It's the difference between principles-based (UK) and rules-based compliance (US, but increasingly UK as well).
Rules based compliance is fine in theory, but smart people can always come up with something that, prime facie, complies with the rules but is effectively an end run around them. If you set out general principles ("treat your customers fairly" "always behave with integrity") then you can slap people who step out of line.
That highlights the problem. I have no issue with those as principles: few people would. And it makes a good back-up.
But what is 'fairly' ? How do you define 'integrity' ?
I might say that ''treating your customers fairly' meant never making more than 5% profit a year out of each customer. You may say it meant explaining T&C's for them. A.n.other might say it meant ensuring their money was secure and safe.
I don't doubt your personal integrity - you behave utterly like a gentleman at all times. I have no doubt that you would interpret those phrases in a fair and equitable way. But others may not, especially if it is in their interests not to.
Perhaps those principles ought to be the bedrock on which the rules are made: the guiding principles. But the rules will be there to ensure they are kept to. And if smart people 'get around them' deliberately, then they should be fired. It's the old tax-avoidance-evasion issue once again, ;-)
But again, it really is not my area.
The whole basis of the financial services industry depends on the regulators judgement as to whether you are a "fit and proper" person to conduct business. If they decide that you aren't then they suspend your license. And there is no appeal.
If you have detailed rules then someone can work around them. There are literally thousands of people in the City whose job is to advise companies on how to maximise their interests while complying with precise rules. You don't want them playing that game with the market as well.
The most effective sanction in the City, for instance, is the 'cold shoulder'. It is very rarely used because it is so draconian: no regulated institution is permitted to work with the individuals who are subject to a cold-shoulder ruling. But that's a penalty that is applied by a non-statutory body.
You're doing it again. I never asked if you're a Labour member. Your avoidance of such a simple voting question on a political blog is weird and makes me discount your opinions frankly.
Moses JonC I am not a Labour voter and oppose restoring the 50% top tax rate, this is NOT an economic point or a personal view but a political one, polls show voters opposed cutting the 50% tax intold me 2012 at a time of austerity and it cost Osborne his 'omnishambles' budget, Labour lost because of Miliband, immigration, Scotland and being seen to have been unwilling to cut spending and welfare NOT because of the 50% rate which even many Tories support
always been puzzled that Labour has not made much more of the fact that Thatcher tolerated a top rate of 60% until the 1988 Budget.
Don’t think “tolerated” has anything to do with it. - Thatcher inherited from Labour a top rate tax of 80%, by the time she left office it was down to 40% and stayed there until Gordon Brown cynically raised it to 50% before the GE2010.
But she could have reduced the Top rate to 40% in Howe's first Budget in June 1979.
Really? - I doubt it was possible given the economic state the country at the time. However, in the first budget after Thatcher's election in 79, the top rate tax was reduced from 83% to 60% and again to 40% in the 1988 budget. The basic rate tax was also reduced from 33% to 25% by 1988.
Whatever, your claim that Thatcher 'tolerated' high taxs rates is utterly bogus.
Mrs Thatcher did tolerate high taxes -- VAT was immediately doubled.
I'm not a Labour member and never have been. But as David Steel replied when asked if he'd voted for himself, "it's a secret ballot".
My point here was that Mrs Thatcher was not an unmitigated tax cutter. Income tax was cut but slowly and was mainly higher than it is now. VAT was doubled and extended. It would be interesting to check what happened to the overall tax burden.
Moses JonC I am not a Labour voter and oppose restoring the 50% top tax rate, this is NOT an economic point or a personal view but a political one, polls show voters opposed cutting the 50% tax in 2012 at a time of austerity and it cost Osborne his 'omnishambles' budget, Labour lost because of Miliband, immigration, Scotland and being seen to have been unwilling to cut spending and welfare NOT because of the 50% rate which even many Tories support
always been puzzled that Labour has not made much more of the fact that Thatcher tolerated a top rate of 60% until the 1988 Budget.
Don’t think “tolerated” has anything to do with it. - Thatcher inherited from Labour a top rate tax of 80%, by the time she left office it was down to 40% and stayed there until Gordon Brown cynically raised it to 50% before the GE2010.
But she could have reduced the Top rate to 40% in Howe's first Budget in June 1979.
Really? - I doubt it was possible given the economic state the country at the time. However, in the first budget after Thatcher's election in 79, the top rate tax was reduced from 83% to 60% and again to 40% in the 1988 budget. The basic rate tax was also reduced from 33% to 25% by 1988.
Whatever, your claim that Thatcher 'tolerated' high taxs rates is utterly bogus.
Mrs Thatcher did tolerate high taxes -- VAT was immediately doubled.
No it wasn't!
Vat was raised from 8% to 15% in the first budget and stayed at that rate for almost twelve years.
Now you may say that a rise from 8 to 15% is virtually double ("it's only 1% out, guvnor") - but that's the trouble with Labour economics. It's sloppy and inaccurate in a field where precision counts.
Moses JonC I am not a Labour voter and oppose restoring the 50% top tax rate, this is NOT an economic point or a personal view but a political one, polls show voters opposed cutting the 50% tax in 2012 at a time of austerity and it cost Osborne his 'omnishambles' budget, Labour lost because of Miliband, immigration, Scotland and being seen to have been unwilling to cut spending and welfare NOT because of the 50% rate which even many Tories support
always been puzzled that Labour has not made much more of the fact that Thatcher tolerated a top rate of 60% until the 1988 Budget.
Don’t think “tolerated” has anything to do with it. - Thatcher inherited from Labour a top rate tax of 80%, by the time she left office it was down to 40% and stayed there until Gordon Brown cynically raised it to 50% before the GE2010.
But she could have reduced the Top rate to 40% in Howe's first Budget in June 1979.
Really? - I doubt it was possible given the economic state the country at the time. However, in the first budget after Thatcher's election in 79, the top rate tax was reduced from 83% to 60% and again to 40% in the 1988 budget. The basic rate tax was also reduced from 33% to 25% by 1988.
Whatever, your claim that Thatcher 'tolerated' high taxs rates is utterly bogus.
Mrs Thatcher did tolerate high taxes -- VAT was immediately doubled.
No it wasn't!
Vat was raised from 8% to 15% in the first budget and stayed at that rate for almost twelve years.
Now you may say that a rise from 8 to 15% is virtually double ("it's only 1% out, guvnor") - but that's the trouble with Labour economics. It's sloppy and inaccurate in a field where precision counts.
Sandpit Oh really, so why does yougov have Burnham ahead with Tory voters then? Kendall may be second with Tories, ahead of Cooper, but Burnham still narrowly leads her with Tories
You are not on a serious basis taking any notice of Yougov polls surely, all credibility they had has gone. I can assure you as an ex-Labour middle income earner from the East Midlands voter Burnham holds no appeal and won't do generally. All the three ladies standing may stand some chance but not Burnham.
Whether you like Burnham or not and personally I can't stand him, his past allows too much mud to stick, from Mid Staffs, from friend of Blair to Lenny's choice he is a sitting duck to throw mud at. Hunty gave a mild taste of what would be to come, he would be the Conservatives choice as Labour leader almost 100% just like Eddy was, although due to Burnham's suspect temperament under pressure I think he would go even worse as a leader.
Exactly. Just note Hunt's comments to Burnham and Kendall in the Commons yesterday to see how happy the Tories will be if Mr Stafford is elected as leader. He's as crap as Ed.
Moses JonC I am not a Labour voter and oppose restoring the 50% top tax rate, this is NOT an economic point or a personal view but a political one, polls show voters opposed cutting the 50% tax in 2012 at a time of austerity and it cost Osborne his 'omnishambles' budget, Labour lost because of Miliband, immigration, Scotland and being seen to have been unwilling to cut spending and welfare NOT because of the 50% rate which even many Tories support
always been puzzled that Labour has not made much more of the fact that Thatcher tolerated a top rate of 60% until the 1988 Budget.
Don’t think “tolerated” has anything to do with it. - Thatcher inherited from Labour a top rate tax of 80%, by the time she left office it was down to 40% and stayed there until Gordon Brown cynically raised it to 50% before the GE2010.
But she could have reduced the Top rate to 40% in Howe's first Budget in June 1979.
Really? - I doubt it was possible given the economic state the country at the time. However, in the first budget after Thatcher's election in 79, the top rate tax was reduced from 83% to 60% and again to 40% in the 1988 budget. The basic rate tax was also reduced from 33% to 25% by 1988.
Whatever, your claim that Thatcher 'tolerated' high taxs rates is utterly bogus.
Mrs Thatcher did tolerate high taxes -- VAT was immediately doubled.
No it wasn't!
Vat was raised from 8% to 15% in the first budget and stayed at that rate for almost twelve years.
Now you may say that a rise from 8 to 15% is virtually double ("it's only 1% out, guvnor") - but that's the trouble with Labour economics. It's sloppy and inaccurate in a field where precision counts.
Indeed so -VAT was only raised by 87.5%.
Yes. You are learning. I'm heartened by the fact that you admitted your mistake.
Moses JonC I am not a Labour voter and oppose restoring the 50% top tax rate, this is NOT an economic point or a personal view but a political one, polls show voters opposed cutting the 50% tax in 2012 at a time of austerity and it cost Osborne his 'omnishambles' budget, Labour lost because of Miliband, immigration, Scotland and being seen to have been unwilling to cut spending and welfare NOT because of the 50% rate which even many Tories support
always been puzzled that Labour has not made much more of the fact that Thatcher tolerated a top rate of 60% until the 1988 Budget.
Don’t think “tolerated” has anything to do with it. - Thatcher inherited from Labour a top rate tax of 80%, by the time she left office it was down to 40% and stayed there until Gordon Brown cynically raised it to 50% before the GE2010.
But she could have reduced the Top rate to 40% in Howe's first Budget in June 1979.
Really? - I doubt it was possible given the economic state the country at the time. However, in the first budget after Thatcher's election in 79, the top rate tax was reduced from 83% to 60% and again to 40% in the 1988 budget. The basic rate tax was also reduced from 33% to 25% by 1988.
Whatever, your claim that Thatcher 'tolerated' high taxs rates is utterly bogus.
Mrs Thatcher did tolerate high taxes -- VAT was immediately doubled.
No it wasn't!
Vat was raised from 8% to 15% in the first budget and stayed at that rate for almost twelve years.
Now you may say that a rise from 8 to 15% is virtually double ("it's only 1% out, guvnor") - but that's the trouble with Labour economics. It's sloppy and inaccurate in a field where precision counts.
Indeed so -VAT was only raised by 87.5%.
Yes. You are learning. I'm heartened by the fact that you admitted your mistake.
Is it true that all Conservative governments have increased VAT rates?
Heath: introduced at 10% Thatcher: 15% Major: 17.5% Cameron: 20%
I see that Yvette has caught up with Liz on Betfair. Both on 4.6. The momentum is with Yvette.
Edit: Liz just come in to 3.75. Momentum not with Yvette. Fast changing picture!
I think there may be a big Liz backer. There always seems to be over £1k (big in the context of a small, illiquid market) waiting which acts as a firewall on her price.
Is it true that all Conservative governments have increased VAT rates?
Heath: introduced at 10% Thatcher: 15% Major: 17.5% Cameron: 20%
Is it true that all Conservative governments have increased VAT rates?
Heath: introduced at 10% Thatcher: 15% Major: 17.5% Cameron: 20%
Indeed it is. Isn't it wonderful!
Here are the rates since 1979.
From To Standard rate 18/06/1979 18/03/1991 15 % (Conservative) 19/03/1991 30/11/2008 17.5 % (Conservative) 01/12/2008 31/12/2009 15 % (Labour) 01/01/2010 03/01/2011 17.5 % (Labour) 04/01/2011 20 % (Conservative)
Since 1979 the Conservatives lowered direct taxation in accordance with the dominant themes of post-war taxation policies followed by the two main parties.
Conservatives favour indirect taxation. Labour governments favour direct taxation, and if they include Gordon Brown raids on Pension funds, stealth taxes and hunting for the magic money tree.
Is it true that all Conservative governments have increased VAT rates?
Heath: introduced at 10% Thatcher: 15% Major: 17.5% Cameron: 20%
Is it true that all Conservative governments have increased VAT rates?
Heath: introduced at 10% Thatcher: 15% Major: 17.5% Cameron: 20%
Indeed it is. Isn't it wonderful!
Here are the rates since 1979.
From To Standard rate 18/06/1979 18/03/1991 15 % (Conservative) 19/03/1991 30/11/2008 17.5 % (Conservative) 01/12/2008 31/12/2009 15 % (Labour) 01/01/2010 03/01/2011 17.5 % (Labour) 04/01/2011 20 % (Conservative)
Since 1979 the Conservatives lowered direct taxation in accordance with the dominant themes of post-war taxation policies followed by the two main parties.
Conservatives favour indirect taxation. Labour governments favour direct taxation, and if they include Gordon Brown raids on Pension funds, stealth taxes and hunting for the magic money tree.
Certainly some Conservatives favour indirect taxes but many would say what they actually want is *low* taxation. Probably that is what most voters think too. It will be interesting to see how overall taxation has changed.
Moses JonC I am not a Labour voter and oppose restoring the 50% top tax rate, this is NOT an economic point or a personal view but a political one, polls show voters opposed cutting the 50% tax in 2012 at a time of austerity and it cost Osborne his 'omnishambles' budget, Labour lost because of Miliband, immigration, Scotland and being seen to have been unwilling to cut spending and welfare NOT because of the 50% rate which even many Tories support
always been puzzled that Labour has not made much more of the fact that Thatcher tolerated a top rate of 60% until the 1988 Budget.
Don’t think “tolerated” has anything to do with it. - Thatcher inherited from Labour a top rate tax of 80%, by the time she left office it was down to 40% and stayed there until Gordon Brown cynically raised it to 50% before the GE2010.
But she could have reduced the Top rate to 40% in Howe's first Budget in June 1979.
Really? - I doubt it was possible given the economic state the country at the time. However, in the first budget after Thatcher's election in 79, the top rate tax was reduced from 83% to 60% and again to 40% in the 1988 budget. The basic rate tax was also reduced from 33% to 25% by 1988.
Whatever, your claim that Thatcher 'tolerated' high taxs rates is utterly bogus.
Mrs Thatcher did tolerate high taxes -- VAT was immediately doubled.
No it wasn't!
Vat was raised from 8% to 15% in the first budget and stayed at that rate for almost twelve years.
Now you may say that a rise from 8 to 15% is virtually double ("it's only 1% out, guvnor") - but that's the trouble with Labour economics. It's sloppy and inaccurate in a field where precision counts.
Indeed so -VAT was only raised by 87.5%.
Yes. You are learning. I'm heartened by the fact that you admitted your mistake.
Because of the shift to rules-based compliance under the unlamented FSA.
(To quote @Plato) Integrity is like porn: you can't define it, but you know when you see it
And everything was hunky-dory before the FSA was formed in 2001? There were no financial scandals? When did PPI mis-selling start?
This all sounds slightly dodgy and complacent to me.
Mid 2000s, I believe. Consequence of putting a retailer in charge of a bank (I love you Andy! Hope you are enjoying the new job running a casino!)
A lot of the problem is with institutional complexity. But fundamentally if you can sack a CEO for breaching principles even if he complies with the rules it's much the most effective.
Moses JonC I am not a Labour voter and oppose restoring the 50% top tax rate, this is NOT an economic point or a personal view but a political one, polls show voters opposed cutting the 50% tax in 2012 at a time of austerity and it cost Osborne his 'omnishambles' budget, Labour lost because of Miliband, immigration, Scotland and being seen to have been unwilling to cut spending and welfare NOT because of the 50% rate which even many Tories support
always been puzzled that Labour has not made much more of the fact that Thatcher tolerated a top rate of 60% until the 1988 Budget.
Don’t think “tolerated” has anything to do with it. - Thatcher inherited from Labour a top rate tax of 80%, by the time she left office it was down to 40% and stayed there until Gordon Brown cynically raised it to 50% before the GE2010.
But she could have reduced the Top rate to 40% in Howe's first Budget in June 1979.
Really? - I doubt it was possible given the economic state the country at the time. However, in the first budget after Thatcher's election in 79, the top rate tax was reduced from 83% to 60% and again to 40% in the 1988 budget. The basic rate tax was also reduced from 33% to 25% by 1988.
Whatever, your claim that Thatcher 'tolerated' high taxs rates is utterly bogus.
Mrs Thatcher did tolerate high taxes -- VAT was immediately doubled.
No it wasn't!
Vat was raised from 8% to 15% in the first budget and stayed at that rate for almost twelve years.
Now you may say that a rise from 8 to 15% is virtually double ("it's only 1% out, guvnor") - but that's the trouble with Labour economics. It's sloppy and inaccurate in a field where precision counts.
Indeed so -VAT was only raised by 87.5%.
Yes. You are learning. I'm heartened by the fact that you admitted your mistake.
If you care to check again it was not my mistake!
Mr Justin - my apologies. I must learn to read the "blockquote" markers better. No offence intended, I assure you.
Is it true that all Conservative governments have increased VAT rates?
Heath: introduced at 10% Thatcher: 15% Major: 17.5% Cameron: 20%
Is it true that all Conservative governments have increased VAT rates?
Heath: introduced at 10% Thatcher: 15% Major: 17.5% Cameron: 20%
Indeed it is. Isn't it wonderful!
Here are the rates since 1979.
From To Standard rate 18/06/1979 18/03/1991 15 % (Conservative) 19/03/1991 30/11/2008 17.5 % (Conservative) 01/12/2008 31/12/2009 15 % (Labour) 01/01/2010 03/01/2011 17.5 % (Labour) 04/01/2011 20 % (Conservative)
Since 1979 the Conservatives lowered direct taxation in accordance with the dominant themes of post-war taxation policies followed by the two main parties.
Conservatives favour indirect taxation. Labour governments favour direct taxation, and if they include Gordon Brown raids on Pension funds, stealth taxes and hunting for the magic money tree.
Certainly some Conservatives favour indirect taxes but many would say what they actually want is *low* taxation. Probably that is what most voters think too. It will be interesting to see how overall taxation has changed.
A very shrewd comment. Yes, I think that you've hit the nail on the head (as the cliche goes). I am a bit impish when it comes to commenting on taxation. I reckon that neither the Conservatives nor Labour are totally correct, but they both behave rather annoyingly as though only their way is best.
macisback Regardless of your personal yougov shows Burnham most popular with both all voter and Labor voters and whatever the Tory leadership thinks even Tories. As for yougov's reputation, even Kellner said the Tories would be largest party, like most pollsters they just failed to predict the last minute swing to the Tories which gave them a majority
Because of the shift to rules-based compliance under the unlamented FSA.
(To quote @Plato) Integrity is like porn: you can't define it, but you know when you see it
And everything was hunky-dory before the FSA was formed in 2001? There were no financial scandals? When did PPI mis-selling start?
This all sounds slightly dodgy and complacent to me.
Mid 2000s, I believe. Consequence of putting a retailer in charge of a bank (I love you Andy! Hope you are enjoying the new job running a casino!)
A lot of the problem is with institutional complexity. But fundamentally if you can sack a CEO for breaching principles even if he complies with the rules it's much the most effective.
@Charles : Probably a bit late back to this, but did not want to continue onto the next thread.
Thanks for that. I suppose a set of principles, strictly enforced, would engender a sense of extreme caution.
I'm still not fully convinced, but you know your business!
Comments
(To quote @Plato) Integrity is like porn: you can't define it, but you know when you see it
Vat was raised from 8% to 15% in the first budget and stayed at that rate for almost twelve years.
Now you may say that a rise from 8 to 15% is virtually double ("it's only 1% out, guvnor") - but that's the trouble with Labour economics. It's sloppy and inaccurate in a field where precision counts.
How we keep such trivia nuggets reminds me of your reply to @Morris_Dancer and specialism
Edit: Liz just come in to 3.75. Momentum not with Yvette. Fast changing picture!
This all sounds slightly dodgy and complacent to me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7c3s4pLsN9M
Heath: introduced at 10%
Thatcher: 15%
Major: 17.5%
Cameron: 20%
Here are the rates since 1979.
From To Standard rate
18/06/1979 18/03/1991 15 % (Conservative)
19/03/1991 30/11/2008 17.5 % (Conservative)
01/12/2008 31/12/2009 15 % (Labour)
01/01/2010 03/01/2011 17.5 % (Labour)
04/01/2011 20 % (Conservative)
Since 1979 the Conservatives lowered direct taxation in accordance with the dominant themes of post-war taxation policies followed by the two main parties.
Conservatives favour indirect taxation. Labour governments favour direct taxation, and if they include Gordon Brown raids on Pension funds, stealth taxes and hunting for the magic money tree.
A lot of the problem is with institutional complexity. But fundamentally if you can sack a CEO for breaching principles even if he complies with the rules it's much the most effective.
I am a bit impish when it comes to commenting on taxation. I reckon that neither the Conservatives nor Labour are totally correct, but they both behave rather annoyingly as though only their way is best.
Thanks for that. I suppose a set of principles, strictly enforced, would engender a sense of extreme caution.
I'm still not fully convinced, but you know your business!
http://andrewduff.blogactiv.eu/2015/06/02/turkeys-incredible-election/?utm_source=EurActiv+Newsletter&utm_campaign=8c622bff1b-Bmail&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_bab5f0ea4e-8c622bff1b-245514803
http://andrewduff.blogactiv.eu/2015/06/02/turkeys-incredible-election/?utm_source=EurActiv+Newsletter&utm_campaign=8c622bff1b-Bmail&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_bab5f0ea4e-8c622bff1b-245514803