Comments on: VAT increase to 20% would be “intently regressive”

By: Tory Stories » Blog Archive » What the Tories say – and what they really mean

Fri, 12 Nov 2010 01:52:10 +0000

[...] will have to resort to a VAT rise to fund the NI cut – lowering a progressive tax by increasing a highly regressive one; in relative terms, taking from the poor and giving to the rich. Painless cuts will not [...]

By: Pigou versus Progress « Left Outside

Pigou versus Progress « Left Outside — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 23:09:19 +0000

[...] because of the existence of regressive consumption taxes, which unite Left Foot Forward and Guido Fawkes in opposition, the poorest have the highest overall tax burden. The richest get [...]

By: Top earners pay more, and so they should | Left Foot Forward

Top earners pay more, and so they should | Left Foot Forward — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 14:21:37 +0000

[...] because of the existence of regressive consumption taxes, which unite Left Foot Forward and Guido Fawkes in opposition, the poorest have the highest overall tax [...]

By: John77

John77 — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 19:47:36 +0000

Your data is (i) misleading because the bottom fifth at any one moment are spending more than their current income – they include a lot of retired people living off their savings and those temporarily unemployed so “disposable income” is not the same as money available to be spent (ii) just plain wrong because ONS admit that their data excludes one-third of the sum handed out by HMRC in tax credits. VAT is 7.9%, 7.9%, 7.8%, 7.7%, 7.1% of expenditure. The truly regressive tax is tobacco duty

By: Tory business tax cuts threaten public services and poorest | Left Foot Forward

Mon, 23 Nov 2009 11:02:16 +0000

[...] regressive” move which would fall disproportionately on the poorest as Left Foot Forward has previously shown. The alternative is further public spending cuts. As Adam Lent at Touchstone asks: “Is this [...]