The Sunday Times story regarding Tory candidate Zac Goldsmith and his non-dom status is absorbing on many counts.(1) It cuts deep into the toff Tories vs working class Labour narrative that many in the Labour party have been happy to push.
(2) It focusses on inheritance tax which is a clear dividing line going into the General Election with the Tories keen to scrap or at least curtail the tax and most other parties against such moves and currently on the popular side of the debate. Who can forget Gordon Brown's rare comedy gem that Cameron "will know by name almost all of the potential beneficiaries."
(3) Zac Goldsmith is part of the A-list candidates parachuted into safe seats. If he was to embarrassingly stand down as a candidate it could indirectly damage all other A-list candidates across the country.
Personally, I don't think he's done much wrong. He's not broken any laws and tax avoidance is a legitimate pursuit that accountants and financial services firms openly promote.
There is even a similarity to the story with the SNP PPC Charles Brodie who has been urged to step down as the candidate due to being caught drink-driving. Once Charles has paid the fine and learned the lesson, I simply do not see why an extra punishment in not standing for Parliament should be applied, noting of course that Zac hasn't even broken a law!
We need to stop adhering to the knee-jerk notion that the media should always 'get its man' when murmurs for resignations begin.
I am personally impressed with what Zac Goldsmith has to offer and was particularly taken with a recent Newsnight show where he stood shoulder to shoulder with Caroline Lucas of the Green party and John Sauven of Greenpeace and intelligently, knowledgably pushed his argument with the apparent agreement of his two fellow guests. As much as I like Ed Miliband, I suspect there would be a step up if Zac was to made the Environment Secretary in the next term. It would be a shame to lose someone so talented over something so trivial.
Furthermore, Governments shouldn't focus on individuals when setting policies, even individuals inside their own cabinet. If there is something wrong with non-dom status then let's change the law accordingly, if there isn't anything wrong then let's leave them and their millions alone.
I still think the key factor in this story is that Zac Goldsmith would contribute more to the UK as Environment Secretary than he would by stumping up a tax liability that doesn't exist.
A curious twist however is that if Zac Goldsmith changes (or is made to change) his non-dom status it will be too cynical a move for me to accept, a conclusion that is in stark contrast to that of Iain Dale I have noted.
Individuals should either back their conduct to the hilt or admit they were wrong and step down, there is no middle terrain where one has done no wrong but will still change one's situation anyway.
And if David Cameron makes Zac change his non-dom status then the Tory leader will be confirming he is shallow and obsessed with PR.
7 comments:
It wouldn't surprise me if this story about Goldsmith actually came from Tory sources.
He was blamed for the Conservatives lurch greenward when Cameron first came to power which seemed to stick in the craw of the old guard of Tories. He's always struck me as not being a natural fit in the Conservatives, as if he's trying to shoehorn himself into the party. His uncle was, after all, a founder of the Green Party.
I'm not convinced by the Greening Of The Tories, it'll be interesting to see Zac's reaction if/when the facade slips.
Zac Goldsmith was not parachuted into a safe seat - indeed he declined several safe ones to instead stand in a Lib Dem held target (always amongst the hardest targets to swing).
Being a non-dom is one of the more difficult tax status to apply for. He must have had some reason for him to be granted this. It depends on my things such as parents birth place , intentions etc. Many will think it is a way of avoiding UK tax but that is not so. It is about remitting foreign income into the UK. If you have a non-dom status then in the past if the your non UK income was not brought in the UK then it was not chargeable to UK tax.If you are resident and ordinarily resident you are charged on the whole worldwide income less certain exclusions. Non-Doms are now being charged a large annual fee by the Treasury to retain non-dom status.
my = many in line 3
Seems to me you're right jeff.
Brown has made tax avoidance a part of getting rich people to mlive in London. Half the economy of London appears to be dependent upon the fact that very rich people live there but don't pay tax there. It's a way of getting them not to live in Switzerland.
It's the British way. Why would Zac, who is worth £300,000,000 not do it?
The Tories would never stand for Cameron appointing Goldsmith as his Environment Secretary in May. Can you imagine the howls of outrage over a) his lack of Parliamentary experience and b) his politics, however veiled now?
This is the man who said in a 2003 interview with People and Planet:
“If only a few brave countries pulled out of the global economy, then the whole rotten edifice would implode, collapsing under its own weight. At what point are the fucking politicians going to do something?! At what point are they going to realise that it is not about making the gradual slip into the shit easier but a question of the fundamentals of our system?”
To be a non-dom Goldsmith must be maintaining 2 houses & gouing abroad, presumably flying, very regularly. That makes him a cmoplete hypocrit, like Al gore, saying that the common people must have a tiny "carbon footprint" forced on them while they have no such limitations.
The eco-fascist movement is full of such parasites.
Post a Comment