From STV‘s Craig Mehan, today:
Kate Forbes has warned that people could move out of the country if the Scottish Government hikes taxes again. The Scottish Government has previously committed to “progressive taxation”, with last year’s budget increasing income tax on the highest earners and creating a new band for those earning between £75,000 and £125,140. But speaking at an event at the SNP conference on Friday, organised by the Child Poverty Action Group Scotland, the deputy first minister warned of the dangers of further tax rises. Responding to a staff member from Oxfam Scotland, Forbes said she had to “guarantee income” for the Government.
“The nature of tax policy in a devolved context, you just can’t get away from the reality, it’s very easy to move – it just is very easy to move.
Remember this is the wife of a Tory farmer in the north of Scotland speaking. Why hasn’t he moved to England to avoid those SNP taxes? Bleedin’ obvious?
From the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Tax-Related Migration Is Grossly Exaggerated: a Research Preview, 2023
Most people in the U.S. plant roots in the places they live, and it takes a lot to uproot and move across state lines. Only about 1.5 percent of people make interstate moves in any given year. For those who do move, what attracts them to one state over another? For some it’s a job opportunity. For others it’s family, housing, or even better weather. One factor that comes up rarely, if ever, is taxes.
That doesn’t stop anti-tax advocates from claiming that proposals to raise state revenues will drive people, especially high-income people, away. They paint a picture of doctors, engineers, and other highly skilled and sought-after workers leaving the state en masse. They also cite the corollary, that lowering taxes will attract meaningful numbers of people to the state. These tax flight claims are dire — and wrong — and too many policymakers find them persuasive.1
I know, US research but from a similar culture, political and economic system. It is very easy to move from one US state to another but folk just don’t.
STV‘s Craig Mehan, writing the above, has strangely forgotten what he wrote in April of this year:
Thousands more workers moved to Scotland than left since the nation became the highest taxed part of the UK, research by HMRC has found.
The study found there was “no evidence of changes in labour market participation” following tax rises in 2017 that saw Scotland begin to diverge from the rest of the union.
HMRC found that in the 2021-22 tax year, Scotland benefited from a £200m surplus in taxable income from Brits from the rest of the UK.2, 3
Kate must surely have seen this tweet at the time:
Finally, I should thank Kate for making me feel less bad about leaving the SNP.
Sources:
- https://www.cbpp.org/blog/tax-related-migration-is-grossly-exaggerated-a-research-preview
- https://news.stv.tv/scotland/more-workers-moving-to-scotland-from-uk-than-leaving-after-snp-tax-rises-hmrc-finds
- https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/labour-market-participation-and-intra-uk-migration-of-taxpayers
Talking-up Scotland 
SLIGHTLY higher top rate , balanced with a LOWER bottom rate coupled with FREE prescriptions , FREE Uni tuition , lower Council Tax , lower house prices , lower Water Bills ( and CLEAN water ) , help with Child Care , FREE care for the elderly ….. yes , this will have all those greedy unionists running south to the border !
LikeLiked by 2 people
Since Devolution 2000, the population has increased. 5.4million. 5million since 1900 and before.
Why should Scotland pay more taxes for Westminster’s failure and bad policies. Scotland has to pay for illegal wars, Trident, nuclear, Brexit, tax evasion, HS2, Hickley Point etc. Scotland pays debt repayments on monies not borrowed or spent in Scotland. Westminster decides how 40% of Scotland’s revenues are spent. Not in Scotland’s best interest.
Scotland in surplus in fuel and energy, and nearer the source, pays more because of Westminster bad policies. No parity. A burden on the Scottish economy.
Independence would sort it out. No taxation without representation.
LikeLiked by 3 people
if tye scot gov needs cash they should introduce a large estate tax for estates.
lots of big estates in scotland are glorified holiday homes and inactive.
might wash out who actually owned them and raise a lot if money.
guess the snp will avoid anything contorversial
LikeLiked by 1 person
Land is exempt from tax to keep farms together. Increasing a land inheritance tax could split up farms that have been built up. Farms etc pay corporation tax, VAT tax on revenues. The farming/ food industry is worth £Billions to Scotland. By imposing land tax. It could be throwing the bath water out with the baby. It has to be weighed up. A balance. Much of Scotland is hilly. Sheep farming. Berries are good. Potatoes and vegetables. Barley, whisky, water, cereal. Cows milk and beef. Alternative milk products. Oats. More veggies. Scotland is self sufficient in many products.
Rateable value on some estates could be increased. Land is worth £7,000 an acre. With building permission 100+ times more. Anyone can buy an acre land and put a shed on it. Certain size but people do not want to. Or more would do it. Scotland has a ‘right to roam’ so people can camp, B&B or hotel it. Visit different areas. Scotland is one of the least densely populated places in the world because of Westminster policy. The Clearances, higher unemployment, wasting Scotland’s revenues and resources. Migration. 40million diaporia.
Japan 120million on two islands. One of the most densely populated. They need a bullet train. (Osbourne HS2 with no business case). Japan the highest life expectancy 85 years. Women five years more than men on average. More equal and fair. Better economy.
LikeLiked by 1 person
A land tax based on use would not be necessarily be bad for farmers, particularly those ob marginal land. Big estates owned by absentee landlords fir grouse shooting etc should be heavily taxed,as they bring little benefit to the community.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Land ownership in Scotland will change soon. Most farmers are elderly over sixty. There will be new ownership. With new ideas?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I suspect many (most) farms are owned by large estates or landowners who take rent and do nothing for it. Farmer owned farms likely reducing as more “investors” buy into the land-market. So increasing land tax would not necessarily have a huge effect on use. One simple way to reduce decimation would be to insist owners of farms live there and work the land themselves. As in Norway.
LikeLike
PS above posted by Jon M
LikeLike