LESSON



LESSON 1: Ethics and Government. Richard Sharp, 2016Contents TOC \o "1-3" \h \z \u LESSON 1: Ethics and Government.Page PAGEREF _Toc465771747 \h 1,1.?Objectives and Activities.Page PAGEREF _Toc465771748 \h 1,2.?Overview of individual and corporate taxation.Page PAGEREF _Toc465771749 \h 2,3.?Defining tax avoidance.Page PAGEREF _Toc465771750 \h 3,3.1.?Activity.Page PAGEREF _Toc465771751 \h 4,4.?Should corporations be treated like individuals?Page PAGEREF _Toc465771752 \h 5,4.1.?Activity.Page PAGEREF _Toc465771753 \h 5,5.?Utilitarianism.Page PAGEREF _Toc465771754 \h 6,5.1.?Activity.Page PAGEREF _Toc465771755 \h 6,6.?Governmental focus on business.Page PAGEREF _Toc465771756 \h 7,6.1.?Activity.Page PAGEREF _Toc465771757 \h 8,7.?What are the aims of corporate business?Page PAGEREF _Toc465771758 \h 8,8.?Can there be an economic measurement of Utility?Page PAGEREF _Toc465771759 \h 10,8.1.?Activity.Page PAGEREF _Toc465771760 \h 10,8.2.?Activity.Page PAGEREF _Toc465771761 \h 11,References:Page PAGEREF _Toc465771762 \h 12,1.?Objectives and Activities.Students completing this lesson will: Reflect on the UK Government’s attitude to individual and corporate taxation.Relate Utilitarian ethical theory to the operation of government. Consider whether nationally aggregated economic statistics such as Gross Domestic Product (GDP) are a useful measure of governmental success or benefit to plete the discussion activities listed throughout the document. Record your views and reasoning when completing any discussion activity. Perform an independent research activity.2.?Overview of individual and corporate taxation.Taxes collected by Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) are used to fund the resources of the state, with which the Government can serve society and its citizens. The democratic process facilitates collective acceptance of the principle of taxation, whereby members of society pay their fair contribution to the upkeep of the state. Income Tax for individuals is progressive, using thresholds and bandings. The progression built into income tax allows the Government to distribute the tax burden fairly and with consideration of individuals’ ability to pay. Table 1: Tax Rates for individuals CITATION HMR16 \l 2057 (HMRC, 2016a)Taxable income 2016 to 2017Tax RateTax band descriptionUp to ?32,00020%Basic rate?32,001 to ?150,00040%Higher rateOver ?150,00145%Additional rateTable 2: Tax Rates for corporations CITATION HMR6b \l 2057 (HMRC, 2016b)Taxable profits 2016 to 2017Tax RateUp to any amount20%Currently, for individuals, basic tax of 20% is due on income between ?11,000 and ?43,000 CITATION UKG161 \l 2057 (UK Government, 2016b). The most current published HMRC percentile statistics for before-tax income are for 2013/14. The statistics show that the median before-tax income of tax payers was ?21,900 (the 50th percentile), 6% of the tax-paying population had incomes which fell below ?11,000, and 85% had incomes which fell below ?42,500 CITATION UKG162 \l 2057 (UK Government, 2016c). These percentile statistics are available in spreadsheet format from the GOV.UK National Statistics website: percentile statistics for total income. NOTE: the website includes provision for users of assistive technology to request alternative formats.From April 2015 Corporation Tax was set at a flat rate of 20% for all businesses excluding the oil industry. This removed forms of tax banding and progression for corporations. This action also reduced the tax rate for multinationals and large corporations to what had previously been called the “small profits rate” CITATION UKG15 \l 2057 (UK Government, 2015). In the 2016 Budget, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne proudly announced that by 2020, corporation tax would be reduced further to 17% CITATION UKG16 \l 2057 (UK Government, 2016a). However, an article in the Independent newspaper dated 24th of October 2016 CITATION Ken16 \l 2057 (Kentish, 2016) suggested that government ministers are now considering halving corporation tax to 10%, in order to strengthen the UK’s position in EU exit negotiations. In terms of the UK’s tax liability, the Institute for Fiscal Studies CITATION Ins14 \n \l 2057 (2014) said that, for the 2014-15 tax year, 11% of total receipt forecasts came from Company Taxes. The bulk of the rest were taxation methods linked to the activity of individuals CITATION Ins14 \p 5 \l 2057 (Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2014, p. 5).3.?Defining tax avoidance.Politicians, commentators, and tax experts, when discussing the avoidance and evasion of tax, use terminology found in ethical arguments such as morality, good-faith, bad-faith, and by referring to outcomes as separate from intentions. In his 2012 Budget Speech, Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne said that he regarded both tax evasion and aggressive tax avoidance to be “morally repugnant” CITATION Geo12 \p 16 \l 2057 (Osborne, 2012, p. 16).Tax evasion is the offence committed when individuals or businesses deliberately, and knowingly, act illegally in order not to pay tax that is due. Tax avoidance, according to many is more difficult to define. In a House of Lords debate on the 24th of May 2006, asked whether the Government would clarify definitions of avoidance and evasion, Lord McKenzie replied that “these terms lack any single or universally applied legal definition [and] depend upon the context in which they are used” CITATION UKP06 \l 2057 (UK Parliament, 2006). However, many of the accepted definitions of avoidance are like the one given by David Gauke, 2010 Exchequer Secretary, who explained it as “compliance with the letter but not the spirit of the law” CITATION UKP10 \l 2057 (UK Parliament, 2010). A further definition was supplied by Graham Aaronson QC who, on giving evidence to the Lords Economic Affairs Committee in January 2013, said that the term avoidance is unhelpful and that the matter for consideration is tax planning. He explained that it may be good or bad, it may also be performed in good faith or deceitfully, but these distinctions are entirely dependent on the viewpoint and intention of the individual CITATION Ant15 \l 2057 (Seeley, 2015). Complications arise in the grey areas between evasion and avoidance, and then for those who recognise a further distinction: between legitimate avoidance, sometimes called tax planning, and aggressive or abusive tax avoidance. Jamieson CITATION Jam15 \n \t \l 2057 (2015) coined the phrase “tax avoision” to represent the indistinctness between avoidance and evasion.For many years UK tax law, has been “specifically targeted rather than purposive” CITATION Ant15 \p 3 \l 2057 (Seeley, 2015, p. 3), with laws which cover specific situations. This creates room for inventive navigation of the tax system for those who have the resources to act to reduce their tax bill. There has been extensive coverage in the media of multinationals such as Google, Amazon, and Starbucks who have used various practices to avoid corporate tax liability. Later investigations have often resulted in a mutually acceptable deal between the multinational and HMRC, with the company agreeing to pay back far less than the original debt in a so called sweetheart deal. In 2011 the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) released its summary on tax disputes with HMRC, saying that “large companies appear to receive preferential treatment compared to small businesses and individuals” CITATION Pub11 \l 2057 (Public Accounts Committee, 2011). Former tax inspector Richard Brooks explained differences in attitude by HMRC when pursuing tax investigations and prosecutions, by saying that “the poor make easier targets than the rich” CITATION Bro14 \p 13 \l 2057 (Brooks, 2014, p. 13). 3.1?Activity.Discussion 1: Do you think that it is necessary for corporation tax to be lower than the basic rate for individuals, and to be a flat-rate? Discussion 2: Do you feel that the Government treats individuals and businesses differently as sources of tax revenue?Pause to answer or discuss before returning to the lesson material [End of activity].4.?Should corporations be treated like individuals?When a business registers as a company it acquires the attributes of a legal person. The corporation gains legal and operational benefits from its classification as an individual entity, and becomes subject to law and regulations relating to its actions and responsibilities. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) website states that in terms of its legal responsibilities, a company “should not be treated differently from an individual because of its artificial personality” CITATION Cro15 \l 2057 (Crown Prosecution Service, n.d.).The Government expects, and enforces, that people meet their legal obligations in relation to tax due on their earnings. However incorporated businesses often argue that when pursuing aggressive tax avoidance strategies, they are meeting their obligations to their shareholders, whilst also meeting their legal obligations to the Government. 4.1?Activity.Discussion: Corporations, like individuals, are required to pay their taxes. However, some corporations justify aggressive tax avoidance strategies because of the obligation to act on behalf of their shareholders. Do you agree with this logic? Could you create a similar argument for individuals and the responsibilities that they may have? Do you think that your argument would be accepted by HMRC?Pause to answer or discuss before returning to the lesson material [End of activity].5.?Utilitarianism.Utilitarianism measures social institutions by how practical and useful they are. This ethical theory is often summarised by the slogan to do the greatest good for the greatest number. Bentham CITATION Jer81 \n \l 2057 (1781) said that utility, in consideration of an action, is the measure of producing benefit or good, and reducing or preventing the opposite. Utility is considered from the perspective of the individual and of the wider community. An action affecting society, such as an action of government, is Utilitarian “when the tendency it has to augment the happiness of the community is greater than any it has to diminish it” CITATION Jer81 \p "ebook location 266-268" \l 2057 (Bentham, 1781, pp. ebook location 266-268).Mill CITATION Joh79 \n \l 2057 (1879) asserted the importance of the individual in the Utilitarian argument with the identification of a hierarchy of moral rules including “the moral rules which forbid mankind to hurt one another” CITATION Joh79 \p 67 \l 2057 (Mill, 1879, p. 67). He also said that utility is not only the pursuit of happiness but also the prevention of unhappiness: where happiness is difficult to define, or achieve overall, then there is more need to focus on the minimisation of unhappiness.5.1?Activity.Discussion 1: Does this picture of Utilitarianism fit with your view of how a government should act to serve society?Discussion 2: When seeking to achieve a Utilitarian benefit for the greatest number, do you think that it would be acceptable for a government to sacrifice the needs of a part of society to achieve that overall aim?Pause to answer or discuss before returning to the lesson material [End of activity].6.?Governmental focus on business.A Government is elected to serve the public interest. The question is: is public interest best served by an impersonal focus on the economy to the exclusion of other considerations? Corporations have argued, as Friedman CITATION Fri70 \n \t \l 2057 (1970) proposed, that it is not their responsibility to regulate or concern themselves with society; and that the only logical goal of business is to pursue the self-interest of generating profit. Campbell and Kitson say that business organisations are outside the moral realm. They suggest that it is “[as] absurd to require an organisation to act justly or to behave charitably as it would to expect the sea to be responsible in deciding which bits of the coastline to erode” CITATION Cam08 \p 4 \l 2057 (Campbell & Kitson, 2008, p. 4).De Mooij & Keen CITATION Ruu15 \n \l 2057 (2015), from the International Monetary Fund’s Fiscal Affairs Department, suggested that corporation tax can be a deciding factor in businesses moving from or to, a country. They argue that disadvantageous corporate tax rates could cause a business to move its base of operations elsewhere, and that while that action would help the business’ shareholders, it would disadvantage the workers, economy, and society of the country vacated. They offer this justification of low corporation tax rates as having logic in a Utilitarian sense. It is often stated as a general concept of free-market economics, as well as in defence of low corporate taxation, that improving the lot of large businesses and the rich, will lead to the improvement of the general economy and therefore the rest of the population. Friedman CITATION Fri70 \n \t \l 2057 (1970) and like-minded free-market economists and politicians say that the way a business helps society is to provide employment and investment which in turn fuels the economy and wider society. This benefit is said to occur in a trickle-down manner where wealthy individuals and businesses re-invest their profits in a way that produces growth and a spreading of wealth. However, Dr Ha-Joon Chang, economics tutor at Cambridge University, disagrees with the idea that making the rich wealthier automatically makes the poor better off. He says that for this to work to any degree, “the rich have to be made to deliver higher investment and thus higher growth through [conditional] policy measures” and then the benefits of this growth need to be distributed through state mechanisms CITATION HaJ10 \p 147 \l 2057 (Chang, 2010, p. 147). Brooks CITATION Bro14 \n \l 2057 (2014) argues that Government’s focus on the profits and operation of big business has reinforced and legitimised tax avoidance practices, which makes an ethical discussion of tax avoidance more complex since the UK Government now views corporation tax from the point of view of large business and the tax avoidance industry CITATION Bro14 \p 180 \l 2057 (Brooks, 2014, p. 180). Successful companies consider the customer in all aspects of their operation, since there is a direct link between the customer and their measurement of the business’ success. A government which measures its success in terms of aggregate economic figures will necessarily view those who contribute directly to that measure as their key stakeholders.6.1?Activity.Discussion: Does a focus on aggregate economic statistics as a measure of governmental success lead to a disproportionate consideration for the interests of corporate business; i.e. those entities thought to contribute most directly towards this measure?Pause to answer or discuss before returning to the lesson material [End of activity].7.?What are the aims of corporate business?Although Friedman CITATION Fri70 \n \l 2057 (1970) asserted that business has no responsibility to be ethical and only needs to concern itself with the pursuit of profit, Fleming and Jones CITATION Pet13 \n \l 2057 (2013) point out that the logical extreme to this argument is that businesses are irresponsible if they act upon ethical motives. This view was indirectly expressed by Google CEO Eric Schmidt in 2012 when he said that they pay their taxes “in the legally prescribed ways” and that in their shareholders’ interests they could not pay more tax than they were legally obliged to do, adding “there is probably some law against doing that” CITATION Kum12 \l 2057 (Kumar & Wright, 2012).Google Chairman Eric Schmidt CITATION Kum12 \l 2057 (Kumar & Wright, 2012).Businesses are achieving success if they grow and become more profitable. The Government has stated its intention to support business in these aims, saying that “businesses are the lifeblood of the economy, and it is enterprise and innovation by British business which will deliver growth and opportunity for the next generation” CITATION HMT16 \l 2057 (HM Treasury, 2016). However, any societal goals are incidental to the aims of business. Those controlling corporate businesses aim to grow, to improve their share price, to meet shareholder expectations and pay dividends, and to reward themselves appropriately. In their employment of workers, as with other resources and raw materials, their aim is to reduce costs and pay as little as possible.8.?Can there be an economic measurement of Utility?Governments running on free-market, capitalist lines may assume that when the country is better off in terms of aggregate economic measures, then the entire population is also better off. However, can this position accurately reflect a measurement of utility for the individual members of society, or the whole of society?8.1?Activity.Research: Perform research to find support of the view that capitalism and free-market policies are the best method for delivering benefit to society. Summarise and comment on the views expressed. (For example, see Milton Friedman).Pause to answer or discuss before returning to the lesson material [End of activity].Data from the Office for National Statistics website CITATION Off15 \n \l 2057 (2015a) shows that between July 2012 and June 2014 in the UK “the wealthiest 10% of households owned 45% of aggregate total wealth [and] the least wealthy half of households owned 9% of total aggregate household wealth” CITATION Off15 \l 2057 (Office for National Statistics, 2015a). Figure 1 below, demonstrates the percentages described. It shows the aggregate total wealth grouped by deciles. “Deciles divide the data, sorted in ascending order, into ten equal parts so that each part contains 10% (or one-tenth) of the wealth distribution – from the least wealthy households in the first decile to the wealthiest in the 10th decile” CITATION Off15a \l 2057 (Office for National Statistics, 2015b).Figure 1: Aggregate total wealth July 2012 to June 2014, grouped by deciles and components CITATION Off15a \l 2057 (Office for National Statistics, 2015b). The components of aggregate wealth measured are: property, financial, physical, and pension wealth. Further analysis of the data accompanying the aggregate wealth graph (CSV format) shows that while the wealthiest 10% owned 45% of aggregate total wealth; in terms of the individual components they owned: 40% of property wealth, 23% of physical wealth, 48% of pension wealth, and 65% of financial wealth CITATION Off15a \l 2057 (Office for National Statistics, 2015b). 8.2?Activity.Discussion 1: Can utility for all members of society be assessed by measuring the aggregate worth of the country? Discussion 2: Can you suggest other definitions or variables which could be used to measure Utilitarian benefit for the whole of society?Pause to answer or discuss before returning to the lesson material [End of activity].[End of Lesson].References. BIBLIOGRAPHY Bentham, J., 1781. An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. 1st ed. Kindle Edition ebook: White Dog Publishing.Brooks, R., 2014. The Great Tax Robbery: How Britain became a Tax Haven for Fat Cats and Big Business. 2nd ed. London: Oneworld Publications.Campbell, R. & Kitson, A., 2008. The Ethical Organisation. 2nd ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Chang, H.-J., 2010. 23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism. 1st ed. London (ebook): Penguin Group.Crown Prosecution Service, n.d. Corporate Prosecutions. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 20 November 2015].De Mooij, R. & Keen, M., 2015. Taxes in practice: it is hard to design a fair and efficient revenue system. Finance & Development, Vol. 52(No. 1), p. 48.Fleming, P. & Jones, M. T., 2013. The End of Corporate Social Responsibility. 1st ed. London: Sage Publications Ltd.Friedman, M., 1970. The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits. New York Times Magazine, 13 September. HM Treasury, 2016. Budget 2016. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 27 October 2016]. HMRC, 2016a. Income Tax rates and allowances: current and past. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 25 October 2016].HMRC, 2016b. Rates and allowances: Corporation Tax. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 25 October 2016].Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2014. A survey of the UK tax system [IFS Briefing Note BN09], London: Institute for Fiscal Studies.Jamieson, B., 2015. Comment: Tax avoidance a grey area with 50 shades?. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 24 November 2015].Kentish, B., 2016. Brexit: Government 'may have to slash corporation tax' to put pressure on EU in negotiations [The Independent]. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 25 October 2016].Kumar, N. & Wright, O., 2012. Google boss: I'm very proud of our tax avoidance scheme [The Independent]. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 22 April 2016].Mill, J. S., 1879. Utilitarianism. 7th ed. London: Kindle Edition.Office for National Statistics, 2015a. Main results from the Wealth and Assets Survey: July 2012 to June 2014. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 21 April 2016].Office for National Statistics, 2015b. Chapter 2: Total wealth, Wealth in Great Britain 2012 to 2014. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 25 October 2016].Osborne, G., 2012. Budget 2012. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 20 November 2015].Public Accounts Committee, 2011. HM Revenue & Customs 2010-11 Accounts: tax disputes - Public Accounts Committee. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 12 November 2015].Seeley, A., 2015. Tax Avoidance: a General Anti-Abuse Rule (Briefing paper 06265), London: House of Commons Library.UK Government, 2015. Rates and allowances: Corporation Tax. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 20 November 2015].UK Government, 2016a. Budget 2016: some of the things we've announced. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 20 April 2016].UK Government, 2016b. Income Tax rates and Personal Allowances. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 20 April 2016].UK Government, 2016c. Percentile points from 1 to 99 for total income before and after tax. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 20 April 2016].UK Parliament, 2006. Publications and records. Taxation: Avoidance and Evasion. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 20 November 2015].UK Parliament, 2010. Publications & records. Finance Bill 12 Jul. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 20 November 2015]. CC-BY-NC. Richard Sharp 06.01.2016 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download