The Politics Of Envy

Before I go any further I must categorically say I am not a flag waver for the bookmakers, far from it.

In my ideal world bookmakers would play no part in horse racing and the sport would be healthily funded, as in other racing jurisdictions, by a Tote monopoly.  

Unfortunately we do not live in an ideal world and thanks to some ill-conceived legislation in the early 1960’s racing has been lumbered with a funding model which may (although I would question even that) have been appropriate for that day and age but which is now wholly inappropriate for the 21^st Century.

The recent “scandal” surrounding the taxation affairs of companies like Starbucks, Amazon and Google has again turned attention to the tax affairs of bookmakers.

You will note I placed the word scandal in quotes. For the simple reason I don’t view it as a scandal. The companies involved have done nothing illegal and are merely exploiting the taxation system to their best advantage.

If any Government introduced the draconian tax measures being naively called for by some, investment in this country would virtually end overnight and our economy would make Greece look positively flush.  

Of course there have been sanctimonious, mealy mouthed, protestations from all the usual suspects.

MP’s have described the actions of the companies as immoral. Two comments on that, firstly given the recent track records of Parliamentarians in relation to their expenses I don’t think they are in any position to Pontificate. Secondly it is not the position of MP’s or indeed anyone to tell others what is morally right or wrong. Morals are very personal to individuals; everyone has a different moral compass, developed by a combination of nurture and personal circumstances.

My moral code is unique to me and whereas I may not approve of the morals of others, what right do I have to impose my own moral code on others? The same should apply to politicians.

I agree there needs to be certain standards maintained in society but they come about through general consent and consensus, not by imposition by a random sample of 600 odd MP’s – and the term “odd” can be applied in more ways than one.

It could also be argued the “loopholes” being exploited by these companies are here because of the inability of successive Governments to frame strict enough legislation, although the pragmatic truth is the loopholes are there for a very good reason

Also how many of the influential people beating their chests about this issue are self-employed or work with freelance contracts? Do they not employ accountants to minimise their tax liabilities?

Many of these pontificating politicians earn decent incomes with extra-curricular activities, such as public speaking engagements. You can bet your bottom dollar they don’t pay full whack tax on the income derived from those activities.

Does anyone in their right mind pay more tax than they need to?

Anyway, I digress, as I said attention has once again turned to the bookmakers and their affairs.

Bookmakers are, once again, being attacked for moving offshore in order to minimise their tax and Levy liabilities.

Why shouldn’t they?

They are, in the main, public companies which have a legal responsibility to maximise returns for shareholders and if, perfectly legally, they choose to offshore their businesses to maximise returns why shouldn’t they?

There was a “debate” on Twitter last night around this issue.

I say “debate” because it’s interesting to note as soon as I began to question one of the arguments being put forward, a particular user who, until that point, I had a great deal of respect for and who I thought to be an intelligent, rational person, decided to block me, thus preventing any further, discussion.

It’s interesting to see people in their true, arrogant, colours.

Anyway, I digress again, the tenet of last night’s discussion is that businesses, including bookmakers (and other shops), should be forced to display, in their windows, details of where they pay their taxes. The “logic” behind this being customers could make an informed choice as to whether they choose to transact business with these organisations.

It is a ridiculous suggestion, not least because most punters / customers could not give a toss about where companies or organisations are based. Your average betting shop punter or man on the Clapham omnibus couldn’t care less if his bookmaker / shopkeeper pays 50% tax in the UK or 1% in Outer Mongolia.

For the small minority who really do care about the tax affairs of the businesses they do business with, the information is already easily available within the public domain.

It is being rather simplistic but those people who are generally exercised by the issue can be placed into one of two categories.

First, the Guardian reading, Champagne Socialists, who tend to be the biggest hypocrites of the lot – pretending to be supporters of the “working man” Which they are, provided their only contact with the “working man” is the chap they employ to decorate little Tristan’s nursery. Although in that instance the man is likely to be Polish as he’s cheaper, and who will, of course, be paid cash in hand to avoid tax.

Indeed how many of those self-righteously complaining have paid a tradesman “cash in hand” to carry out some work or have done “cash in hand” work themselves – and that is illegal!!   

The second category are those for whom the politics of envy is still a mantra, those who believe the crap spouted by the group above, those who generally have no self-ambition, who take the easy option and always look for somebody else to blame for their parlous position.

In the past few weeks I’ve see supposedly intelligent people calling for legislation to protect racing from FOBT’s, legislation to force businesses to display taxation information, legislation to protect racings funding. Legislate, legislate, legislate!!!!

Why should there be legislation to protect racing? Why should racing have special treatment? Why should racing not stand or fall on its own two feet, like any other industry?

The truth is racing has relied on a funding model which is no longer fit for purpose. Instead of facing up to the impending crisis it has buried its head in the sand and done nothing. The sport is paying the price for years of impotent, incompetent, “leadership”.

In parallel the bookmakers have been very competently and very astutely managed, to the extent they now hold all the aces, whilst racing holds a busted flush.

Much as I like my racing I also don’t want legislators wasting time discussing protectionist legislation simply to protect an industry which is floundering as a result of its own incompetence, they have far more important issues to deal with.

I don’t want to see legislation introduced to restrict the use of FOBT’s. The argument is trotted out that the machines are addictive, so are many things addictive. Alcohol is more addictive than FOBT’s and causes far more harm within society.

Many of those jumping on the “ban the FOBT” bandwagon are claiming their objections are from the position of protecting addictive gamblers, when in reality what they want is to reduce the competition for racing. If protection of racing is their motive that is fine – just be honest and say so.

As for “protecting” those addicted to FOBT’s – whatever happened to self responsibility? Of course, silly me, our Guardian reading Champagne socialists don’t believe the “plebs” should have any responsibility – the Nanny State should be looking after them and telling them what to do and think.   

I don’t want to see “politically” motivated witch hunts against organisations that are running their businesses efficiently and maximising profits using perfectly legitimate means. Clearly they are jealous of the success of those businesses.

The politics of envy stinks and has no place in any century, let alone the 21^st.