“The fact is that to administrate something like means testing for all these benefits would be so time consuming and costly it would probably cost more than any savings they're wittering on about. Yet what bugs me is that Cameron still won't agree with Merkel over taxing the banks with a transaction tax.”…You’ve already provided your own answer, Vanessa.EU analysis concluded the financial transaction tax (FTT) would make a net loss, i.e. it would cost more than it would make.The point is, however, that the FTT would likely be the first proper EU tax. With the FTT, the EU would therefore gain greater sovereignty and a new revenue stream (plus a way around the squabbles over increased member contributions to the EU budget). This is why the EU’s in favour, with FTT revenues likely being redistributed via the European Commission to support the likes of Spain, Greece, Portugal, Cyprus, France and Italy.The problem is that the majority of this tax would be raised in the UK, with 100% of the costs incurred ‘where they fall’ (i.e. Britain would pay as much as 80% of the tax and incur more than 80% of the cost).This is a reason why the British government’s against the FTT.The FTT would therefore give the EU new cash, more power, help subsidise stricken economies within the EU, help the German taxpayer off the hook and get companies in the UK to pay the vast majority of it - with the costs likely passed onto British bank customers, including little people like you and me.Such a tax shouldn’t be used to prop up a flawed system.---P.S. A way to help lower fuel bills might be to overturn the Climate Change Act. If you look on the back of your energy bill, it will list the various green taxes and levies caused by such legislation.The Climate Change Act was brought in by Ed Milliband in 2008. Only three MPs voted against the Climate Change Act, 463 in favour (and George Osborne had the nerve last year to call it “Labour’s Climate Change Act”!). The government’s own estimates thought the Act would cost each household the equivalent of £760 a year, every year over the next four decades.Perhaps nice pay, comfy expenses and the Westminster bubble make MPs immune to the effects of their own legislation.
Fraser Pearce ● 4805d