Isle of Man Budget 2024

[TheTeapot]

2 hours ago, piebaps said:

[sensible advice]

You're quite right that the higher rate can make a second job less attractive, but a letter, email or phone call to the tax office can get it changed to suit the preference of the worker.

It's a perception thing, especially for lower paid and often less organised people. 

I know people can change things around and that the tax office can actually be quite helpful, and that it all works out correctly in the end. It can actually be beneficial to over pay tax, much better to get a rebate than a bill!

My question was had any thought been given to it? I doubt it myself. It can already be challenging to recruit people to do low paid crappy hours part time work, in jobs that need doing, a higher tax rate might make it harder.

Edited February 22 by TheTeapot

[Non-Believer]

I think we know where it goes...

 

[Moghrey Mie]

10 years on and it's time to re-visit the Scope of Government Report.

https://www.gov.im/media/628403/cominscoperesponse.pdf

 

[Yibble]

18 hours ago, TurricanII said:

 

I'm trying to work out the answer to this question also.

 

Can anyone playing devil's advocate (or advocate) give a reasonable explanation for the increase in these staff numbers that I am missing?

 

In 2012: 7,733 staff for 84,519 population. £3.8Bn GDP

 

In 2022: 8,380 staff for 84,338 population. £5Bn GDP

 

£3.8bn in 2011 adjusted for inflation was worth £4.8Bn in 2022, so hardly a massive increase in GDP. 

 

8.4% increase in staff numbers for 0.2% decrease in population, when the pension black hole has been widely reported and being discussed by the Chief Minister as a serious problem since 2004.

 

It's not even as if we had a massive spike of population in the decade which would explain a rising staff numbers that will then difficult to reduce. Population numbers have been steady.

Whilst I'm not quite sure of the basis for those staff figures (I'm not disputing them, just unaware of the details), you raise a good question. One might also have reasonably expected that over a ten year period, we should have seen ongoing public sector productivity improvements, not least through technology enabled process improvement. However, prima facie, your figures suggest productivity has actually become worse rather than better. Well, unless I've missed major improvements in the quality of public services delivered 😉 .

There is of course the normal chorus from those who are 'generously' suggesting ways in which the government could extract even more of other people's money to fund misrule. I think more reasonable people would instead baulk at spending more until we get answers as to why it seems taxpayers' money is being spent less-and-less effectively.

[Albert Tatlock]

1 minute ago, Moghrey Mie said:

10 years on and it's time to re-visit the Scope of Government Report.

https://www.gov.im/media/628403/cominscoperesponse.pdf

 

10 years? The first serious attempt was 2006. Nearly 20 years of waste and bloat since.

[Non-Believer]

7 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

10 years? The first serious attempt was 2006. Nearly 20 years of waste and bloat since.

From the 3FM article introducing the new CEO...

[Spyk3r]

I have often contemplated the following:

Bureaucratic Requirements (sometimes nonsense) - GDPR/Freedom of information requests etc

Compliance managers in place to ensure we are compliant with European and global requirements, which I understand is required, but often ask myself whether it is necessary. I also think that this is only going to get worse and we are going to have to get more people doing reporting on information which is ultimately going to cause additional bloat. 

Consider the DHSC/Manx Care Fiasco - we have two boards which to the layman look like they are doing the same thing. I don't actually know what the DHSC and MC boards do and where the division of duties comes from - I acknowledge it may be outlined somewhere - but It isn't readily available information that I can find by doing a simple google search. What I can find is that the DHSC is responsible for establishing health and social care Priorities and writing policies to meet those priorities (Read above Bureaucratic Requirements). I'm certain Manx Care could do this themselves, couldn't they? There isn't such an arm for the Steam racket, is there (all this Arms length bs)?

Consider the Freedom of information portal - anyone can request information on almost any topic from the government - but someone or a team has to then go through the records, prepare and respond to the request. I would imagine this type of job wouldn't have been around from before 2016 up to maybe 2019... Now I wouldnt be surprised if there is someone dedicated to this per department (i may be incorrect - this is just an opinion), There is also a lot of time wasted where someone has to reply and say the information is not held - and that the requester should contact a different department to potentially get the information they want.

I had to assist in a DSAR a few months ago - sifting through terabytes of data in documents to provide information - censor information that was classified as someone else's personal information and then provide that in a format that could be viewed by the person who requested it. It was 5-6 days worth of work for this simple request. That is time taken out of people's days that could be used to deliver services...

I'm not saying it should all go (and I understand that the move to a technologically advanced civilisation necessitates us creating ways to protect individuals and their personal data) - but we really do need to assess what each role is doing in the government. We have C£2b in reserves - some of that is down to investments and a lot of it has been used in the past 3-5 years but i'm sure at some point we would have been running at a surplus in order to build a reserve of that magnitude. 

 

[Moghrey Mie]

DHSC sets policy.

Manx Care has a mandate to carry out practical, operational activities on behalf of the Department for a fixed price.

They are mandated to make efficiency and cost savings which they have done through their Cost Improvement Programme.

Here is this year's Mandate.

https://www.gov.im/media/1382372/mandate-to-manx-care-2024-final-102_compressed.pdf

 

 

 

Edited February 22 by Moghrey Mie

[CrazyDave]

“

The Island’s biggest business network says the Budget shows Government is ‘in denial’ about the harsh realities being experienced by the majority of Island businesses, and their employees.

Isle of Man Chamber of Commerce says it is yet another missed opportunity to address many long-running issues which the organisation has highlighted for several years as being barriers to economic growth.

In more detail, Chamber has 5 major concerns:

1. Overall, the Budget will not drive economic growth or address the main challenges that businesses in many sectors are facing (i.e. rising costs, labour and skills shortages). The tax changes announced will increase these disparities. This makes the Isle of Man a less attractive option for workers from overseas – a crucial point in the context of employers needing to recruit in order to address labour and skills shortages, and in terms of meeting the Government’s own target of increasing the economically active population. We also need to consider that many experienced and highly qualified professionals in critical roles with Island businesses right now have plenty of options to relocate to competitor jurisdictions. This Budget is unlikely to help employers address any of these challenges.
2. The Isle of Man is facing a demographic time-bomb that could explode in the next decade. Data from the UK and USA shows that for every 5 ‘Baby Boomers’ who retire, only 2 from ‘Generation Z’ are replacing them – and anecdotal evidence Chamber has gathered suggests that the same trend is happening here.
3. It increases the tax-burden for many workers, especially single people and those on lower and middle incomes, at the same time as increasing the budgets for all Government departments. This, says Chamber, shows Government’s continued failure to focus on making departments more efficient and providing better value for money, rather than increasing spending.
4. In his closing comments to the Budget debate we were pleased to hear Treasury Minister rubber stamp the important work of the recently established Skills Board and are keen to hear more about the support he will enable to progress the key actions.
5. In short, the Budget is an example of Government being more focused on input than output in terms of the service delivery of departments. Chamber – as it has done since it published a Business Manifesto in the run up to the 2021 IOM General Election – has been calling for Government to do more to improve efficiency across all departments i.e. removing duplication across departments, focussing on delivery not producing more strategies and replacing paper with digitised services.  

Chamber does acknowledge some positives in the Budget:

• Help for workers needing childcare (i.e. the additional funding of £3 million has been provided to the Department of Education, Sport and Culture for 2024-25 to assist with the initial implementation of the Child Care Strategy);
• A review of procurement regulations to maximise benefit to the local economy, while continuing to satisfy the requirements of international Free Trade Agreements.

 

We have today engaged with our membership to gain their feedback which will be shared next week.”

[Moghrey Mie]

For once I agree with the Chamber of Commerce. Not raising tax thresholds means that more and more people are being dragged into paying tax and that includes pensioners who are on fixed incomes.

And you are taxed on all your savings over here. No ISAs No Savings Interest tax allowance ( first £5,000 interest on savings is tax free in UK if you have a low income)

Not even Rent A Room Scheme here where you can earn £7,500 tax free.

 

Edited February 22 by Moghrey Mie

[Derek Flint]

6 hours ago, wrighty said:

You mean greedy

I really don't know what these so called wealthy people do with their money.  Can't take it with them. If they like living here and contribute to the life and soul of the island then great, they're very welcome.  But do we really want people who are simply here for tax avoidance purposes? 

Some I know have tried to invest heavily - give something back, so to speak. After continually coming up with passive resistance from IOMG, they've just given up and spent it elsewhere.

6 hours ago, Non-Believer said:

Exactly. How many have we had put into the office in the past on promises of being "boat rockers" only to have them quickly stifled or U-turn faster than a greased weasel once they realised that there would be no mileage in it?

Do any who would really disrupt stand any chance of election?  Any mention of civil service reform and you've lost a whole lump of your voting mass.

2 hours ago, Moghrey Mie said:

DHSC sets policy.

Manx Care has a mandate to carry out practical, operational activities on behalf of the Department for a fixed price.

They are mandated to make efficiency and cost savings which they have done through their Cost Improvement Programme.

Here is this year's Mandate.

https://www.gov.im/media/1382372/mandate-to-manx-care-2024-final-102_compressed.pdf

 

 

 

In a place as small as the IOM, that is duplication 

[Omobono]

4 hours ago, Moghrey Mie said:

10 years on and it's time to re-visit the Scope of Government Report.

https://www.gov.im/media/628403/cominscoperesponse.pdf

 

not to revisit , but to implement  most of its recommendations   we just cant afford to run such a massive public service  

[genericUserName]

3 minutes ago, Derek Flint said:

Some I know have tried to invest heavily - give something back, so to speak. After continually coming up with passive resistance from IOMG, they've just given up and spent it elsewhere.

People working in govt and many locals often have something like a sixth sense when it comes to some of those "serial entrepreneur" types. Especially when they are after a bit of government money.

[Kopek]

Who amongst us is qualified to say what scope and size of the Govt should be?  MHKs are reluctant to tackle the issue but then, who should?

We want all the services that the Govt provide, we don't want bloat but if Manxcare cut the number of managers and the service were to suffer, would we hold our hands up admit it was 'our' fault???

[Two-lane]

On 2/18/2024 at 4:12 PM, code99 said:

Nevertheless, IOMG is "legally" required to follow the UK's commitment to Paris Agreement/ COP26.

I have just completed some forms for a company in another country that requires driving licence and passport information.

The Isle of Man is not somewhere that these people have heard of, so I just selected "United Kingdom" from the drop-downs.

The IoM should just be included with the UK statistics as far as emissions are concerned.

The IoM does not have a seat at the United Nations, even if some politicians think it should.