Friday, 26 September 2014

How To Lose The Female Vote In An Instant

Apparently Nigel Farage is attempting to woo the working class voters with a so-called 'wag tax'
Ukip has unveiled a tax on luxury goods such as designer shoes, handbags and sports cars in a series of populist announcements aimed at winning over former Labour voters.
The party wants shoes costing more than £200, handbags worth more than £1,000 and cars costing more than £50,000 to attract a higher level of VAT.
Leaving aside the fact that the acquisition of designer clothes can be part of working class culture, not least women who desire to own Louis Vuitton handbags and Blahnik shoes, what on earth is UKIP doing proposing to retain VAT? VAT is an EU tax which was introduced with our entry into the then EEC in 1973. Why is UKIP proposing to keep it?

We can't help as a consequence coming to conclusion that UKIP has no interest in leaving the EU...

Update: And what about Russell and Bromley? As an example. Most certainly they are not classed as "luxury shoes" but some cost more than £200. Have UKIP lost the plot? One suspects their policy has not only been made as they go along but by men who have no idea whatsoever...


  1. VAT must be by far and away the most complex tax ever imposed. The last time I looked there were well over 800 amendments to the underlying imposition. One of the joys of getting out of the Tyranny was going to be the elimination of VAT.

    I fondly imagined that on Day One of the Return to Sanity VAT would be replaced by a flat 13% sales tax.

    1. Indeed, I agree...and not least because it turns us into unpaid tax collectors.

      A local sales tax within a local structure subject to democratic oversight is the way to go.

  2. Up there with transnational EU parties and a Federal Britain.

    Plot and Lost come to mind.

  3. Should have kept his mouth shut, knowing he would make it a stealth tax if UKIP ever comes into power.

    But there again Farage needs to announce his luxury goods tax now; as part of all the UKIP bribes to get the votes for that power.

    Catch 22 comes to mind.

  4. Actually, lots of countries not in the EU have VAT except they call it something different. In the US it's known as Sales Tax for example but it's effectively the same thing.

    Before we joined the EU we had Purchase Tax which was actually unfairer than VAT.

  5. This does indeed seem inconsistent with UKIP's stance as a tax-cutting party. Personally my attitude to £5,000 handbags is that if there really are some people so rich and so stupid as to pay that much for a bag, it's a great way to get their money off them and into the coffers of whoever runs that small private business. As soon as they've spent it the money goes into circulation and creates other jobs.

  6. Another problem on UKIPs VAT idea is one hit by labour not so long ago.

    The EU "allows" the UK to have 3 VAT rates (no more) these are currently 0%, 5% and 20% on different things. Labour, not so long ago wanted fuel to return to 17.5% but the problem was to do that then everything in the 20% would have to fall to 17.5% to stay within the EU rules.
    Same problem with expensive handbags, Raise them to lets say 22.5% and low and behold you have to ditch one of the other rates.

    Whilst it would be nice to ditch say the 5% rate and make every thing under that bracket 0% instead, sadly the EU wont allow that.

    Though as you pointed out, UKIP wanting to keep VAT is quite a tell tale.

  7. UKIP wanting to keep VAT is quite a tell tale.
    They are all in it together...doesn't matter what tie they wear.
    Vote for government and you get government.

  8. VAT is probably the worst (i.e. economically damaging) tax, but the same applies for all taxes of that ilk, i.e. sales tax, turnover tax, gross profits tax, whatever. Calling it "local" doesn't help.

    Second worst tax is National Insurance.


    It would seem there are many who are happy to swallow the propaganda of the Barclay Beano.

    1. What you actually mean is the Great Leader contradicts his own economic spokesman Patrick O'Flynn within just 24 hours after the policy was announced by Patrick himself.

      It would seem there are so many UKippers who are happy to swallow the propaganda of the Great Leader.

    2. Well now, it seems that Mr O’Flynn said or wrote

      “I want it to investigate the feasibility of imposing a luxury goods rate of VAT. It makes no sense to me that VAT is levied at the same rate on budget items purchased by the hard-pressed as it is on premium ones that are the preserve of the very well heeled. And it seems to me that a luxury goods rate of 25 per cent could raise substantial extra funds from the wealthiest people. I would suggest such a rate be built around simple thresholds such as £200 for a pair of shoes, £1,000 for a bag or £50,000 for a new car.”

      “I want to investigate”, “It makes no sense to me”, “It seems to me”, “I would suggest”.

      Such wording indicates to me a personal view, not an αποδεξις of the UKIP’s intended manifesto; in the link I attached (did you actually bother to listen to it?) Mr Farage reasonably explains that the subject of a luxury goods rate was something to be discussed, but rejected.

      Your implication that I look upon Mr Farage as The Great Leader is, I find, somewhat insulting, and your presumption in “what you actually mean” more so.

      I understand that you and some others (possibly with good reason) have personal issues with Mr Farage, but I must say (I have not met him) that he comes across in his writing and public appearances as a rather jolly character, much more so than his detractors.

      Your, to me seemingly aggressive and hostile, attitude is reminiscent of that of the Yes campaigners in our recent referendum. It was that attitude that finally convinced me to vote No. Take heed of that if we do finally have the promised (lol as I think the youngsters would add) referendum on EU membership. And this abrasive attitude has finally convinced me to stop my months long havering and renew my membership of the UKIP.

      One last thought: when my namesake was faced with a knotty problem, he cut straight through it. History shows that it worked.

      Best wishes,