Seòmar agus comataidhean

That is super. Thanks.

Obviously, the budget sets out the Government’s tax strategy. Tax has been alluded to tangentially at various points—

Presumably, it would be prudent for the Scottish Government to allocate something for the preparatory work and the planning for and the construction of administering the benefit in Scotland, however it ends up doing it.

Good morning. On the two-child cap, the finance secretary said at the weekend that she would look to introduce the payment before the following financial year—that is, in the financial year that we are discussing now—if it was possible to do so, and that she would make provision for that. Have you seen any such provision in the Scottish Government’s budget?

On overall sustainability and the impact that the benefit has on the rest of the budget, at what point should we start to feel uncomfortable about what we are having to move from other areas into that position?

Before Professor Ulph comes in, can you say how easy or difficult that is to model? I presume that there will be a behavioural impact, in the same way as taxation has a behavioural impact.

In relation to the broader language around the long-term sustainability of benefits, which the convener alluded to earlier, the Government characterises that as investment. Are you content with using language about investment in relation to social security? Normally, you would think of investment as something that gives you profit or advantage. Are you comfortable with that language?

I presume that that is a significant risk to the sustainability of the benefit.

I will turn to tax. Pages 148 and 149 of the SFC’s briefing show the forecasts for freezing the higher rate and advanced rate tax thresholds. Prior to your coming in to the meeting, we were advised that in 2025-26 the tax take for the higher rate would increase to £78 million and in 2026-27 to £215 million. After that, the figure in effect plateaus and grows in real terms. I presume that that is because we would expect the tax thresholds to rise at that point. Is that right?

It seems that you get the proof only after the problem has arisen, so you have lost that tax and that taxpayer, and you are unlikely to get them back.