Shirley-Anne Somerville defends top tax rate after millionaire cut call
Sir Tom Hunter published a report to draw on lessons and successes from Singapore, which has a similar-sized population.
The Hunter Foundation commissioned an independent study by Oxford Economics to 'inform a debate on Scotland's future'.
The entrepreneur called for 'radical' change, particularly when it comes to tax.
READ MORE: Inside the extreme far-right plot to infiltrate Reform UK
'Let's make Scotland a low tax economy where we welcome entrepreneurs and wealth creators,' Hunter said.
'They will innovate, create new jobs, and our tax take will go up allowing Scotland to spend more on education and health care.
'The UK and Scottish Governments continue to punish the entrepreneurial community - the value creators - with yet more tax. A different tack needs to be taken.
"Nothing is free in Singapore, but here everything seems to be, and the Pound printing machine can't keep up. No country has ever taxed its way to growth.'
Shirley-Anne Somerville was questioned about Hunter's suggestions on the BBC's Sunday show, and the higher rate of income tax brought in by the Scottish Government.
(Image: Hunter Foundation)
Currently, those earning over £125,140, the top rate, will pay 48% in 2025-26.
'The implications for that and the progressive taxation we have in Scotland, that allows us to have £1.5 billion more coming into our public services,' the Social Justice Secretary said.
'I appreciate that there are calls for tax cuts, but we have to appreciate particularly in the short term that means cuts to public services.'
Pressed on 'how much more' the Scottish Government takes in from that top rate, Somerville defended the system in place.
'The overall progressive taxation system that we have, as compared to the UK for the totality of the changes we've made allows for £1.5bn more to come into the system than we would already have,' she explained.
'So I appreciate there may be people who wish to see that and can make the case there will be in the longer term about what will happen with tax takes. In the shorter term we are setting our budget as we do, taking those decisions.
READ MORE: Harbour Energy under fire over nearly £1bn in dividends amid job cuts
'If you were to change those decisions you would see £1.5bn coming out.
'What those tax takes do also allow us to do that social contract with the people, free tuition, free prescriptions, whether it's our early learning and childcare offer for three and four and eligible two-years olds, those are aspects that many people who do pay that higher taxation can benefit from.
'Of course we have the majority of people not paying any more tax than they do in the rest of the UK.'
Hunter's report called for a new immigration policy, a 20-year economic plan around renewable energy, housing and life sciences, and a radical rethink of health and social care 'including how it's funded'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
10 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Labour's 'war-ready' plans will be blown apart by Nato's demand for 3.5% spending on defence and cause £40billion funding shortfall... and tax hikes might be the only way to plug the gap
Voters were warned last night to brace for further tax rises after Nato spending demands blew a £40billion hole in Labour 's plans. Nato chief Mark Rutte has told Keir Starmer and other leaders that the alliance later this month will raise its minimum spending target from 2 per cent of GDP to 3.5 per cent by 2035 to deter Russia 's Vladimir Putin and placate US President Donald Trump. Military sources said it would be 'unthinkable' for Britain to refuse the demand given its leading role in Nato. But experts claimed the bill could eventually run to £40billion a year – the same amount raised by Chancellor Rachel Reeves in her controversial Budget last year and equal to 5p on the basic rate of income tax. Defence Secretary John Healey refused to rule out tax increases to help fund the push to move Britain to a position of 'war-fighting readiness' but said ministers would 'set out how we'll pay for future increases in the future'. The Prime Minister has committed to raising defence spending from 2.3 per cent of GDP to 2.5 per cent by 2027. And he has said the Government will move to 3 per cent at some point in the early 2030s 'subject to economic and fiscal conditions'. But he repeatedly refused to set an 'arbitrary date' for meeting it or set out how it would be funded. Sir Keir was holding emergency talks with advisers in Downing Street about how to respond to the demand. He said this week there were 'discussions about what the contribution should be going into the Nato conference'. This week's Strategic Defence Review said Britain must be ready 'to step up, to lead in Nato and take greater responsibility for our collective self-defence'. Whitehall sources cautioned the Nato target may not have to be met in full for a decade, although intermediate goals could be set along the way. The increased spending demand comes at a time when Ms Reeves is already struggling to meet her own fiscal rules and ministers are in retreat over welfare cuts. The Institute for Fiscal Studies warned 'chunky' tax rises would be needed even to hit 3 per cent spending on defence. Professor Malcolm Chalmers, of the Royal United Services Institute, claimed meeting 3.5 per cent by 2035 would cost an extra £40billion a year and said this was equivalent to raising overall income tax receipts 'by 10 per cent'. Former Army chief Lord Dannatt said: 'I would make the case that we have got to tighten our belt. And if we can't borrow more, which we can't, if we can't grow the economy, which we're struggling to, then we've got to put some taxes up.' Official figures show Labour's current plans would see spending on sickness benefits rise faster than that on defence. Despite planned cuts to disability benefits, spending on sickness and disability is forecast to rise from 2.4 per cent of GDP to 3.1 per cent by the end of the decade, reaching almost £100billion a year by 2030. Former Tory chancellor Jeremy Hunt said yesterday that welfare reform was the 'only way' to square the circle. Mr Rutte is expected to set the minimum defence spending target when Nato leaders gather in The Hague, Netherlands, on June 24. The target will be supplemented with an additional goal of spending 1.5 per cent on security- related activity, taking the total to the five per cent demanded by Mr Trump. But former Nato chief Lord Robertson warned that many countries would struggle if the aims are set too high. The Labour peer, who led the Government's review, said: 'I can see why Nato is giving targets but whether they are realisable is a different question altogether.'
South Wales Guardian
27 minutes ago
- South Wales Guardian
Al Qaida terrorists tried to poison UK water supply, says ex-security minister
Details of the foiled 2008 extremist plot were given by Lord West of Spithead, who was in office at the time, as the Government was tackled at Westminster over steps to protect the Britain's reservoirs against attack by hostile forces. It follows the publication of comprehensive military plans to safeguard the UK in the face of threats from Vladimir Putin's Russia and China. Sir Keir Starmer said the strategic defence review (SDR), published earlier this week, would create a 'battle-ready, armour-clad' nation. The move comes against the backdrop of ongoing concerns about the vulnerability of critical national infrastructure to attack. Pressed in Parliament over whether there had ever been an attempt or a plan uncovered to contaminate the UK's water supply, environment minister Baroness Hayman of Ullock said: 'My understanding is that there has not been such an incident, but that does not mean that we should be complacent. 'We know that our water and energy infrastructure are both potentially vulnerable to hostile attacks.' But moving to correct his frontbench colleague, Lord West, who served as Home Office minister for security and counter-terrorism from 2007 to 2010, said: 'In 2008 there was an attempt by eight al Qaida operatives to poison north London water supplies. 'I am pleased to say that our agencies worked brilliantly to stop it happening.' The former Navy chief, who sits on Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee, added: 'As a result, in the Home Office we put in hand a whole series of work on police response times, indicators of where the outflows from reservoirs went and new barriers. 'Where has all that work gone? These things somehow seem to disappear. There should be some reports, and hopefully someone did something about it.' Responding, Lady Hayman said: 'That is extremely interesting and very helpful of my noble friend. I will certainly look into it, because it is an important point.' Earlier, the minister told peers: 'The Government's first duty is to protect our national security and keep our country safe. 'Defra (the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) recognises that the drinking water supply is a potential target for hostile actors. 'It works with water companies and partners across Government to understand and monitor threats to water supply and to consider responses as appropriate to protect the security of our water system.' But Labour peer Lord Harris of Haringey, who is chairman of the National Preparedness Commission, said: 'I wonder whether her department is being a tad complacent in talking simply about monitoring the threat rather than looking at what practical arrangements can be made. 'For example, how do we deal with a drone which is flown over a reservoir and deposits something in there? 'The panic effects of that being known to have happened and not necessarily knowing what the substance is would be enormous.' Lady Hayman said: 'Tackling the diverse range of state threats – not just drones but many other threats – requires a cross-government and cross-society response. 'We need to draw on the skills, the resources and the remits of different departments and operational partners. 'In Defra, we work closely to look at the threats and the appropriate levels of response, specifically drawing on expert advice from the National Protective Security Authority, the National Cyber Security Centre and the Home Office, as well as carrying out threat assessment with policing partners.' Former Metropolitan Police chief Lord Hogan-Howe, who led the UK's largest force from 2011 to 2017, said: 'For about 15 years, I have been worried about the water supply – the large and small reservoirs, the pipes that connect them and, of course, the water treatment plants. 'I worry that there is sometimes confusion between the Home Office, Defra and others about who is looking after security.' The independent crossbencher added: 'It needs to be higher in the priorities than it presently appears.' In reply, the minister said: 'I can assure him that we discuss these matters with the Home Office. 'One thing that we have been trying hard to do in Defra and other departments since we came into government is to work better across Government.' The Home Office has been contacted for comment.
South Wales Guardian
27 minutes ago
- South Wales Guardian
UK appears to have been spared immediate hit of Trump's 50% steel tariffs
The US President has decided to 'provide different treatment' to the UK after a deal that was struck between Washington and London last month. Levies will remain at 25% for imports from the UK, however Britain could still be subject to the higher 50% rate from July, according to a version of the order confirming the tariff increase posted by a White House X account on Tuesday. According to the text of the order, Mr Trump has 'further determined that it is necessary and appropriate to allow for the implementation of the U.S.-UK Economic Prosperity Deal of May 8, 2025 (EPD), and to accordingly provide different treatment, as described below, for imports of steel and aluminum articles, and their derivatives, from the United Kingdom'. 🚨 @POTUS just signed the order raising tariffs on steel and aluminum imports to 50%. Here is the text of the order: 1. On January 11, 2018, the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) transmitted to me a report on the Secretary's investigation into the effect of imports of steel… — Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) June 3, 2025 The order later says that rates will for now stay at 25% and adds: 'On or after July 9, 2025, the Secretary may adjust the applicable rates of duty and construct import quotas for steel and aluminum consistent with the terms of the EPD, or he may increase the applicable rates of duty to 50 percent if he determines that the United Kingdom has not complied with relevant aspects of the EPD'. The 50% tariff rate more widely is due to come into force from 12.01am Washington DC time on Wednesday, which is shortly after 5am in the UK. A Government spokesperson said: 'The UK was the first country to secure a trade deal with the US earlier this month and we remain committed to protecting British business and jobs across key sectors, including steel as part of our plan for change. 'We're pleased that as a result of our agreement with the US, UK steel will not be subject to these additional tariffs. 'We will continue to work with the US to implement our agreement, which will see the 25% US tariffs on steel removed.' Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer's trade deal with the US, struck last month, included relief on the steel and aluminium tariffs, but the implementation has not yet been finalised. Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds met White House trade representative Jamieson Greer in Paris on Tuesday. According to the Department for Business and Trade, Mr Reynolds and Mr Greer discussed a desire to implement the deal struck between London and Washington as soon as possible, and committed to working closely to make it happen. The general terms for the agreement between the UK and US were published in May when the deal was announced, and outline the intended plans. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt was asked if there was a text of the full deal ready to be released, and told reporters on Tuesday: 'There 's most definitely text with this deal, there is language that this side has seen. 'You'll have to ask the UK Parliament why they haven't seen it from their own Government, I obviously can't answer that question.'
