The government has released its projections for revenue generation in 2016. And by revenue generation one means tax. Buried among the various contributions is what is referred to as "other taxes". This shows a 50 million euro increase over 2015. It is the provision, so it is believed, for the tourist tax, a rather more modest number than the 100 million or more that has been spoken of but which would be attainable only with what would prove to be an onerous levy.
It's difficult to judge how accurate the provision is without knowing what exemptions there might be (children) or what the cap will be on the number of overnight stays (of which it has been suggested they may be only five). It's also difficult because of the number of visitors who won't pay it because there will be no mechanism to do so through accommodation. This is why the government is so keen to have collection at ports and airports, a scheme which, however, could prove as unworkable as it would be damaging (even more damaging) in PR terms. That Madrid appears disinclined to meet the regional transport minister to discuss the subject is to Madrid's credit.
The inclusion of the provision for the tourist tax in the revenue forecast is fair enough, but the very fact of its inclusion lends weight to the argument that the tax will merely be a further means of boosting general revenues, i.e. it will be treated as a general tax. As the government continues to faff around and change its mind on an almost daily basis as to what its purpose is, this impression strengthens. But above all, there is the whole question of government finance. It bangs on constantly about the 0.3% deficit ceiling for 2016, one on which Madrid will not budge, making it ever clearer that the tourist tax is a device for addressing spending capacity that will be denied to the government because of the ceiling.
The government does, though, have to consider its spending as a consequence of its own specific tax-raising. The greater its capacity, the more Madrid might be inclined to penalise the government when it comes to the funding allocation derived from the system that the government considers so unfair: the redistribution of tax revenues to richer and poorer regions of Spain. It is an unfair system in that the Balearics have constantly been left well short because of the high levels of income tax and IVA (VAT) returns compared with other regions. But the more revenue that the government derives from its own specific regional taxes, the more the liquidity funds and what have you that Madrid controls will be biased towards the farmers of Extremadura. It is a bit of a Catch 22 in this regard, but that is how the system, flawed as it is, works.
The expectation is that this will all change if the national government changes and PSOE's Pedro Sánchez becomes prime minister. It may well change, but change is already afoot, the Rajoy administration having conceded that the financing system needs to be amended and to be made more favourable to the Balearics. For all that Rajoy has applied austerity, the point needs to be made that Madrid has brought about some discipline with regions' finances, though even it has been unable to effect major improvements to debt levels: the regional government, left a legacy of enormous debt by the Bauzá regime, wants to negotiate with the banks.
Even once the government does finally define the tourist tax - the amount, the length of stay, the exemptions, the means of collection, the use (or uses) - the arguments will continue, and the Balearic tax will attach far greater controversy than similar taxes elsewhere, some of which are little known about. A correspondent of mine mentioned a conversation he had with a tourist who has come to Mallorca twice this year rather than dividing his two annual holidays between Mallorca and Tunisia (for obvious reasons). This tourist says that he won't be returning to Mallorca if there is a tax, but then Tunisia has one of its own - a departure tax.
The point is, though, that regardless of taxes in what are direct competitor destinations - Morocco, Tunisia, Croatia, Bulgaria, Catalonia, parts of France and even perhaps Dubai - the Mallorcan visitor appears unmoved by the argument and the comparison.
The same tourist of my correspondent's acquaintance says why don't they just hide the tax and apply it some other way and not make an issue of it. Possibly they could, but I've other suggestions. Why not make it a tourist lottery? Or make it voluntary? As President Armengol believes that tourists are willing to be so generous with the tax, who knows, the government might rake in even more from a massive Balearic tipping scheme. Couldn't be done though, as the tax budget wouldn't allow it.
Showing posts with label Taxation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Taxation. Show all posts
Thursday, October 15, 2015
Thursday, March 14, 2013
The Recovery Will Not Be Realised
Alfredo Pastor is professor of economics at the IESE Business School. He is also a former secretary of state for the economy - in the last PSOE government of Felipe González. It was interesting, therefore, to find an article of his in "The Bulletin", one entitled "Reasons to believe Spain's recovery is not far away". The reasons why Professor Pastor believes recovery might be in the offing include greater competitiveness through lower labour costs, a growing export market and some hints of business confidence creeping back.
There are some signs of recovery and it would be wrong to talk down the possibility of an improvement in the overall economic picture if not this year then next. BBVA bank has suggested that negative growth of minus 1.1% in 2013, slightly less bad than had been predicted, will be matched by plus 1.1% in 2014. It wouldn't be a huge improvement, but it would still be an improvement. BBVA, like Professor Pastor, emphasises export performance, but the economist Edward Hugh, generally a pessimist rather than an optimist, has made a comparison with the experience in Hungary where, despite good export performance, its economy keeps slipping back into recession. In Hungary, the country's current account balance is in the black. Spain's is moving this way, too, which sounds like a reason to be cheerful, but this disguises the size of the country's external debt.
Because of this debt, gains that are made from having a trade surplus thanks to export performance are used to service the debt. Greater competitiveness because of lower labour costs (internal devaluation) leads to better export competitiveness but doesn't necessarily mean economic growth, or growth that is anything other than small or even sustainable.
The Spanish Government is pinning its hopes on there being some growth, even if it is very moderate, and on this having a positive impact on the 26% unemployment rate. But unless export growth were to be more spectacular, it remains difficult to see how this unemployment is going to be tackled. Despite Professor Pastor's belief that confidence may be coming back, even if it is only trickling back, is this confidence among exporters or among those involved with the domestic market? The retail sector, for instance, is depressed and is likely to stay depressed. It may even become more depressed. And the reason for this is that there are potentially more recessionary measures yet to be taken.
The EU's budget enforcer, Olli Rehn, has suggested that Spain's deficit targets, ones that the government keeps missing anyway, could be eased, but the fact is that the country's fiscal position is currently unsustainable. More cuts and more tax increases are going to be needed at some point. Indeed, the EU has also suggested that there is room for a further rise in IVA (if not to the higher, general rate then to the lower rate, the so-called tourist rate). The political fallout from a rise in the tourist rate might prove too much for the government and for its supporters in the tourism industry who would desert it. But if the higher rate were to rise, then demand would be squeezed even more, meaning a further brake on any possible growth.
The miserable truth is that although taxes have been raised, although cuts have been swingeing, the deficit targets are still not being met, while, as a consequence - and perversely enough - of attempting to curb the deficit as swiftly as the government has been attempting to, the economy has been contracting because of the squeeze on demand.
Growth may return next year but as the government has been hell-bent (mainly because it had no other option) on pursuing a policy of internal devaluation through lower costs, this will also, both in the short and longer-term, have a depressive effect. Salary and wage reductions, some in the order of up to 40%, mainly in the public sector but certainly not exclusively, will do nothing to stimulate demand, and with credit squeezed as well (though movements on banks' recapitalisation may just takes the brakes off to a degree), it is almost impossible to see from where growth, other than any from exports, is likely to come and even more impossible to see how it might be sustained.
Professor Pastor is optimistic that the political situation re Catalonia will not lead to violence (and one can interpret this how one wants). Let's hope he's right. I happen to agree with him, but can there be the same optimism where social discontent is concerned? There is only so much a people can put up with, and while the financial economy might be showing an improvement, in the real world, there is none.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
There are some signs of recovery and it would be wrong to talk down the possibility of an improvement in the overall economic picture if not this year then next. BBVA bank has suggested that negative growth of minus 1.1% in 2013, slightly less bad than had been predicted, will be matched by plus 1.1% in 2014. It wouldn't be a huge improvement, but it would still be an improvement. BBVA, like Professor Pastor, emphasises export performance, but the economist Edward Hugh, generally a pessimist rather than an optimist, has made a comparison with the experience in Hungary where, despite good export performance, its economy keeps slipping back into recession. In Hungary, the country's current account balance is in the black. Spain's is moving this way, too, which sounds like a reason to be cheerful, but this disguises the size of the country's external debt.
Because of this debt, gains that are made from having a trade surplus thanks to export performance are used to service the debt. Greater competitiveness because of lower labour costs (internal devaluation) leads to better export competitiveness but doesn't necessarily mean economic growth, or growth that is anything other than small or even sustainable.
The Spanish Government is pinning its hopes on there being some growth, even if it is very moderate, and on this having a positive impact on the 26% unemployment rate. But unless export growth were to be more spectacular, it remains difficult to see how this unemployment is going to be tackled. Despite Professor Pastor's belief that confidence may be coming back, even if it is only trickling back, is this confidence among exporters or among those involved with the domestic market? The retail sector, for instance, is depressed and is likely to stay depressed. It may even become more depressed. And the reason for this is that there are potentially more recessionary measures yet to be taken.
The EU's budget enforcer, Olli Rehn, has suggested that Spain's deficit targets, ones that the government keeps missing anyway, could be eased, but the fact is that the country's fiscal position is currently unsustainable. More cuts and more tax increases are going to be needed at some point. Indeed, the EU has also suggested that there is room for a further rise in IVA (if not to the higher, general rate then to the lower rate, the so-called tourist rate). The political fallout from a rise in the tourist rate might prove too much for the government and for its supporters in the tourism industry who would desert it. But if the higher rate were to rise, then demand would be squeezed even more, meaning a further brake on any possible growth.
The miserable truth is that although taxes have been raised, although cuts have been swingeing, the deficit targets are still not being met, while, as a consequence - and perversely enough - of attempting to curb the deficit as swiftly as the government has been attempting to, the economy has been contracting because of the squeeze on demand.
Growth may return next year but as the government has been hell-bent (mainly because it had no other option) on pursuing a policy of internal devaluation through lower costs, this will also, both in the short and longer-term, have a depressive effect. Salary and wage reductions, some in the order of up to 40%, mainly in the public sector but certainly not exclusively, will do nothing to stimulate demand, and with credit squeezed as well (though movements on banks' recapitalisation may just takes the brakes off to a degree), it is almost impossible to see from where growth, other than any from exports, is likely to come and even more impossible to see how it might be sustained.
Professor Pastor is optimistic that the political situation re Catalonia will not lead to violence (and one can interpret this how one wants). Let's hope he's right. I happen to agree with him, but can there be the same optimism where social discontent is concerned? There is only so much a people can put up with, and while the financial economy might be showing an improvement, in the real world, there is none.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
Saturday, April 28, 2012
The Tax Calamity About To Arrive In Spain
There you are, standing on the platform waiting for the train of recovery to arrive and whisk you off to the promised land of growth, and what happens? Some idiot goes and derails the train.
Is Señor Luis de Guindos an idiot? It is a perfectly reasonable question because, and I quote from the news feeds, "next year will be time to increase the tax burden on consumption, once the economy starts to grow again". There is an awful lot wrong with this statement. In fact, there isn't anything that is right about it. "Once the economy starts to grow again?" When is this meant to happen?
Who is Señor de Guindos? It is another perfectly reasonable question, as no one seems to have the faintest idea who is in fact running Spain's economy. Rajoy can be discounted, as one fancies he is being sidelined by the rest of his party as he has shown a total lack of leadership. It could be the iron lady-in-waiting, the deeply worrying María Soraya Sáenz de Santamaria Antón (to name but a few), ostensibly the vice-president (or deputy prime minister, to be more accurate). Or it could be Cristóbal Montoro Romero, the treasury minister. Him, do you think? Who knows?
De Guindos is the minister for economic affairs and competitiveness, and he and Montoro have managed in the recent past to utter totally conflicting statements. Let's wait and see. Montoro will probably announce that there is to be a tax reduction rather than an increase.
For now though, we have to take de Guindos' word for what is going to happen in 2013. And this, bearing in mind it is coming from someone supposedly responsible for competitiveness, will entail an increase in IVA, or value added tax as the British would know it. He hasn't said by how much, but rise there will be.
Let's consider de Guindos' statement again. There is no growth at present. Indeed, Spain has fallen back into recession. Were there to be any growth, and that's a big "were", it would be negligible, but clearly de Guindos believes it's going to be of such magnitude that the time will be right to up IVA. Again. It went up last year by two percentage points.
It's all right of course, because the IMF says that this is the best strategy. Best strategy for what exactly? You don't need to have studied economics to know that increasing value added tax is a surefire way of stunting growth. Put it up and you cut consumption, which cuts growth. Simples. Moreover, a rise in IVA adds to inflation, thus penalising doubly those who can least afford price increases - the poorer sectors of society.
Increasing indirect taxation has not exactly been an overwhelming success elsewhere. Britain, for example. Double-dip recession has at least been contributed to by the rise in VAT. It's not as though Cameron had not expressed his doubts about VAT previously. "Regressive," he had called it. "Hits the poorest the hardest." So what did Osborne do?
It is regressive in two ways. One that it causes the economy to regress, the other that is the opposite of progressive, as in progressive taxation, otherwise known as income tax and variable rates depending upon income and means.
The apologists, and no doubt the Spanish Government, will argue that something has to be done about getting the Spanish economy out of its coffin with the lid on the point of closing and about signalling intentions to markets and the European Union which have all but given up on Rajoy. But signalling intention to do something in 2013 isn't going to stop the immediate problems Spain faces and the likelihood that future bond sales might not work.
There is a further problem. And that is the fact that the Spanish as a people spend their leisure time figuring out ways of not paying IVA. Put it up further and they'll be devoting even more of this leisure time.
And announcing an intention to increase IVA is going to unleash all manner of vested interests demanding that it is not increased in their sector. The hotels and the tourism industry, for example. They had hoped for a cut to what is in effect a tourist rate of IVA (8%) which wasn't forthcoming. They keep banging on about the necessity of a reduction for the tourism sector and the noise will get louder now.
Were, though, there to be special concessions for tourism (and in my view there most certainly shouldn't be), these would be an even more bitter pill for the general public to take. It would be wrong and would represent a caving-in to a powerful lobby. But increasing IVA at all would be wrong. It would be calamitous.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
Is Señor Luis de Guindos an idiot? It is a perfectly reasonable question because, and I quote from the news feeds, "next year will be time to increase the tax burden on consumption, once the economy starts to grow again". There is an awful lot wrong with this statement. In fact, there isn't anything that is right about it. "Once the economy starts to grow again?" When is this meant to happen?
Who is Señor de Guindos? It is another perfectly reasonable question, as no one seems to have the faintest idea who is in fact running Spain's economy. Rajoy can be discounted, as one fancies he is being sidelined by the rest of his party as he has shown a total lack of leadership. It could be the iron lady-in-waiting, the deeply worrying María Soraya Sáenz de Santamaria Antón (to name but a few), ostensibly the vice-president (or deputy prime minister, to be more accurate). Or it could be Cristóbal Montoro Romero, the treasury minister. Him, do you think? Who knows?
De Guindos is the minister for economic affairs and competitiveness, and he and Montoro have managed in the recent past to utter totally conflicting statements. Let's wait and see. Montoro will probably announce that there is to be a tax reduction rather than an increase.
For now though, we have to take de Guindos' word for what is going to happen in 2013. And this, bearing in mind it is coming from someone supposedly responsible for competitiveness, will entail an increase in IVA, or value added tax as the British would know it. He hasn't said by how much, but rise there will be.
Let's consider de Guindos' statement again. There is no growth at present. Indeed, Spain has fallen back into recession. Were there to be any growth, and that's a big "were", it would be negligible, but clearly de Guindos believes it's going to be of such magnitude that the time will be right to up IVA. Again. It went up last year by two percentage points.
It's all right of course, because the IMF says that this is the best strategy. Best strategy for what exactly? You don't need to have studied economics to know that increasing value added tax is a surefire way of stunting growth. Put it up and you cut consumption, which cuts growth. Simples. Moreover, a rise in IVA adds to inflation, thus penalising doubly those who can least afford price increases - the poorer sectors of society.
Increasing indirect taxation has not exactly been an overwhelming success elsewhere. Britain, for example. Double-dip recession has at least been contributed to by the rise in VAT. It's not as though Cameron had not expressed his doubts about VAT previously. "Regressive," he had called it. "Hits the poorest the hardest." So what did Osborne do?
It is regressive in two ways. One that it causes the economy to regress, the other that is the opposite of progressive, as in progressive taxation, otherwise known as income tax and variable rates depending upon income and means.
The apologists, and no doubt the Spanish Government, will argue that something has to be done about getting the Spanish economy out of its coffin with the lid on the point of closing and about signalling intentions to markets and the European Union which have all but given up on Rajoy. But signalling intention to do something in 2013 isn't going to stop the immediate problems Spain faces and the likelihood that future bond sales might not work.
There is a further problem. And that is the fact that the Spanish as a people spend their leisure time figuring out ways of not paying IVA. Put it up further and they'll be devoting even more of this leisure time.
And announcing an intention to increase IVA is going to unleash all manner of vested interests demanding that it is not increased in their sector. The hotels and the tourism industry, for example. They had hoped for a cut to what is in effect a tourist rate of IVA (8%) which wasn't forthcoming. They keep banging on about the necessity of a reduction for the tourism sector and the noise will get louder now.
Were, though, there to be special concessions for tourism (and in my view there most certainly shouldn't be), these would be an even more bitter pill for the general public to take. It would be wrong and would represent a caving-in to a powerful lobby. But increasing IVA at all would be wrong. It would be calamitous.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
Friday, April 27, 2012
MALLORCA TODAY - IVA will rise next year in Spain
The Spanish Government has announced that there will be an increase in IVA (value added tax) next year. Without specifying what the rise will amount to, the government is to take this step as a means of cutting the deficit. It should be noted that IVA has already risen since the economic crisis took hold, having gone up last year to 18% (the general rate) from 16%.
Thursday, January 06, 2011
When In Rome: Climate change
Two euros per night per guest in one to three-star accommodation. Three euros a night for four and five-star hotels. Sounds familiar? It is. But this is not Mallorca, this is Rome. The Italian capital's council introduced its own version of the unlamented eco-tax on 1 January. Rome's tax is earmarked for keeping the city clean and for urban improvements; it should raise 82 million euros per year. It hasn't exactly met with universal approval. Just as Mallorca's eco-tax was met with a level of hostility that saw it booted far out to sea a year after its introduction.
The eco-tax was flawed for different reasons. One was that the revenue that it might have generated, while not insignificant (60 million euros a year in the Balearics as a whole), was not that significant. Think of it this way. Had it been distributed to each town hall in Mallorca and the Balearics in a proportionate manner, it would have failed to bridge town halls' funding gaps. A second reason was that it was discriminatory and based on the principle of "polluter pays". It was also potentially pernicious in that, applied unilaterally, it would have placed Mallorca at a disadvantage.
The eco-tax was an example of attempting to apply fiscal measures to tackle environmental problems. Legislatures and executives reach out for more law and more tax in the hope that they can turn back the rising tides of environmental damage and climate change. The eco-warriors of Mallorca, GOB and its fellow campaigners, are now calling on the regional government to introduce a climate change law, one akin perhaps to that now operating in the UK.
There isn't a specific climate change law either in the Balearics or nationally. What there is, in addition to a whole raft of previous laws and policy documents, are measures designed to promote energy efficiency and the use of renewables; these form part of the new law on sustainable economy. GOB and its enviro-fighting allies want the Balearics to go a stage further in bringing in what Friends of the Earth were calling for last year for the whole of Spain.
GOB has specifically fingered the power station of Es Murterar in Alcúdia as the greatest offender when it comes to emissions. Notwithstanding the possibility of the power station converting away from coal, GOB is right to identify it as a major contributor to environmental damage in Mallorca.
However, the resort to legislation and taxation is an essentially mechanistic response to the problem of climate change. The debate is impoverished, partly because of the primacy of the legislature as arbiter of policy and partly because of the nature of the debate itself - you are either a climate change believer or atheist. In the latter camp, for instance, is the leader of the Partido Popular nationally, Mariano Rajoy.
The mechanisms of tax and legislation, combined with political confusion and the inconclusiveness as to whether climate change exists or the degree to which it presents a threat, prevent a far more challenging discussion and far more searching policy decisions.
What if the predictions for climate change are right? It is the inability to answer this question that leads to the impoverishment of the debate where Mallorca's future is concerned. The most dire predictions of rising sea levels and temperatures would create, by the middle of the century, a very different Mallorca. Introducing laws and taxes now might go some way to stalling the inevitable, but if the inevitable is indeed inevitable, then what on earth is going to happen?
It takes little imagination to consider the impact on coastal resorts and on tourism. The impact would affect thousands of homes and businesses. It takes little imagination, but for Mallorca's policymakers it seems to remain unimaginable. They don't have to imagine though. The centre for scientific investigation at Palma university set it out in pretty simple terms last summer. A 20 centimetre rise in sea levels, a 20 metre loss of beach and coast, extended periods of drought, a greater propensity for hurricanes and tsunamis. All by 2050.
If you own a property by the sea, you might be well advised to try and get shot pretty sharpish and hope no one asks any awkward questions. While the Costas authority yomps across the coastal regions in its bovver boots, threatening demolition here and there, it may as well not bother. Something else will do its work for it. The worthless properties caught under the Costas' thirty-year law will be worthless anyway. As will any other that might find its owner sharing its terrace with some jellyfish.
The problem is that you, and others, may well prefer to play at ostriches on the beach. It won't happen. But can you be so sure? Your head in the sand and an almighty great tidal wave suddenly washes up and fills your lungs. Because it seems unimaginable, it won't happen. Maybe it won't. Or maybe it will. Rather than taxes and pieces of law, the government should have a plan. The worst-case scenario. Does such a plan exist? No, it doesn't. Has it even been considered? Not as far as I am aware. Instead, rather like Nero, it fiddles with legislation or is told to do so by GOB while its own Rome drowns and is set ablaze by rising mercury.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
The eco-tax was flawed for different reasons. One was that the revenue that it might have generated, while not insignificant (60 million euros a year in the Balearics as a whole), was not that significant. Think of it this way. Had it been distributed to each town hall in Mallorca and the Balearics in a proportionate manner, it would have failed to bridge town halls' funding gaps. A second reason was that it was discriminatory and based on the principle of "polluter pays". It was also potentially pernicious in that, applied unilaterally, it would have placed Mallorca at a disadvantage.
The eco-tax was an example of attempting to apply fiscal measures to tackle environmental problems. Legislatures and executives reach out for more law and more tax in the hope that they can turn back the rising tides of environmental damage and climate change. The eco-warriors of Mallorca, GOB and its fellow campaigners, are now calling on the regional government to introduce a climate change law, one akin perhaps to that now operating in the UK.
There isn't a specific climate change law either in the Balearics or nationally. What there is, in addition to a whole raft of previous laws and policy documents, are measures designed to promote energy efficiency and the use of renewables; these form part of the new law on sustainable economy. GOB and its enviro-fighting allies want the Balearics to go a stage further in bringing in what Friends of the Earth were calling for last year for the whole of Spain.
GOB has specifically fingered the power station of Es Murterar in Alcúdia as the greatest offender when it comes to emissions. Notwithstanding the possibility of the power station converting away from coal, GOB is right to identify it as a major contributor to environmental damage in Mallorca.
However, the resort to legislation and taxation is an essentially mechanistic response to the problem of climate change. The debate is impoverished, partly because of the primacy of the legislature as arbiter of policy and partly because of the nature of the debate itself - you are either a climate change believer or atheist. In the latter camp, for instance, is the leader of the Partido Popular nationally, Mariano Rajoy.
The mechanisms of tax and legislation, combined with political confusion and the inconclusiveness as to whether climate change exists or the degree to which it presents a threat, prevent a far more challenging discussion and far more searching policy decisions.
What if the predictions for climate change are right? It is the inability to answer this question that leads to the impoverishment of the debate where Mallorca's future is concerned. The most dire predictions of rising sea levels and temperatures would create, by the middle of the century, a very different Mallorca. Introducing laws and taxes now might go some way to stalling the inevitable, but if the inevitable is indeed inevitable, then what on earth is going to happen?
It takes little imagination to consider the impact on coastal resorts and on tourism. The impact would affect thousands of homes and businesses. It takes little imagination, but for Mallorca's policymakers it seems to remain unimaginable. They don't have to imagine though. The centre for scientific investigation at Palma university set it out in pretty simple terms last summer. A 20 centimetre rise in sea levels, a 20 metre loss of beach and coast, extended periods of drought, a greater propensity for hurricanes and tsunamis. All by 2050.
If you own a property by the sea, you might be well advised to try and get shot pretty sharpish and hope no one asks any awkward questions. While the Costas authority yomps across the coastal regions in its bovver boots, threatening demolition here and there, it may as well not bother. Something else will do its work for it. The worthless properties caught under the Costas' thirty-year law will be worthless anyway. As will any other that might find its owner sharing its terrace with some jellyfish.
The problem is that you, and others, may well prefer to play at ostriches on the beach. It won't happen. But can you be so sure? Your head in the sand and an almighty great tidal wave suddenly washes up and fills your lungs. Because it seems unimaginable, it won't happen. Maybe it won't. Or maybe it will. Rather than taxes and pieces of law, the government should have a plan. The worst-case scenario. Does such a plan exist? No, it doesn't. Has it even been considered? Not as far as I am aware. Instead, rather like Nero, it fiddles with legislation or is told to do so by GOB while its own Rome drowns and is set ablaze by rising mercury.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
Saturday, October 02, 2010
Mobile Homes: Residency and Spanish voting
Go on then, you're a British citizen, resident in Mallorca and therefore in Spain. National elections in Spain are looming. Would you vote, if you had the right? Would you know for whom to vote? Would you actually care or be interested?
The absence of voting rights for non-Spanish citizens, for our purposes those from the UK, is a matter that can stick in the craw with some. Tax me and let me vote. But you can't. Paying tax does not confer rights to participate in a political process. End of story.
Setting aside the apparent contradiction of being disenfranchised when it comes to electing parties which might, you hope, be less inclined to burden you with more tax, the issue of voting rights is a far broader subject, one that embraces nationhood, mobility, integration and whether you can actually be bothered.
An editorial in "The Bulletin" yesterday made a plea for the right to vote in national election. I pay tax, therefore I vote. Turn it around. You're Mallorcan, a Spanish citizen, resident in the UK, paying UK taxes. Can you vote in a general election? No you cannot. The right to vote at national level, as opposed to local or European elections, is an expression of nationhood, the domain of citizens of the individual country. If you are not a citizen, then you are not a national. Thus, you cannot vote. I find no contradiction in this.
Where the issue has become complicated, however, is through freedom of movement and rights to residency within the European community. The theoretical breakdown of discrimination against foreign nationals, enshrined in European law, has led to a wish to push the barriers back further - to exercise ever more practical applications, such as national voting.
European citizenship bestows rights to vote for a European parliament, not a national one, save for the parliament of your own country. For British citizens, this means Westminster; it doesn't mean Madrid. Where this does become discriminatory is a British matter, the fifteen-year rule effectively breaking European treaties that allow for voting in British general elections. This in itself isn't an argument for conferring rights to vote in Spanish elections; the national citizenship rule remains fundamental.
A quirk of the British voting system is that there are indeed those from other countries who can vote in a general election - those from Ireland and the Commonwealth. This, though, brings with it the whole baggage of integration and assimilation, one that applies just as much to expatriates in Spain.
Integration is a largely mythical state. It is a word bandied about without an appreciation as to what it might actually mean. Having a few "Spanish friends", eating tapas or knowing some of the lingo do not equate to integration. It's ludicrous to suggest otherwise. Mobility, and its convenient modern-day fellow-travellers, ease of communication and exposure to media, ironically militate against integration. Language and the nuance of language, culture, and, yes, politics remain the stuff of "back home". In the same issue of "The Bulletin" there was a yes-no interlude regarding Ed Miliband. Would there be a similar one regarding Mariano Rajoy and a pretender to his leadership? If you don't know who Rajoy is, you've probably answered the question. British politics 1, Spanish politics 0; for most expats anyway.
The editorial concluded by asking: "could it be that central government simply does not credit non-Spaniards with the intelligence to understand the issues at stake in a general election?" It isn't so much a question of intelligence as, for the most part, interest in or even inclination to understand the issues. Making non-Spaniard Brits part of the political process, i.e. granting them the right to vote, might spark an interest, but you might equally encounter a double whammy of apathy: a natural apathy to vote in whatever circumstances combined with an apathy to come to terms with political issues that aren't those of Britain. This is hypothetical, though; the situation doesn't apply.
Nevertheless, freedom of movement within the European Union does raise an issue in respect of citizenship, in a broad sense as brought about by residency, just as European laws have raised issues regarding absolute parliamentary sovereignty. It is the mobility encouraged by the single market that has inspired demands for national voting. The European Union has created the situation, only it can resolve the voting issue, which it partly addressed in the Maastricht treaty when making provision for voting in local and European elections. But the right for non-nationals to vote in a general election would be a political pill that would be hard to swallow, and it would be unlikely to happen. Or would it?
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
The absence of voting rights for non-Spanish citizens, for our purposes those from the UK, is a matter that can stick in the craw with some. Tax me and let me vote. But you can't. Paying tax does not confer rights to participate in a political process. End of story.
Setting aside the apparent contradiction of being disenfranchised when it comes to electing parties which might, you hope, be less inclined to burden you with more tax, the issue of voting rights is a far broader subject, one that embraces nationhood, mobility, integration and whether you can actually be bothered.
An editorial in "The Bulletin" yesterday made a plea for the right to vote in national election. I pay tax, therefore I vote. Turn it around. You're Mallorcan, a Spanish citizen, resident in the UK, paying UK taxes. Can you vote in a general election? No you cannot. The right to vote at national level, as opposed to local or European elections, is an expression of nationhood, the domain of citizens of the individual country. If you are not a citizen, then you are not a national. Thus, you cannot vote. I find no contradiction in this.
Where the issue has become complicated, however, is through freedom of movement and rights to residency within the European community. The theoretical breakdown of discrimination against foreign nationals, enshrined in European law, has led to a wish to push the barriers back further - to exercise ever more practical applications, such as national voting.
European citizenship bestows rights to vote for a European parliament, not a national one, save for the parliament of your own country. For British citizens, this means Westminster; it doesn't mean Madrid. Where this does become discriminatory is a British matter, the fifteen-year rule effectively breaking European treaties that allow for voting in British general elections. This in itself isn't an argument for conferring rights to vote in Spanish elections; the national citizenship rule remains fundamental.
A quirk of the British voting system is that there are indeed those from other countries who can vote in a general election - those from Ireland and the Commonwealth. This, though, brings with it the whole baggage of integration and assimilation, one that applies just as much to expatriates in Spain.
Integration is a largely mythical state. It is a word bandied about without an appreciation as to what it might actually mean. Having a few "Spanish friends", eating tapas or knowing some of the lingo do not equate to integration. It's ludicrous to suggest otherwise. Mobility, and its convenient modern-day fellow-travellers, ease of communication and exposure to media, ironically militate against integration. Language and the nuance of language, culture, and, yes, politics remain the stuff of "back home". In the same issue of "The Bulletin" there was a yes-no interlude regarding Ed Miliband. Would there be a similar one regarding Mariano Rajoy and a pretender to his leadership? If you don't know who Rajoy is, you've probably answered the question. British politics 1, Spanish politics 0; for most expats anyway.
The editorial concluded by asking: "could it be that central government simply does not credit non-Spaniards with the intelligence to understand the issues at stake in a general election?" It isn't so much a question of intelligence as, for the most part, interest in or even inclination to understand the issues. Making non-Spaniard Brits part of the political process, i.e. granting them the right to vote, might spark an interest, but you might equally encounter a double whammy of apathy: a natural apathy to vote in whatever circumstances combined with an apathy to come to terms with political issues that aren't those of Britain. This is hypothetical, though; the situation doesn't apply.
Nevertheless, freedom of movement within the European Union does raise an issue in respect of citizenship, in a broad sense as brought about by residency, just as European laws have raised issues regarding absolute parliamentary sovereignty. It is the mobility encouraged by the single market that has inspired demands for national voting. The European Union has created the situation, only it can resolve the voting issue, which it partly addressed in the Maastricht treaty when making provision for voting in local and European elections. But the right for non-nationals to vote in a general election would be a political pill that would be hard to swallow, and it would be unlikely to happen. Or would it?
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Will The Circle Be Unbroken? - Unemployment in the Balearics
The psychological barrier has been breached, but the regional government would like to suggest that it has not been. The national statistics office would beg to differ. According to it, unemployment in the Balearics has not only crossed the 100,000 Rubicon, it has embarked on the invasion and is scaling the ramparts. Ok, this is an over-statement; it's not as if a point of no return has been arrived at, but it sure as hell must feel like it to those in the dole queues. The statistics office maintains that the number out of work stands at 112,000, one in ten - approximately - of the islands' population. Or to put it another way, at just under 20%, one in five of the registered working population, and that figure doesn't take account of the self-employed who are also feeling the pinch.
The government reckons that unemployment has peaked. It may have, for the time being, though an improvement in figures is unlikely to show up for some while, until seasonal employment kicks in. Even that, however, disguises the true picture, and that is the lack of employment opportunities which summer work only helps to obscure. Recession has exacerbated the situation, clearly it has, but it has also exposed the fault lines of the local economy - ones that should have been obvious to anyone, even politicians, seduced by the boom times but apparently incapable of counteracting seasonality.
The national government, meanwhile, is flailing around, desperate to find any measure that might reduce its massive budget deficit and to assure the markets that the Spanish economy is not the same basket case as Greece's; oh how the temporarily mighty have fallen. One ploy is to raise the pension age to 67. Fine, assuming there's any work for the 65 year-olds to continue with. Another is to increase indirect taxation. For an island - Mallorca - and a nation for which tax avoidance is a past-time, this is insane. It might, questionably, mollify the markets, but it will do nothing for employment creation.
Mr. Bean is cutting an ever more awkward figure. When elected for his second term in 2008, Sr. Zapatero had promised full employment. There wasn't a hope in hell's chance of that, especially not as the crisis began to consume everything in its path. And even were there "full employment", what would it look like? A few months work as a waiter and then back to the off-season dole queues, paid for by the burdensome levels of social security that are a brake on much employment creation. Were there to be an election now, chances are that the PSOE would be obliterated, bringing into office - by default - the singularly uninspiring figure of the PP's climate-change-denying Mariano Rajoy. You might remember him; he's the one with a relative who holds a position in a university who doesn't reckon much to the climate-change argument, and so Mariano used that as the basis for his own argument. That's about as good as it gets.
But also meanwhile, Sr. Zapatero can at least walk the European stage during Spain's EU presidency term. The central government's science and innovation minister has announced, as part of the programme for the presidency, that research and development and innovation should be at the heart of European recovery. Good for her. Ah yes, innovation, technology, research and development. Now, wasn't there something about all that two or three years back? Not from Madrid, but from the regional government. Whatever happened, do you suppose? Could it be that funding just had to be diverted to bolstering the rust-bowl industries - construction and hotels during time of crisis? Industries that are at the heart of Mallorca's seasonality. And so it goes around, and around, and around, the circle remaining unbroken.
QUIZ
Yesterday: A-ha, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAhY2tV5wlc. Today's title: take your pick as to the circle.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
Index for January 2010
Airport management by local government - 25 January 2010
Association of British Companies Menorca - 28 January 2010
Capdepera alternative tourism - 6 January 2010
Ciudadanos Europeos - 17 January 2010
Constructors unpaid by town halls - 26 January 2010
England versus Mallorca in winter - 4 January 2010
English standards in Mallorca - 23 January 2010
Environmental care, lack of - 15 January 2010
Fiestas - 14 January 2010, 15 January 2010, 16 January 2010, 19 January 2010, 22 January 2010
Francesc Antich - 13 January 2010, 25 January 2010
GOB - 30 January 2010
Hiper car rental in administration - 29 January 2010
IVA increase and tourism - 21 January 2010
Jardín restaurant, Alcúdia - 5 January 2010
Miquel Capllonch - 10 January 2010
Miquel Ferrer's tourism boldness - 22 January 2010
Miquel Llompart, new mayor of Alcúdia - 9 January 2010, 18 January 2010
Muro golf course - 29 January 2010, 30 January 2010
Pi de Ternelles accident - 19 January 2010
Pollensa street cleaning - 29 January 2010
Real Mallorca - 5 January 2010, 15 January 2010
Sant Antoni - 14 January 2010, 15 January 2010, 16 January 2010, 19 January 2010
Sant Sebastià in Pollensa - 22 January 2010
Santa Margalida town hall - 8 January 2010
Smoking law, new - 5 January 2010, 20 January 2010, 21 January 2010, 22 January 2010
Thomas Cook advertising - 12 January 2010
Three Kings - 7 January 2010
Tourism a priority - 25 January 2010
Town hall information provision - 16 January 2010, 18 January 2010
Town hall spends - 11 January 2010, 26 January 2010
Unemployment in the Balearics - 31 January 2010
Unió Mallorquina new leader - 5 January 2010, 27 January 2010
Webcams and surveillance - 24 January 2010
World Cup song - 19 January 2010
Zapatero and the price of coffee - 21 January 2010
The government reckons that unemployment has peaked. It may have, for the time being, though an improvement in figures is unlikely to show up for some while, until seasonal employment kicks in. Even that, however, disguises the true picture, and that is the lack of employment opportunities which summer work only helps to obscure. Recession has exacerbated the situation, clearly it has, but it has also exposed the fault lines of the local economy - ones that should have been obvious to anyone, even politicians, seduced by the boom times but apparently incapable of counteracting seasonality.
The national government, meanwhile, is flailing around, desperate to find any measure that might reduce its massive budget deficit and to assure the markets that the Spanish economy is not the same basket case as Greece's; oh how the temporarily mighty have fallen. One ploy is to raise the pension age to 67. Fine, assuming there's any work for the 65 year-olds to continue with. Another is to increase indirect taxation. For an island - Mallorca - and a nation for which tax avoidance is a past-time, this is insane. It might, questionably, mollify the markets, but it will do nothing for employment creation.
Mr. Bean is cutting an ever more awkward figure. When elected for his second term in 2008, Sr. Zapatero had promised full employment. There wasn't a hope in hell's chance of that, especially not as the crisis began to consume everything in its path. And even were there "full employment", what would it look like? A few months work as a waiter and then back to the off-season dole queues, paid for by the burdensome levels of social security that are a brake on much employment creation. Were there to be an election now, chances are that the PSOE would be obliterated, bringing into office - by default - the singularly uninspiring figure of the PP's climate-change-denying Mariano Rajoy. You might remember him; he's the one with a relative who holds a position in a university who doesn't reckon much to the climate-change argument, and so Mariano used that as the basis for his own argument. That's about as good as it gets.
But also meanwhile, Sr. Zapatero can at least walk the European stage during Spain's EU presidency term. The central government's science and innovation minister has announced, as part of the programme for the presidency, that research and development and innovation should be at the heart of European recovery. Good for her. Ah yes, innovation, technology, research and development. Now, wasn't there something about all that two or three years back? Not from Madrid, but from the regional government. Whatever happened, do you suppose? Could it be that funding just had to be diverted to bolstering the rust-bowl industries - construction and hotels during time of crisis? Industries that are at the heart of Mallorca's seasonality. And so it goes around, and around, and around, the circle remaining unbroken.
QUIZ
Yesterday: A-ha, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAhY2tV5wlc. Today's title: take your pick as to the circle.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
Index for January 2010
Airport management by local government - 25 January 2010
Association of British Companies Menorca - 28 January 2010
Capdepera alternative tourism - 6 January 2010
Ciudadanos Europeos - 17 January 2010
Constructors unpaid by town halls - 26 January 2010
England versus Mallorca in winter - 4 January 2010
English standards in Mallorca - 23 January 2010
Environmental care, lack of - 15 January 2010
Fiestas - 14 January 2010, 15 January 2010, 16 January 2010, 19 January 2010, 22 January 2010
Francesc Antich - 13 January 2010, 25 January 2010
GOB - 30 January 2010
Hiper car rental in administration - 29 January 2010
IVA increase and tourism - 21 January 2010
Jardín restaurant, Alcúdia - 5 January 2010
Miquel Capllonch - 10 January 2010
Miquel Ferrer's tourism boldness - 22 January 2010
Miquel Llompart, new mayor of Alcúdia - 9 January 2010, 18 January 2010
Muro golf course - 29 January 2010, 30 January 2010
Pi de Ternelles accident - 19 January 2010
Pollensa street cleaning - 29 January 2010
Real Mallorca - 5 January 2010, 15 January 2010
Sant Antoni - 14 January 2010, 15 January 2010, 16 January 2010, 19 January 2010
Sant Sebastià in Pollensa - 22 January 2010
Santa Margalida town hall - 8 January 2010
Smoking law, new - 5 January 2010, 20 January 2010, 21 January 2010, 22 January 2010
Thomas Cook advertising - 12 January 2010
Three Kings - 7 January 2010
Tourism a priority - 25 January 2010
Town hall information provision - 16 January 2010, 18 January 2010
Town hall spends - 11 January 2010, 26 January 2010
Unemployment in the Balearics - 31 January 2010
Unió Mallorquina new leader - 5 January 2010, 27 January 2010
Webcams and surveillance - 24 January 2010
World Cup song - 19 January 2010
Zapatero and the price of coffee - 21 January 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
