the pension deficit?
I think these are appropriate questions to ask.
They’re ludicrous questions to ask.
Seriously, he’s suggesting that companies that make a loss should pay a tax on profits they’ve not made. And given those losses what money to close the pension gap?