Latest news with #taxrevenue
Reuters
5 days ago
- Business
- Reuters
Brazil's tax revenue surges to record in H1
BRASILIA, July 24 (Reuters) - Brazil's federal tax revenue hit a record high in the first half of the year, lifted by strong June collections, revenue service data showed on Thursday, as President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva seeks to boost public income to shore up fiscal accounts. Federal tax revenue rose 6.62% in June from a year earlier in real terms, reaching 234.594 billion reais ($42.51 billion). From January to June, revenue totaled 1.426 trillion reais, up 4.38% in real terms from the same period last year. Both the monthly and year-to-date figures were the highest ever recorded for their respective periods, the tax authority said. Revenue from the IOF tax on financial operations increased in June after the government raised the levy on several transactions via decree in late May. Although Congress later overturned the measure, it was reinstated earlier this month following a Supreme Court decision. The revenue service also highlighted a rise in income tax collection on financial investments, driven by the elevated benchmark interest rate, Selic, "which contributed to the performance of fixed income funds and securities." Policymakers have raised the Selic by 450 basis points since last September to fight inflation, taking the rate to a nearly 20-year high of 15%. Despite strong tax revenue, the government projected earlier this month a primary deficit of 26.3 billion reais for the year, excluding nearly 50 billion reais in court-ordered payments that the Supreme Court ruled should not count toward the fiscal target. While the figure remains within the zero-deficit goal's tolerance band of 0.25% of GDP, it underscores the challenge of balancing the budget amid rising mandatory spending, including pensions and social benefits. ($1 = 5.5187 reais)
The Independent
6 days ago
- Business
- The Independent
Is Labour playing with fire when it comes to lighter regulation for bankers?
The chair and chief executive of Goldman Sachs, David Solomon, has told Sky News that London's status as one of the world's pre-eminent financial centres is ' fragile ', because of the continuing effects of Brexit, increased competition from other European centres, and the tax treatment of the US investment bank's most highly paid staff. Although Solomon cuts a rather remote figure with concerns far removed from the average British family, the fact is that financial services and the City are such a significant part of the economy that his remarks carry some serious implications for the economy, and thus the living standards of all. So he's worth listening to. What is at issue? Solomon points out that his bank, one of the largest in the world, has more people employed in continental Europe and proportionally fewer in London than was the case before Brexit. As a result, the UK doesn't enjoy the spending these 'absent' workers would otherwise inject into the local economy. Even in its current 'fragile' state, the financial services sector contributes about £44bn to the Exchequer, not far off the entire defence budget, and it could be even more, given the right conditions. The temptation for ministers is to change rules on tax and regulatory rulebooks, to boost banking profits and thus tax revenues, social spending and investment. We may term this 'Rachel's Dream'. What's wrong with London? Solomon is fairly clear that Brexit put up too many barriers with the EU in the financial sector, so relocation of certain functions and staff became inevitable. Tax and 'incentives' are also significant factors in the leakage of people and money abroad to rival centres. The abolition of ' non-dom ' status under the Conservatives, with additional tax liabilities added by Labour, Solomon says, has also depopulated the UK tax base. 'Incentives matter. If you create tax policy or incentives that push people away, you harm your economy … in Goldman Sachs today, if you're in Europe, you can live in London, you can live in Paris, you can live in Germany, in Frankfurt or Munich, you can live in Italy, you can live in Switzerland.' The government has already softened the former non-doms' tax obligations; paying inheritance tax is a particular concern for the super-rich. Thus far, the Labour left hasn't objected much. What else does this major investor want? Lighter regulation, as also suggested by the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, in her Mansion House speech last week. In particular, he wants the rules introduced in the aftermath of the global financial crisis of 2008, which keep 'high street' retail banking and 'casino' investment banking separate, to be reformed: 'It's a place where the UK is an outlier, and by being an outlier, it prevents capital formation and growth. What's the justification for being an outlier? Why is this so difficult to change? It's hard to make a substantive policy argument that this is like a great policy for the UK. So why is it so hard to change?' Well, why is it so hard to change? It's precisely because the UK has such an outsized financial sector compared to the size of its GDP that leaves the government and British taxpayers badly exposed if banks overextend themselves and have to be rescued with public funds – as happened before with Northern Rock, RBS, HBOS et al. Put simply, given the national debt, another banking crash could collapse the British public finances. The governor of the Bank of England, Andrew Bailey, is alive to the dangers. He said only this week that such 'ring fencing' rules needed to be kept in place: 'I do think the ring-fencing regime is an important part of the structure of the banking system. It makes the resolution of banks if they're in trouble much easier, and it benefits, particularly in terms of the UK, consumers, business and households.' Who will win? The Bank is operationally independent, and has to be to maintain confidence, so no chancellor would be reckless enough to undermine its status (as happened, in a different context, with the infamous Truss mini-Budget of 2022). However, the chancellor in the final analysis sets the Bank's remit, with parliamentary authority, and can prevail on a governor to contemplate change. Bailey hasn't ruled out reform, but banking supervision is a delicate and complex task, and there is much devilment in the detail. There will probably be some compromise and consequent quiet deregulation because the government is so desperate to boost growth, even if it means the system taking on more risk. No one will notice such boring developments – unless/until they go wrong. If they do, and if the Starmer government is still in charge, then the Labour Party would collapse along with the banks. How much of a gamble are Starmer and Reeves ready to take on the likes of Goldman Sachs getting it right? As the old saying goes, the most dangerous words in finance are 'this time, it's different'.
Malay Mail
23-07-2025
- Business
- Malay Mail
Johor Regent moots 25pc tax revenue return for state self-reliance
JOHOR BAHRU, July 23 – Johor would be able to achieve self-reliance if a quarter of tax revenue collected from the state is returned to it, Johor Regent Tunku Ismail Sultan Ibrahim said. His Royal Highness said a 25 per cent tax return allow Johor to sustain itself without needing to rely on assistance from other parties. 'We would not need to burden the federal government or endure a long wait for approval through applications,' he said in a statement posted on his official Facebook page last night. Tunku Ismail's statement comes after recent incidents involving public facilities and development projects in the state. Among issues he highlighted was the delay in the opening of Hospital Pasir Gudang, which was supposed to begin operations in phases starting this August but has now been postponed to January next year. The 41-year-old crown prince also pointed to the recent disruption of the Immigration Department's autogate system at the Bangunan Sultan Iskandar (BSI) Customs, Immigration, and Quarantine (CIQ) Complex here and the Sultan Abu Bakar Complex (KSAB) in Gelang Patah, in addition to other issues related to hospitals and flood mitigation projects. 'Following these shortcomings, I wish to convey to Johor residents how important it is for 25 per cent of the state's income tax revenue to be returned to Johor,' he said. This is not the first time His Royal Highness has made such a proposal. In December last year, Tunku Ismail requested that the federal government consider returning 20 to 30 per cent of the tax revenue collected from Johor. At the time, he noted that the Johor government contributes between RM48 billion and RM49 billion a year in tax revenue to Putrajaya.
CBS News
22-07-2025
- Business
- CBS News
Aurora, Illinois, considers doubling hotel tax
The Aurora City Council will consider doubling the west suburb's hotel occupancy tax at their meeting Tuesday. The current Illinois hotel occupancy tax is 3%. The ordinance Aurora is considering would double that rate to 6% and add a $10 daily fee on rooms. The proposal says the current rate is "at the lower end of the spectrum" compared to their surrounding suburbs, and said doubling the rate would bring in a little more than $3 million a year in tax revenue. The new Hollywood Casino is set to bring another 220 hotel rooms to Aurora. If approved, the new rate would go into effect on Jan. 1, 2026.
RNZ News
21-07-2025
- Business
- RNZ News
CNMI's delegate seeks clarification from US Treasury on use of federal tax revenues
According to Section 703(b) of the CNMI's Covenant with the US, federal income taxes and other federal revenues derived from sources in the CNMI needs to be returned to the local government. Photo: Supplied The delegate for the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) to the United States Congress, Kimberlyn King-Hinds, has formally asked the US Treasury to clarify how fedeal taxes generated in the territory are being utilised. Delegate Kimberlyn King-Hinds sent a formal request to US Treasury secretary Scott Bessent seeking clarification. According to Section 703(b) of the CNMI's Covenant with the US, federal income taxes and other federal revenues derived from sources in the CNMI needs to be returned to the local government. In her letter, King-Hinds raised concerns that significant tax revenues linked to federal activity in the CNMI are not being returned to the local government as the Covenant provides. She pointed specifically to recent Department of Defence construction projects on Tinian totaling more than $153 million. Despite the scale of federal spending, the CNMI government received only $87,000 in reported tax revenue. "This provision was included in the Covenant to ensure that when activity happens in the CNMI, the returns from that activity are shared with the CNMI," she said. " "The people of the Northern Marianas and our government should see the benefit of economic activity occurring in their islands, especially when it is federally funded." Section 703(b) outlines a range of federal taxes that are to be paid into the CNMI Treasury, including income taxes derived from the CNMI and taxes on goods produced or consumed in the Commonwealth. King-Hinds noted that the provision applies regardless of where a contractor is headquartered, so long as the income is derived from work in the CNMI. "Nearly five decades after this language was adopted, we still do not have clear implementation of this section," she said. "As more federal funding and contract work flows into the CNMI, the question of how those revenues are treated under the Covenant is increasingly urgent." King-Hinds is requesting that the Department of Treasury clarify its interpretation of Section 703(b) and determine whether income taxes collected on work performed in the CNMI, particularly by off-island contractors, are appropriately credited to the CNMI government. She also indicated that if legislative steps are needed to reinforce the Covenant's requirements, she is prepared to work with Congress to advance those changes. "This is a practical issue with real consequences for the CNMI's ability to operate and plan for the future," King-Hinds said. "The Covenant will only endure if we remain committed to upholding its terms and ensuring its provisions are followed, including making certain the CNMI receives the revenues it is owed. I appreciate Secretary Bessent's attention to this request and look forward to a constructive dialogue on how we can ensure the Covenant is implemented as intended." During a recent CNMI House of Representatives hearing, Rep. Marissa Flores said the CNMI only collected a mere $87,000 in fees and taxes from $153-million worth of military activities in the Northern Marianas. Flores shared that data, which she said was shared at a recent meeting with the military, at the end of the House Standing Committee on Ways and Means budget hearing from the Department of Finance (DOF) last 9 July. "Why are we not collecting? What is the problem?" Flores asked DOF and the Division of Revenue and Taxation. "All this military build-up is happening…Are you collecting tax on developer's tax at all with the military?" she added. Division of Revenue & Taxation director Daniel Alvarez responded, "I do not believe the military projects fall under developer tax. I would probably have to confirm that with legal." Flores said the CNMI also needs to monitor how many military developers are being brought in because the island does not have the workforce. "We're losing money in that area. So many projects came and left, and we're only charging on the construction tax. Again, which is another problem, because now we know that they're bringing in their construction material," she explained. The lawmaker recommended that DOF have an increased presence on Tinian. Finance Secretary Tracy Norita later clarified that it has been a long-standing issue. "This is a conversation that has been going on between the municipality of Tinian and my office and [Department of Public Works] on who's going to assess the tax. "We've received information from DPW, I believe they've asked for [the Attorney-General's] opinion on whether they can assess the tax. To this day, I don't believe they're assessing it because there is no legal authority to assess the developer's tax on the military projects. "And so at this point, I believe it's legislation that's required to specify what exactly is exempted from the developer tax, whether it's a military project with an independent contractor or only military projects that are conducted by the military themselves," Norita added. "So again, it goes back to the legislation and the authority for DPW to assess the developer's tax." DPW Secretary Ray Yumul said they submitted an internal Legal Services Request form to the CNMI AG a few months ago but have not received a response.
