Mathematics brought rigor to Economics.
Unfortunately, it also brought mortis.

The TaxPayers’ Alliance (TPA) shows that the average family pays £656,000 in tax over their lifetime.

After years of the state overspending and misusing our money we now have a greater idea of how far this legacy cripples the finances of British families. The TPA’s latest research shows the total amount of direct and indirect tax that households will pay over their working lifetimes and in retirement. Based on the current level of taxes applying over a working lifetime of 40 years and 15 years of retirement the key findings of their research are:

• The average household will pay over their lifetime a total of £250,000 in Income Tax and £101,000 in VAT;
• Poorest households are hit hardest by VAT and Council Tax. A household in the lowest quintile pays £57,000 in VAT and £55,000 in Council Tax over a lifetime;
• An average household in the lowest income quintile will pay £235,000 in direct and indirect taxes;
• An average household in the second income quintile will pay over £392,000 in direct and indirect taxes;
• An average household in the third income quintile will pay over £556,000 in direct and indirect taxes;
• An average household in the fourth income quintile will pay over £755,000 in direct and indirect taxes; and
• The four most burdensome individual taxes over a lifetime are Income Tax, VAT, employee National Insurance contributions and Council Tax.

Matthew Sinclair, Director TaxPayers’ Alliance said:

Households in the UK now pay an incredible amount in tax over a lifetime, handing over a hefty slice of their income. The VAT hike has added to the cost of living and many taxpayers are really feeling the pinch with little prospect of improvement on the horizon. The Chancellor needs to deliver a tax cut in the Budget, to ease the burden and help the economy to grow. Simpler, fairer taxes can decrease the lifetime tax bill for households and leave everyone with more of their own money, so they can decide how to spend it. 

When the poor are hit so heavily through taxation it is impossible to view current levels of taxation as fair and just. That is why we need lower, simpler taxes.

Last year, the Government delivered the biggest single increase of personal allowances in income tax history. The amount that can be earned before income tax rose from £6,475 to £7,475 in April 2011, which took 880,000 people out of the income tax system altogether. This year, the Government plans to increase it to £8,105. However, we need to go further.

I repeat the call that I made recently in correspondence with constituents:

For far too long, Governments have got away with making promises which could only be funded by excessively high taxes, immoral borrowing and damaging inflation. No other organisation would be allowed to get away with it and neither should government. More than that, I want to see lower taxes across the board. As a Conservative, I believe that less government, less tax, more freedom and more responsibility are elements of the right recipe to create a better society for everyone. I want radical change.

Via “Merle Hazard”:

I’m reminded of economist James Buchanan’s words:

The market will not work effectively with monetary anarchy. Politicization is not an effective alternative. We must commence meaningful dialogue with acceptance of these elementary verities. Far too much has been said and written in elaboration of the first statement, which too often is taken to be equivalent to the assertion that “capitalism” or “the market” has failed. Admittedly claims for market efficacy without qualifiers can be found. But economists should know that anarchy can only generate disorder rather than its opposite

.

David Willetts writes in the Telegraph: Our university revolution has only just begun:

Despite some dire warnings about the Coalition’s student finance reforms, we’ve already had more applications to university than in any year under the previous government. Once the decline in the total number of 18 year olds has been accounted for, their application rate is down only 1 per cent on last year, when a record number of people applied to get in. We’ve sent recent graduates into 2,000 schools and colleges to explain that maintenance grants are being increased and monthly repayments after graduation are being reduced.

I recommend the whole article. We previously commented on the funding reforms here.

This week Open Europe published a new report that shows how the Government could repatriate 130 EU laws on crime and policing, including the controversial European Arrest Warrant.

The Government must decide before June 2014 whether a whole raft of EU police and justice laws, adopted before the Lisbon Treaty took force, will continue to apply in the UK beyond December 2014. Under Lisbon, if the Government opts out of any one of the existing laws, it has to opt out of the entire lot.

If it decides to keep these laws as they currently stand, ultimate and full jurisdiction over them will for the first time be irreversibly transferred from the UK courts to the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg. For example, it would give EU judges the final say over the mechanisms for extraditing British citizens to other member states, on the basis of a case brought against the UK by the European Commission.

The EU document relating to these powers was debated on the Floor of the House on 25^th January, during which the Justice Minister, Crispin Blunt, said that:

It is clear that the Government and the European Scrutiny Committee are of the same view: we consider that European legislation in the field of criminal law should be contemplated only as the last resort and only where action at the European level is absolutely necessary.

However, words of caution were given by my colleague, Dominic Raab:

The document before us has all the hallmarks of a massive and substantial power grab from Brussels in the area of EU criminal law. We might have ad hoc opt-outs, but the direction of travel has very serious implications for this country. The clear ambition in the document is for a pan-European code on what the Commission calls “Euro-crimes”, backed by EU penalties and jurisdiction… This is a fork in the road: it is time to decide whether Britain will retain our unique justice system and common-law tradition. This is one of the most serious constitutional challenges the House will face in this Parliament.

Commenting on Open Europe’s report, their Research Director, Stephen Booth, said:

As much as the Government would like to put this crucial decision off until 2014, this is neither politically nor practically tenable. The body of law to which the 2014 block opt-out applies is reduced every time the UK opts in to a new EU law which either amends, repeals or replaces a law on the list. To date, the Government has chosen to opt in on every occasion it has had to make such a decision and has not required Parliament’s approval. No matter where one stands in the debate, this clearly marks a failure of democratic scrutiny.

Finally, the wording of the Europe Commission’s official communication on this issue is of particular concern:

In cases where the enforcement choices in the Member States do not yield the desired result and levels of enforcement remain uneven, the Union itself may set common rules on how to ensure implementation, if necessary, the requirement for criminal sanctions for breaches of EU law.

Regarding sanctions, “minimum rules” can be requirements of certain sanction types (e.g. fines, imprisonment, disqualification), levels or the EU-wide definition of what are to be considered aggravating or mitigating circumstances.

In their haste to use ever greater state power to solve the problems caused by excess state power, the European nations intend, it appears, to use an EU institution, the ECJ, to arbitrate disputes under a non-EU treaty.

This may seem arcane, but EU matters always are. It’s one of the reasons democrats and lovers of liberty keep losing. The world long since ought to have learned that politicians must obey the law, in crisis as in routine. And yet it suits our masters to bend their own rules.

I look forward to the PM’s statement today.