« Gordo's Awayday to the Sand | Main | Ball's Schooling »

Put it on expenses.

MPs set to claim £40,000 perk - Times Online

Members of parliament could receive a standard allowance of £40,000 a year on top of their salaries to pay for a second home in London, under proposals to be finalised this week.

Under the new arrangement, MPs would be spared the scrutiny that comes with submitting individual receipts for the running costs of their properties.

Critics argue that if the proposed reform is adopted it will amount to rewarding MPs for their recent abuses of the system.

The committee has drawn up two other options to restore public confidence in the expenses system. One would also impose a £24,000 ceiling, but this would be calculated on a per diem rate linked to an MP’s attendance at the Commons.

The third option would be to retain the current system where MPs submit individual receipts to the Commons expenses department before they are reimbursed, but with closer scrutiny.

That third option, outrageous! That is what the rest of the workers have to do, you spend your own money on company business, you keep the receipts, you claim the money back after the bean counters and the taxman have taken a long hard look at the claim. You can't expect MPs to be subject to that sort of scrutiny, can you?

I'm waiting for the first MP to announce that when he submits his expense claim he will copy it to his website, that is the sort of openness we need to restore trust.

Comments

It is a fundamental rule of Schedule E taxation that broad-brush expense allowances are taxable. In the case of MPs that will be at 40%.

To limit the tax charge, the employee then has to submit claims to the Revenue, demonstrating that their expenditure is "wholly, necessarily and exclusively" incurred in the course of their duties.

So either MPs might as well claim in detail from the House in the first place, or they put themselves above the tax rules the rest of us have to obey.

If the taxpayers of this fine land are paying for second homes for MPs whilst they are employed
by the people, should not these second homes revert to the property of the people once they (the MPs) leave that employment?

Post a comment