Labour has found itself in a bit of a mess over the concept of what constitutes a ‘working person’. While this may seem pretty straightforward to you, it’s far from the case for the media. In their election campaign, the Labour Party vowed not to tax ‘working people’. This has led to lots of confusion; in part because journalists are pretending not to understand what ‘work’ is. And while we’re of the opinion that Labour has made this mess for itself by not calling for clear taxes on the mega-rich, that doesn’t excuse the feigned stupidity of journalists like the BBC‘s Laura Kuenssberg:
Laura Kuenssberg wonders if 'working people' are those who have "Scrimped and saved to buy a couple of rental properties". Only in your world Laura.#bbclaurak
— Parody Keir Starmer (@Parody_PM) October 27, 2024
Kuenssberg: it’s hard work, being a parasitic landlord
Kuenssberg asked if buy-to-let landlords count – specifically buy-to-let landlords who had to work to purchase their mini rental empire. This is something most people could answer quite clearly:
- Working to save up to buy the houses = work.
- Reaping rental money each month from your asset portfolio = not-work.
So we could imagine a situation in which these petit land barons are taxed more on their rental income but not taxed more on any actual work they still engage in. You don’t need to understand rocket science to see this. You don’t even need to understand rocket salad:
Laura Kuenssberg wants to know if 'working people' are those who have "Scrimped and saved to buy a couple of rental properties".
Won’t somebody think of the poor landlords?
This ‘working people’ line of questioning is preposterous. #bbclaurak pic.twitter.com/EtxbZ932PD
— Deirdre Heenan (@deirdreheenan) October 27, 2024
Some landlords would likely disagree, of course. ‘I have to call a plumber sometimes’, they might say, or ‘I have to fill out forms’, or ‘I have to meet the agent I pay to call plumbers and fills out forms’. What it comes do is the amount of ‘work’ compared to the amount of ‘profit’. The aim of every landlord is to basically do nothing for months at a time while still receiving rent, and as you’ve likely rented yourself, you’ll know that most of them achieve this. Some landlords probably do spend more time maintaining their properties, but these aren’t the norm, and you probably wouldn’t want to spare landlords in their entirety because of a minority of exceptional buy-to-letters.
The landlord situation is interesting because there is a massive difference between an artistocrat who owns half of Cambridge and Brian from Dudley who rents his old house. The good news for those who think low-rung buy-to-letters should be spared is that you can make taxes progressive – i.e. the more you earn, the more tax you pay. Again, this isn’t rocket salad.
Do we think that this is what Labour should do?
Well, it’s a poor option compared to “ending landlordism” entirely, but that’s besides the point here.
The point is that the media is pretending not to understand what work is. But have Labour brought this problem on themselves?
Tax who exactly?
Sky News made a good point this week when it wrote:
Labour actually mentioned the term working people 21 times in their manifesto, so you’d think they would have a pretty concrete idea of who they have in their mind’s eye when pushed on their definition.
But yesterday when asked by Sky News whether anyone whose income derived from assets, such as shares or property, could be considered a working person, Sir Keir Starmer said: “Well, they wouldn’t come within my definition.”
The point is that Labour seemingly didn’t put any thought into this at all.
Which is staggering.
Keir Starmer has been the Labour leader since 2019. Five years is enough time to make a plan, and yet the impression we’re getting is that Labour didn’t start seriously thinking about this until after the “loveless landslide” in July.
The vagueness isn’t even the biggest problem, either; the real issue is that there was an obvious means of raising money right there, and Starmer’s Labour did everything they could not to call for it.
Wealth taxes
Wealth inequality in the UK is surging, while millions don’t have enough to get by. All the while our underfunded NHS and public services continue to struggle. We need to tax the very rich more to save our society.
They add:
The UK is home to an extraordinary number of billionaires – their wealth has increased twelvefold in thirty years. While the world’s ten richest men recently doubled their fortunes in the space of two years.
It’s an idea with a proven track record of success:
In 2022, Norway increased their wealth tax to 1.1%. In response, some high profile billionaires moved out of the country. According to a viral claim, this resulted in a net loss of revenue. Is this true?
No. Over the next two years, wealth tax revenue soared to all time highs. pic.twitter.com/sonC2GigYd— James Medlock (@jdcmedlock) October 21, 2024
Just look what’s happened to the wealth of these people without appropriate wealth taxes (at the same time that actual working people have seen their quality of life steadily decline):
Wealth of Elon Musk
2012: $2,000,000,000
2024: $273,000,000,000Wealth of Jeff Bezos
2012: $18,400,000,000
2024: $207,100,000,000Wealth of Mark Zuckerberg
2012: $17,500,000,000
2024: $200,000,000,000Federal Minimum Wage
2012: $7.25
2024: $7.25Three words: tax the rich.
— Andrea Junker (@Strandjunker) October 25, 2024
Tax Justice UK has plenty of ideas on how to tax wealth, as they explain:
- New taxes on wealth: We’re campaigning for a new wealth tax: a 2% levy on individuals who own assets worth more than £10 million. It would affect 0.04% of the UK population. And we’re campaigning to apply national insurance to investment income, raising up to £24 billion a year.
- Reform existing taxes on wealth: Those who get their income from stocks, shares and other assets often pay far less tax than those who work. We campaign for the tax rates on these forms of income to be equalised with income tax. So we all pay the same rates. It could raise £16.7 billion a year. Additionally we campaign for National Insurance to be applied to all forms of income, not just work. This would raise an additional £10.2 billion a year.
- Clamp down on tax havens: Hundreds of billions of pounds are lost every single year to tax avoidance via tax havens. We campaign for global action against tax havens. We’re demanding more transparency – and global minimum rates of tax, so countries aren’t undercutting each other.
Some people like economist Grace Blakeley are promoting a petition calling for Rachel Reeves to implement wealth taxes in the upcoming budget:
Tax wealth now
Sign the petition:https://t.co/jlnRDxnnmc
— Grace Blakeley (@graceblakeley) October 27, 2024
Given that Labour seem to be coming up with policy on the fly, there may still be time for them to take notice. It seems clear where their loyalties lie at this point, but it’s good to make clear that Labour’s loyalties are not those of the public they supposedly serve.
Kuenssberg: a wealth of bad opinions
Kuenssberg herself is clearly a working person. It takes hard work to consistently have opinions this bad, and we can’t take that away from her. If we implemented wealth taxes, however, we could claw back the undeserved wealth of her Tory mates.
Featured image via BBC
