Skip to main content

Corporate Services - Approved Panel Minutes - 24 March 2006

The official version of this document can be found via the PDF button.

The below content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost, therefore it should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments.

Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel

Minutes of 9th meeting held on Friday 24th March 2006

Present Deputy P J D Ryan, Chairman

Senator J L Perchard Connétable J L S Gallichan Deputy J Gallichan

Apologies Connétable D J Murphy

In attendance Mr M Haden, Scrutiny Officer

Miss S Power, Scrutiny Officer

 

Ref Back

Agenda matter

Action

1.

Item 5 23.03.06

Age of consent review

The  Panel  delegated  to  Senator  J.  Perchard  and   Deputy  J. Gallichan agreement of the amendments to the text of the report following its previous meeting on 23rd March 2006. The text having reviewed by this group, the report was approved for presentation to the States on 28th March 2006.

 

2

Item 3 16.03.06

Fiscal Strategy - GST implementation

The  Panel  received  the  Treasury  and  Resources  Minister,  the Comptroller  of  Income  Tax,  the  Departmental  Scrutiny  Liaison officer and a representative of Crown Agents, Mr. G. Conlon, for a confidential presentation on the draft GST law which was to be published for public consultation on 28th March 2006.

The  Panel  noted  that  a  separate  consultation  document  on  the treatment of financial services would be issued at a later date. It was intended to publish consultation documents on zero/ten and look through in April and 20% means 20% before the summer recess.

The Panel was informed that the Household Expenditure Survey, to be  published  by  the  Statistics  Unit  in  June,  would  be  used  to revalidate the figures for the expected yield from the proposed tax.

The Panel noted that the Crown Agents research into the question of excluding  everyday  items,  such  as  basic  foodstuffs,  children's clothes, medical supplies and books and newspapers, had indicated that it was the highest income households who would benefit most from the listed exclusions. The Panel requested the evidence to support this statement.

The Panel was informed that the issue of the provision of residential accommodation  would  be  clarified  in  the  published  consultation document.

The Panel discussed with the Minister and the Comptroller of Income Tax the question of guaranteeing the GST rate at 3% for three years. The  Comptroller  maintained  that  the  business  community  would prefer to see the rate included in the primary law and that it would not  prove  difficult  to  amend  the  rate  if  necessary.  The  Minister asserted that it would not be feasible to amend the rate for at least three years and that it was important for the business community to have a period of certainty.

The Panel discussed with the Minister a number of technical issues which were open to change following the public consultation period,

 

including

allowing businesses to account for any tax only after they have received payment from their customers rather than at the point of invoice

the treatment of imports

the concept of belonging (Article 4)

the timing of returns

The Panel enquired whether any research had been conducted into the merits of joining the EU VAT system as an alternative to the GST proposals. The Minister responded that this research would not be beneficial in his view as it would mean going back over the decision taken  last  year  by  the  states  to  adopt  the  Fiscal  Strategy  (P. 44/2005). It remained the intention of the Minister to introduce a simple, broad based tax with the minimum number of exclusions based on modern systems such as those in place in New Zealand and Singapore.

The Panel was informed that a review team had been established by the Treasury to examine the results of the public consultation on the draft law. These results would be published. The Minister suggested that it was for the Panel to choose whether to be involved in the consultation exercise itself or to stand back from the exercise so that it could review the outcome objectively.

The Panel thanked the delegation before they withdrew from the meeting

Signed Date . ..

Chairman, Corporate Services Panel