Should Gordon Brown levy a windfall tax on the banks in view of their vast profits? Should he include other businesses? What should be the threshhold? What should be done with the revenue generated?
2007-02-20 06:17:06 · 3 answers · asked by Duffer 6 in Business & Finance ➔ Taxes ➔ Other - Taxes
No, how would you define a windfall tax. They already pay a percentage of their profits in corporation tax.
Why should a business earning 6 billion profit pay a higher percentage than one earning 6 million. They probably employ people in the same ratio to thier profits.
2007-02-21 23:15:15 · answer #1 · answered by Mark J 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
here in the United States we have a capitalist economic system. as much as we may dislike an industry for the profits they earn, small or excessively large to encourage a "windfall tax" as you call it would be regressive and damaging to our economic system and would be communist or fascist at best. In America when a consumer sees or finds a company, merchant or corporation that the consumer does not believe has fair and equitable policies and prices the only real response is to boycott that organization and express your opposing views in a fair and equitable way. who knows may be they will hear it if every one expresses their views
2007-02-20 14:34:11 · answer #2 · answered by amazed 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No the banks should not suffer any more tax. BUT the FSA and OFT should continue to stamp out the unfair practices that are generating these profits:
1. Unfair/excessive charges
2. Ridiculously overpriced insurance and loans
3. Irresponsible lending
This way the money stays with the original person who earned it from their job.
2007-02-20 14:34:05 · answer #3 · answered by yfscots 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋