Are Labour`s tax plans too moderate?

Paul Mason reckons the country needs a "Marshall Plan on steroids", with a "huge fiscal and monetary stimulus" directed at the "heartlands of poverty and decay", with opposition parties showing "leadership and vision" (A country in a critical condition, 23rd November, 2018). His view was supported by the UN`s special rapporteur on poverty whose recent investigation "exposed the baleful effects of austerity" (Crumbling Britain, 23rd November, 2018). Yet when the shadow chancellor says a Labour government would increase corporation tax to 26%, reduce the 45p threshold to £80,000, and tax at 50% earnings over £123,000, these plans are criticised for being "too unimaginative" (The tax conundrum, 16th November, 2018). 

   I am not sure the majority of the population, whose earnings average around £26,000 would agree. In fact many would see little wrong if  Labour`s proposals went further, with incremental increases imposed on earnings over £250,000 and £500,000, culminating with a 90% tax band on earnings over £1 million. Tory propaganda would claim such taxes curb aspiration but this lacks supportive evidence, as does the so-called Laffer curve which claims higher taxes do not increase revenue. The fact that this was dreamed up by Reagan`s advisers in the 1980s to justify lowering taxes on America`s richest, needs to be publicised more!

t does seem the Labour party, at least in its current guise, cannot win. Your Leader states that the Tory cuts to corporation tax saw "no resulting surge in investment", and adds that "in an era of weakening social trust" and austerity, the Tories still went ahead with tax cuts for the wealthy (The tax conundrum, 16th November, 2018). Yet when the shadow chancellor says a Labour government would increase corporation tax to 26%, reduce the 45p threshold to £80,000, and tax at 50% earnings over £123,000, these plans are criticised for being "too unimaginative"! How much would have been written about Labour missing open  goals, I wonder, if  restoring fairness to the tax system like this had not been pledged?

      Labour`s proposals, however, can certainly go further, with incremental increases imposed on earnings over £250,000 and £500,000, culminating with a 90% tax band on earnings over £1 million. The idea that such taxes would curb aspiration lacks supportive evidence, and can be classed as right-wing propaganda, but this is an area where Labour should be more imaginative. Even the modest increases McDonnell suggests will be attacked in the mainstream media, so Labour needs to get its retaliation in early. Television broadcasts and social media videos could be prepared, with actors playing roles of people in the workforce, explaining how much they earn , how much tax they pay currently, and how much they would pay under a Labour government. With only those earning over three times the national average having to pay  a modest amount more, and only the very rich having to pay lots more, not only would the aspiration myth be destroyed, the fairness of the proposals would be made obvious.

    The "super-rich" may well be "adept at avoiding taxation", but imaginative legislation making both tax avoidance, and advising on it, illegal, banning tax avoiders from any form of national representation,  honours, or from holding public office, would change a few tunes!