On inheritance tax there is a "credibility gap"

Cameron's plan remains unfair and unfunded

David Cameron has denounced Alistair Darling's 148-page dossier on the "credibility gap" in the Tories' spending plans as "complete junk from start to finish". So are the Tories' spending commitments fully costed? Here's one that isn't.

Cameron claimed again today that sweeping cuts in inheritance tax could be paid for by "taxing the non-doms". The party's pledge to raise the inheritance-tax threshold -- currently £325,000 -- to £1m would cost £3.1bn a year. Cameron hopes to raise this amount by charging non-doms £25,000 a year to live and work in the UK. The Tories estimate that about 150,000 residents would pay the levy, raising £3.5bn and funding cuts in inheritance tax and a rise in the stamp duty threshold to £250,000 for first-time buyers.

But the Tory proposal overestimates the total number of non-doms. The latest HMRC figures show that there are only 120,000 currently registered. Ken Clarke was admirably honest when he conceded: "We don't know how many non-doms will be here; we don't know how much our policy of raising fair taxation from foreigners who work in this country will raise." It's a pity his leader can't be.

The commitment to cut inheritance tax could yet become politically toxic for the Tories, particularly if the suspicion that a Cameron government would increase VAT grows. History teaches us that when in need of revenue, the Tories raise VAT, the most regressive tax of all.

It was Margaret Thatcher who almost doubled VAT from 8 to 15 per cent in 1979 in order to slash income tax and it was John Major who raised VAT by 2.5 per cent to its current level of 17.5 per cent.

Over at Comment Central, Daniel Finkelstein astutely notes that Darling himself still refuses to rule out raising VAT to 20 per cent. The Chancellor's plan to do so in the pre-Budget report was overruled by Gordon Brown. By contrast, Ed Balls (writing outside of his brief) has accused the Tories of secretly plotting to increase VAT and has attacked George Osborne for refusing -- like Darling -- to rule out a rise.

Balls might be keen to use these lines on the campaign trail, but VAT could yet become a dividing line between him and the man he still longs to replace.


Follow the New Statesman team on Twitter

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Show Hide image

It's Gary Lineker 1, the Sun 0

The football hero has found himself at the heart of a Twitter storm over the refugee children debate.

The Mole wonders what sort of topsy-turvy universe we now live in where Gary Lineker is suddenly being called a “political activist” by a Conservative MP? Our favourite big-eared football pundit has found himself in a war of words with the Sun newspaper after wading into the controversy over the age of the refugee children granted entry into Britain from Calais.

Pictures published earlier this week in the right-wing press prompted speculation over the migrants' “true age”, and a Tory MP even went as far as suggesting that these children should have their age verified by dental X-rays. All of which leaves your poor Mole with a deeply furrowed brow. But luckily the British Dental Association was on hand to condemn the idea as unethical, inaccurate and inappropriate. Phew. Thank God for dentists.

Back to old Big Ears, sorry, Saint Gary, who on Wednesday tweeted his outrage over the Murdoch-owned newspaper’s scaremongering coverage of the story. He smacked down the ex-English Defence League leader, Tommy Robinson, in a single tweet, calling him a “racist idiot”, and went on to defend his right to express his opinions freely on his feed.

The Sun hit back in traditional form, calling for Lineker to be ousted from his job as host of the BBC’s Match of the Day. The headline they chose? “Out on his ears”, of course, referring to the sporting hero’s most notable assets. In the article, the tabloid lays into Lineker, branding him a “leftie luvvie” and “jug-eared”. The article attacked him for describing those querying the age of the young migrants as “hideously racist” and suggested he had breached BBC guidelines on impartiality.

All of which has prompted calls for a boycott of the Sun and an outpouring of support for Lineker on Twitter. His fellow football hero Stan Collymore waded in, tweeting that he was on “Team Lineker”. Leading the charge against the Murdoch-owned title was the close ally of Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and former Channel 4 News economics editor, Paul Mason, who tweeted:

Lineker, who is not accustomed to finding himself at the centre of such highly politicised arguments on social media, responded with typical good humour, saying he had received a bit of a “spanking”.

All of which leaves the Mole with renewed respect for Lineker and an uncharacteristic desire to watch this weekend’s Match of the Day to see if any trace of his new activist persona might surface.


I'm a mole, innit.