Rachel Reeves ought to tax financial institution earnings to recuperate taxpayer cash spent on compensating losses from the Financial institution of England’s cash-printing drive, a suppose tank has stated.
Climbing a levy on the windfalls from main corporations comparable to Barclays, Lloyds, HSBC and NatWest may elevate as much as £8 billion a yr for public companies, in keeping with a report by the Institute for Public Coverage Analysis.
The suppose tank argues the UK is a world outlier in having its Treasury pay for central Financial institution losses on its bond-buying quantitative easing (QE) programme.
After a interval of creating earnings on this programme, the Financial institution of England is going through file losses, estimated to price the taxpayer £22 billion a yr, as rates of interest have risen since 2021, it warned.
This cash is then partly being funnelled to financial institution shareholders as a consequence of a “flawed” coverage design, boosting earnings whereas tens of millions throughout Britain proceed to face cost-of-living pressures, the report says.
It recommends the Treasury introduce a “QE reserves earnings levy”, much like the two.5 per cent deposit tax imposed on banks below Margaret Thatcher in 1981, to rebalance the prevailing set-up.
The main suppose tank, which labored intently with the federal government on its industrial technique, additionally calls on the Financial institution of England to decelerate its sale of bonds – so-called quantitative tightening (QT) – to save lots of greater than £12 billion a yr.
These two insurance policies collectively may save greater than £100 billion over this Parliament, opening up a lot wanted fiscal headroom for the Chancellor, it says.
Beneath the proposals, the receipts from the banks levy could be used to assist “households and development” and would fall to zero as soon as all QE-related gilts are off the Financial institution of England’s stability sheet, or when the financial institution price reaches 2 per cent, that means the tax could be non permanent.
Get a free fractional share value as much as £100.
Capital in danger.
Phrases and circumstances apply.
Go to web site
ADVERTISEMENT
Get a free fractional share value as much as £100.
Capital in danger.
Phrases and circumstances apply.
Go to web site
ADVERTISEMENT
Given the “focused” nature of the tax, it ought to solely have a “small influence, if any” on UK banks’ competitiveness and smaller banks ought to be exempted from the measure, the suppose tank stated.
It comes amid warnings from economists that tax rises within the autumn funds are doubtless wanted to plug a gap within the public funds, prompting hypothesis about which areas the Chancellor may goal.
The Treasury has been contacted for remark.
Carsten Jung, affiliate director for financial coverage at IPPR and former Financial institution of England economist, stated: “The Financial institution of England and Treasury bungled the implementation of quantitative easing.
“What began as a programme to spice up the financial system is now a large drain on taxpayer cash.
“Whereas households battle with rising prices, the federal government is successfully writing multi-billion-pound cheques to financial institution shareholders.
“A focused levy, impressed by Margaret Thatcher’s personal method within the Nineteen Eighties, would recoup a few of these windfalls and put the cash to much better use – serving to folks and the financial system, not simply financial institution stability sheets.”
UK Finance criticised the proposals, arguing {that a} additional tax on banks would make Britain much less internationally aggressive.
“Banks based mostly right here already pay each an organization tax surcharge and a financial institution levy,” the commerce affiliation stated.
Including one other would “run counter to the federal government’s purpose of supporting the monetary companies sector to assist drive development and funding within the wider financial system,” it stated.
