The Trial of Taxation
A Talking Economics Evening in Stroud

Taxation is on trial. On the basis that it is not a legal obligation in the terms of the US constitution, millions of Americans are refusing to pay. In the UK, where precedent is the guide, the ‘king’s right to raise an army’ is accepted, or at least felt to be an incontestable right. Yet one might legitimately ask what ultimately stands behind taxation. Some think of it purely as a levy that enables the state to function, while others see it as a way in which the government can conduct social engineering: for example, by giving tax-breaks to ‘charitable’ organisations or by attempting to socialise the selfishness of its citizens, collecting revenue ‘here’ in order to redistribute them ‘there.’ Should the state should let itself out of the allocation loop by giving tax credits to social donors?

The ever-changing world of taxation engenders a lumbering bureaucracy in its wake. Enthusiasts for ‘flat-taxes’ point out that what is really needed is a simpler system. Why have umpteen forms of taxation when logic indicates that one would suffice? Proponents of ‘tax-justice’ put a question mark over the future of revenue taxation by describing the increasing trend of taxable income to go off-shore, with an estimated 355 billion of tax revenue lost annually.

The other side is that taxation puts the individual citizen on trial. Critics scoff that for those on low incomes tax is inevitable, whereas tax avoidance is simply a matter of planning for the well-to-do, who can afford to choose. Should one consult conscience or tax law in order to know what is due? Do I attempt to veil the real nature of my financial situation, by more or less legal means, or do I make a full and honest declaration?

Whither Fair Trade?

In an age of competitive marketing for brand value, what does it mean to say that one represents fairness? Now that Fairtrade products are widely available, the spotlight is falling increasingly on what lies behind these new brands. It is not just their trading practices that are examined, but also the conceptual integrity of what they promote. For example, if a number of new 'fairly traded' brands appear, what other than the market and competitive pricing will they base themselves on? Can each maintain its own version of fairness without reference to the others or will they eventually come round full circle to a competitive ‘beauty contest’ to decide who is the fairest of them all? To be able to say what one means by ‘fair’ is, of course, crucial, taking account of the inherent dynamics of true economic relationships in a way that is rigorous enough to lay down in criteria, but avoiding anything bureaucratically conceived or outwardly imposed. In the words of Michael Wilson from The Golden Blade 1978: “The ability to decide wisely is an art, not a system, and can be developed only from man to man, and from moment to moment. But if a group of people, however small, succeed in developing it, they will have enormous coherence as a unit. Our concept of ‘fair’ will deepen immeasurably with the penetration of our insight and the widening of our responsibility. Other countries have already had to borrow our English word fair, couldn’t we do more with it ourselves?”