Dear Editor,
The 2016 national budget speech argues that this budget seeks to address inequalities and discrimination with a heavy emphasis on increased taxes/licences and tax collection, especially from the persons who are categorised as “self-employed”.
The credibility (and compliance) of this case would be legitimately advanced were the President and the Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs to pay tax on their ‘public service’ salaries.
Another budget presented in the Parliament and yet another failed opportunity for President Granger to address the issue of his ‘public service’ non-taxable salary along with that of his Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs. The argument of ‘who started it’ and ‘you all used to get it’ can no longer be tenable. There is no basis for either position to attract a tax-free salary, especially when one considers the largesse they receive from the state with all the benefits and their expenses being covered.
It would be interesting to note that had both of them paid tax on their salary of almost $24m a year each the treasury would be richer and the sum could buy many boots, boats and buses.
Leadership begins by example!
Yours faithfully,
Charles S Ramson MP
