Skip to main content

Draft budget 2017- Ministerial Response- 08 February 2017

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.

STATES OF JERSEY

DRAFT BUDGET 2017 (S.R.8/2016): RESPONSE OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES

Presented to the States on 8th February 2017 by the Minister for Treasury and Resources

STATES GREFFE

2016  S.R.8 Res.

DRAFT BUDGET 2017 (S.R.8/2016): RESPONSE OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES


Ministerial Response to: Ministerial Response required by: Review title:

Scrutiny Panel: INTRODUCTION


S.R.8/2016

27th January 2017 Draft Budget 2017 Corporate Services


The Minister, as always, welcomes the assistance of the Panel. Whilst the debate on the Budget 2017 has now taken place, full responses are given below to all findings and recommendations.

FINDINGS

 

 

Findings

Comments

1

Increases in Impôts duties for alcohol and tobacco are in part linked to health considerations.

Rather than being in part linked, the strength of evidence for the causal link between the price of alcohol, level of consumption, and related  harm  to  a  population  is  considered  extremely  robust. Studies demonstrating this link include systematic reviews and meta-analyses, which are considered the gold standard in scientific evidence,  as  they  analyse  the  results  of  all  available  research studies on a particular intervention, in order to calculate an overall effect size.

Pricing policies and taxation are therefore employed as one of the most  reliable  tools  to  decrease  population-level  alcohol-related harm  and  per  capita  consumption.  This  approach  should  be distinguished from provisions targeted at sub-groups with alcohol dependence,  who  require  specialist  care  and  clinical  support – although price increases serve to create a supportive environment for these higher tier measures. Universal price increases impact behaviour at a wider population level, and more so among price- sensitive groups such as young people. This wider population- level approach, by impacting behaviour to a small degree, but for a larger  proportion  of  the  population,  leads  to  large  economic savings;  for  example,  through  increased  productivity  in  the workplace, reductions in preventable cancers and other illness in later life, and reductions in alcohol-related crime, violence and road accidents.

WHO  and  OECD  both  recommend  tax  increases  as  part  of  a strategy to reduce the harm caused to society by the use of alcohol.

It is also important to note that while increases on impôts duties are  linked  to  reduced  consumption  and  therefore  need  to  be considered as measures to improve health, these fiscal measures form  part  of  a  strategic  response  that  together  impact  on  the known health and social harms.

 

 

Findings

Comments

2

There is a lack of clear statistical evidence showing the impact that rises in impôts duties have on consumption of alcohol and tobacco.

Meta-analysis of 112 research studies on the link between taxes and price and alcohol consumption:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1360-

Systematic review of 50 research studies on impact of price of alcohol on alcohol-related disease, traffic crash deaths, sexually transmitted disease, violence and crime:

http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2009.1860

07

Global research and policy advice: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3860576/

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs349/en/

http://www.oecd.org/health/oecdoutlinesactionforgovernmentstota

ckleheavycostofharmfuldrinking.htm

The relationship between alcohol taxes and binge drinking: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/add.12818/abstract

Relationship between small increases in tax above inflation on violence-related injuries in England and Wales.

http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/early/2016/06/16/injurypr

ev-2015-041884.abstract

Relationship between alcohol tax policies and health inequalities. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26905063

When  taken  alongside  the  considerable  scientific  evidence  of pricing impact, our own local evidence of per capita consumption alongside above-inflation impôts duties appears to support the idea that Islanders' alcohol consumption levels are similarly influenced by price mechanisms.

https://www.gov.je/SiteCollectionDocuments/Health%20and%20

wellbeing/R%20Alcohol%20Profile%202015%2020151112%20

Much  of  the  evidence  presented  above  links  price  and consumption having impact on younger people. Locally, we are able to identify, similarly to other jurisdictions, that with above- inflation rises alongside other strategic measures, that both self- reported  alcohol  consumption  and  tobacco  consumption  have steadily fallen amongst school-age children and young people over the  same  periods.  This  is  particularly  important  in  delaying unhealthy  behaviours  and  setting  healthier  behaviours  as  our Islands young people grow into a healthier adulthood.

https://www.gov.je/SiteCollectionDocuments/Government%20and

%20administration/R%20A%20Picture%20of%20Health%20Jerse

y%202014%2020150302%20HI.pdf

Price and tax measures are an effective and important means of reducing  tobacco  consumption  by  various  segments  of  the population, in particular young persons.

 

 

Findings

Comments

 

 

Smokers  are  no  different  to  other  consumers  when  spending money:  price  dominates  decision-making.  Consequently, increasing the price of tobacco through taxation remains the single most  effective  way  of  reducing  smoking  rates  ( Wilson L.M., Tang E.A.,  Chander G.,  et al  2012)  Impact  of  tobacco  control interventions on smoking cessation, and prevalence: a systematic review. Journal of Environmental and Public Health Article ID 961724.

Economic models show that a 10% increase in price leads to a 4% drop in smoking prevalence across the population, with higher quit rates among lower-income smokers and younger smokers (Jha & Chaloupka, 2009). Curbing the epidemic: Governments and the economics of tobacco control World Bank.

Additionally, it should be borne in mind that the Economics and

Statistical Departments of the World's largest Treasuries calculate

the price-elasticity of demand for excisable goods such as alcohol

and  tobacco.  These  calculate  the  relationship  between  price

increases and demand. It would be disproportionately expensive

for Jersey to attempt such analysis. However, we can conclude

from available data that Jersey has not yet reached the tipping

point where a duty-increase not only generates reduced demand

but also reduces States revenues.

3

The purpose of fuel duty is not solely to cover road maintenance costs.

Both fuel duty and Vehicle Emissions Duty are levied for environmental reasons.

The purpose of fuel duty – like all impôts duties – is primarily to raise revenue to pay for Jersey's public services. Excise duties – especially  for  alcohol  and  tobacco –  have  been  charged  by Governments across the globe for centuries. In recent decades, Governments  have  become  more  aware  of  the  environmental, health and social costs of alcohol, tobacco and vehicle emissions and have taken those factors into account when affecting price levels through duty increases.

In  economic  terms,  it  is  rational  for  Governments  to  try  to "internalise"  (i.e. recover)  some  of  the  "external"  costs (e.g. healthcare, atmospheric pollution) of consumption of certain goods  where  markets  do  not  automatically  adjust  for  those external  costs.  In  the  absence  of  government  intervention, consumers do not face prices which reflect more accurately the costs of consuming particular goods, and this will mean those costs are borne by Society as a whole.

4

A total of

£103 million will be withdrawn from returns on the Strategic Reserve between 2016 and 2019.

The proposals for withdrawals from the Strategic Reserve were agreed by the States in  P.76/2015. The total amounts have not changed,  except  for  the  additional  £16 million  which  may  be required following the slight reduction in income forecasts after BREXIT. The use of the Strategic Reserve in the short term, as the economy recovers and sustainable measures are phased-in, is in line with the advice of the FPP and should protect the economic recovery in the short term.

 

 

Findings

Comments

5

Capital expenditure is largely being funded from the Strategic Reserve while the States work towards returning to a budgeted surplus in 2019.

The use of the Strategic Reserve in the short-term, as the economy recovers and sustainable measures are phased-in, is in line with the advice of the FPP and should protect the economic recovery in the short term. Of the £168 million capital programme, it is currently proposed that £82 million, or just less than 50% of the capital programme, is funded from the Consolidated Fund.

6

The proposals in the Budget to introduce reporting for all companies on a 0% tax rate could lead to the introduction of some form of taxation on those companies. This could be similar to the "Tesco Tax" in the Isle of Man.

The  Minister  for  Treasury  and  Resources  first  mooted  the possibility  of  applying  higher  rates  (i.e. higher  than  0%)  of corporate income tax to some businesses in 2015, and work will continue through 2017 with a view to bringing forward proposals in the Budget 2018.

7

There is no evidence yet of a coherent plan to fund the gap left by the rejection of the health charge; however a revised version of the health charge is not under consideration.

The Council of Ministers has been  clear that "future  revenue- raising measures" will be brought forward to replace the funding from the Health Charge for 2018 and 2019, in advance of the Budget 2018.

These "revenue-raising measures" will include consideration of the distributional impacts of such proposals. As noted above, part of this additional revenue may be raised by applying higher rates of corporate income tax to some businesses.

After  the  rejection  of  the  income-based  Health  Charge,  the Treasury will continue to work to identify options for a long-term, sustainable  funding  mechanism  for  Health  for  consideration during the next MTFP period 2020–2023.

8

The Panel's advisers consider that the revised income forecasts used in the Budget are still optimistic and do not reflect current levels of uncertainty.

The  income  forecasts  for  the  original  MTFP 2016–2019 (June 2016) included an assessment of future uncertainties. The final MTFP Addition forecasts were reduced slightly following the revised  economic  assumptions  from  the  FPP  in  August  2016 which were adjusted to reflect the uncertainty created by the UK referendum result. The FPP did highlight that the "impact of the referendum on the Jersey economy is still very uncertain and is likely  to  remain  so  at  least  until  negotiations  are  complete". However,  they  provided  a  central  projection,  which  was  their independent assessment at that time of the most suitable economic assumptions to use.

The Draft Budget 2017 also includes comparisons of the economic assumptions (August 2016) used in the Budget forecasts against those current at the same time for the UK. These show that in general the economic assumptions used are either in line or less optimistic than those used in the UK.

 

 

Findings

Comments

 

 

The forecasts are presented as the central point of a range, but current reports suggest that 2016 States revenues should achieve those forecasts.

9

Productivity in the economy has fallen by 20% since 2000.

This was highlighted in the Draft Budget 2017 and is not a new development. More recently, productivity in Jersey (as measured by GVA per full-time equivalent employee) declined slightly in 2015 (by 0.2%). However, this was made up of an increase of 3% in non-finance sectors and a decrease of 4% in finance (driven by the fall in profitability).

Jersey is not alone in experiencing weak productivity trends, as there has been a sustained worldwide slowdown in productivity since the financial crisis, and raising it is the central long-term economic challenge. Productivity determines living standards in the long term, and improving it is the key to increasing wages. As well as investing in health, education and infrastructure as set out in the MTFP Addition, the Strategic Plan sets out how the Council of  Ministers  aims  to  rectify  this  productivity  performance  and optimise economic growth.

10

The actual balance on the Consolidated Fund is distorted by the upfront approval of funding for capital projects.

The unallocated balance on the Consolidated Fund is prepared for Annual Budgets and MTFPs in accordance with the Finance Law to ensure that the Fund is not over-committed. The actual cash balance  on  the  Consolidated  Fund,  which  is  much  higher  and includes allocated but unspent capital budgets, is reported each year in the States Annual Report and Accounts. The Minister is aware  that  the  Panel  does  not  favour  change  to  the  existing arrangements,  but  nevertheless  the  Treasury  will  continue  to consider options to bring forward such change.

11

It is not clear how the States intends to fund the payment of Parish rates on States properties.

The changes to the Rates (Jersey) Law 2005 required to facilitate the States' payment of rates was rejected by the States during the debate of the Draft Budget 2017.

The Minister for Treasury and Resources had committed to work with the Connétable s and bring forward proposals for the funding of the States' payment of rates.

Further work will now be required with the Connétable s during 2017 to agree how to progress the payment and funding of the States'  payment  of  rates,  which  remains  a  priority  from  the Strategic Plan, ahead of the Budget 2018.

RECOMMENDATIONS

 

 

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

1

Where health

considerations play a part in proposed rises to impôts duties, the Minister should provide reliable evidence to show how such rises will reduce consumption.

A portion of alcohol and tobacco duties should be hypothecated to the Health Department.

T&R

T&R

Accept

Reject

Global research (as linked to above) and policy  advice  from  global  organisations like the OECD & WHO agree the price of alcohol  and  tobacco  does  affect consumption  and  should  form  part  of government  strategy  to  reduce  the  harms caused to society by alcohol:

http://www.who.int/fctc/text_download/en/

Include more detail in Budget 2018

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/

PMC3860576/ http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/

fs349/en/ http://www.oecd.org/health/oecdoutlinesact

ionforgovernmentstotackleheavycostofhar

In Jersey the drive to support increases in impôt  duty  run  alongside  a  strategic approach  to  the  issue  of  high  levels  of alcohol-related  harm  in  Jersey,  included work towards a new licensing law through the Alcohol and Licensing Strategy, and the recent  formation  of  a  Drug  and  Alcohol Action Team.

It is probably unrealistic and unaffordable for  Jersey  to  create  price-elasticity-of- demand' data for Jersey, but could explore the case for considering the elasticities used by  H.M. Treasury –  if  we  judge  the similarities  between  the  UK  and  Jersey markets are broadly similar. However, we already  know  that  Jersey's  per capita consumption of alcohol is greater than the UK's.

As a matter of principle, the Treasury does not support hypothecation of taxes, except in certain specific cases where all of the revenue  so  raised  is  to  be  exclusively earmarked  for  specified  expenditure. Hypothecation  increases  administrative costs and limits Ministers' ability to fund public  services  according  to  a  current assessment of priorities.

 

 

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

 

 

 

 

Customs Officers will continue to consult with  Health  officers  over  increases  in alcohol and tobacco duties and their impact on importation levels.

The  Treasury  will  continue  to  work  to identify a sustainable funding mechanism for Health after the rejection of the income- based Health Charge, but does not consider the  hypothecation  of  impôts  duties  a sustainable option.

 

2

A proportion of Fuel

Duty should be hypothecated for road maintenance costs. VED is levied for environmental reasons and should be hypothecated for environmental projects.

T&R

Reject

Impôts duties are part of general taxation that  supports  the  funding  of  all  public services.  As  noted  above, as a  matter of principle,  the  Treasury  does  not  support hypothecation  of  taxes  except  in  certain specific cases. There are currently no plans for  the  direct  hypothecation  of  existing impôts duties for health, environmental or road-surfacing budgets.

N/A

3

Once States' budgets

have returned to surplus, the capital expenditure programme should be funded in full through annual depreciation. Further work should be carried out by the Department for Treasury and Resources to establish the best way of ring- fencing depreciation in order to achieve this.

T&R

Accept in principle for ordinary capital items

The current financial plan for a return to broadly balanced budgets by 2019 includes a  capital  allocation  broadly  equivalent  to the  annual  depreciation  level.  However, there will always be a need for additional funding  strategies  for  certain  Major Projects such as the hospital.

Work continues towards potential changes to  the  capital  allocation  and  approvals process to bring this more in line with the cash flow of capital projects.

The  Treasury  will  explore  a  number  of options,  including  depreciation,  before recommending  changes  to  the  Finance Law.

From return to surplus

Draft Budget 2018

October 2017

 

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

4

Any further tax

increases or charges considered by the Minister for Treasury and Resources in the future must take into account the considerable additional burden placed on personal taxpayers in recent years and be supported by reliable evidence and impact assessments.

T&R

Accept

An  extensive  distributional  analysis  was provided for the revenue-raising measures contained  in  the  MTFP  Addition  (in particular the Health Charge proposals).

A Review of Personal Income Tax data has been commissioned – to help explain how tax  changes  since  2007  have  affected Islanders  across  the  different  income groups.  This  will  include  analysis  with respect to the proposed commercial waste charges. The Review began in October and is being overseen by a Steering Group of Ministers and other members of the States Assembly.

Future tax changes (as has been the case with  previous  tax  changes)  will  include consideration of the distributional impacts of  such  proposals.  It  is  the  Minister's intention  that  the  "future  revenue-raising measures" to replace the funding from the rejected Health Charge will include options to increase the tax liability of companies.

Draft Budget 2018

October 2017

5

The Department for

Treasury and Resources should undertake work to analyse the reason for the fall in productivity in Jersey's economy over a period when the population has grown consistently, in order to identify ways that productivity can be increased.

T&R

Accept in principle

The  Council  of  Ministers  have  already given  very  high  priority  to  boosting productivity in light of the trends in Jersey in  recent  years.  As  well  as  investing  in health, education and infrastructure as set out  in  the  MTFP  Addition,  the  Strategic Plan  sets  out  the  Council  of  Ministers' priorities for policy going forward in order to increase productivity. In particular –

  • promoting jobs and growth in the technology sector, with a particular focus on Fintech
  • delivering and further enhancing the existing Financial Services Policy Framework
  • promoting higher productivity in all economic strategies, including the new Tourism, Retail and Rural Economy Strategies
  • developing a new and challenging Enterprise Strategy, a new Innovation Strategy and attracting more inward investment

Ongoing

 

 

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

 

 

 

 

  • reviewing and upgrading the existing Skills Strategy
  • developing a new Competition Framework and reviewing opportunities to promote competition
  • identifying and addressing barriers to work for key groups
  • adopting environmental management principles to help improve productivity and efficiency and attract environmental businesses in line with our economic growth objectives.

In addition, the MTFP provides investment in an Economic and Productivity Growth Provision,  which  is  intended  to  drive growth and productivity across the whole economy.

These  are  the  priorities  for  productivity policy and where Treasury and Resources believe  resources  can  be  used  most effectively.  Particularly  as  the  FPP  did substantial  analysis  of  Jersey's  economic performance in its 2015 Pre-MTFP Report (https://www.gov.je/SiteCollectionDocume nts/Government%20and%20administration/

 

R%20Fiscal%20Policy%20Panel%202015

%20annual%20report%2020150130%20JE

.pdf)  including  productivity  trends.  It concluded  that  trends  over  the  recent economic cycle were a result of the fall in financial  services  productivity  (driven  by the fall in banking profitability).

6

The treatment of

capital allocations within the Consolidated Fund should be changed to better reflect the actual profile of expenditure and to provide clarity on unspent amounts and unallocated funds.

T&R

Accept

Work continues towards potential changes to  the  capital  allocation  and  approvals process to bring this more in line with the cash flow of capital projects.

The Minister is encouraged that following the advice from CIPFA, the Panel is now more inclined to be supportive of a change in approach to capital funding.

This may require changes to the Finance Law and once proposals are developed, the Treasury will share these with the Panel.

Draft Budget 2018

October 2017

 

 

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

7

Forecasts for the

Consolidated Fund included in future budgets and MTFPs should be accompanied by an analysis of unspent capital allocations.

T&R

Accept

An  analysis  of  the  unallocated Consolidated Fund balance which identifies unspent  capital  and  other  unspent allocations  is  provided  in  the  Annual Report  and  Accounts  each  year  (see page 220  of  the  Financial  Report  and Accounts 2015).

Draft Budget 2018

October 2017

The forecast unspent capital balance could be provided alongside capital forecasts if appropriate.

8

Consideration should

be given to requiring departments to re-apply annually for funding for capital projects which have not commenced.

T&R

Accept in principle

Work continues towards potential changes to  the  capital  allocation  and  approvals process to bring this more in line with the cash flow of capital projects.

The Minister is encouraged that following the advice from CIPFA the Panel is now more  inclined  to  be  supportive  of  this approach.

This may require changes to the Finance Law and once proposals are developed, the Treasury will share these with the Panel.

Draft Budget 2018

October 2017

9

The States should not

proceed with the payment of Parish rates until a funding mechanism has been found.

T&R

Accept

The  changes  to  the  Rates  (Jersey)  Law 2005  required  to  facilitate  the  States' payment of Rates was rejected by the States during the debate of the Draft Budget 2017.

The Minister for Treasury and Resources had  committed  to  work  with  the Connétable s  and  bring  proposals  for  the funding of the States payment of rates.

Further work will now be required with the Connétable s during 2017 to agree how to progress the payment and funding of  the States' payment of rates, which remains a priority from the Strategic Plan, ahead of the Budget 2018.

Draft Budget 2018

October 2017

CONCLUSION

The Minister looks forward to further constructive dialogue with the Panel on all tax and spending matters.