Seòmar agus comataidhean

Is LBTT or house price inflation more likely to inhibit people’s ability to move to larger properties? That is in places such as Edinburgh. I am not talking about North Ayrshire, which I represent and where, for £0.5 million, you can buy a palace, never mind a house. I have a five-bedroom detached house with a garage, which cost me £145,000. There is a big difference between house prices across the country. What is your view on that?

It would help if people could actually speak, for the purposes of the Official Report.

We move to our second evidence session on pre-budget scrutiny today. We will hear from Kevin Robertson, who is chair of the Scottish Property Federation, and Joanne Walker, who is technical officer for the Chartered Institute of Taxation and its Low Incomes Tax Reform Group. Joanne is joining us remotely, so once again members should make it clear which witness they would like to respond, and our broadcasting team will turn on their microphones. I will aim to give both witnesses a chance to respond to questions, but if Joanne wishes to respond to a specific point, she should indicate to me by raising her hand and typing R in the chat function on the BlueJeans software package.

I declare an interest as somebody who owns a property and rents it out. I intend to allow around an hour for the session. Members have received copies of both witnesses’ written submissions. Without further ado, I welcome our witnesses to the meeting and start by asking a question of Joanne Walker.

In your submission, you say that you

“do not”

wish to

“put forward suggestions of particular powers for devolution or specific policy proposals.”

Why is that?

Secondly, with regard to the Scottish budget and its taxation policies, do you believe that it conforms to Adam Smith’s principles of fairness, certainty, convenience and efficiency?

I touch on a couple of areas that we have not covered so far, the first of which is that wee tax that Michelle Thomson mentioned—the land and buildings transaction tax, which still brings in a few bob. I am intrigued by the difference in the submissions on this point. In his submission, Kevin Robertson says:

“We are particularly concerned about the 10% tax band, and believe that its threshold should be increased to £500,000”.

In her submission, Joanne Walker says:

“following temporary relief from Stamp Duty Land Tax”—

as it is called south of the border, and as it was called here before LBTT came in—

“for first time buyers ... in 2010 – 2012, HMRC undertook an evaluation. It concluded that the majority of the 1 per cent tax relief (0.5-0.7%) was in fact capitalised in higher prices”.

Has there been any assessment of the impact of that with regard to revenue? After all, there is no point in our increasing a threshold to assist the sector if all it means at the end of the day is that prices go up, revenue declines and no one is any better off.

My next point is for Joanne Walker. If the UK assigned that money and more money came in—obviously, this is hypothetical because it is not happening yet—that would allow the Scottish Government to reduce rates and make the high street more competitive.

Hold on—I will ask all my questions in one, because I want to let members in. I am trying to give everybody one hit.

Secondly, your submission says:

“Fundamentally one of the core issues that must be addressed here, is appropriately resourcing funding to local authority services”.

The issue there is that, unless you mention specifics, the Scottish Government will just say, “Well, we think it is adequately resourced.” We may or may not disagree with that.

I turn to disinvestment. Age Scotland came to a previous iteration of this committee, of which I was also convener, when Callum Chomsky—or Callum Chomczuk, I should say—was in your role. He said that Age Scotland would support an increase in the age at which people get concessionary travel from 60 to 65, although John Swinney did not agree with that at the time. Does Age Scotland still support that view?

I am sure that other members will want to explore that issue further.

I will move on to Laura Mahon. Alcohol Focus Scotland also provided an excellent submission, which makes one or two suggestions that could be implemented without spending money. An obvious one in relation to prevention is increasing the unit price of alcohol. The submission talks about

“a public health supplement to non-domestic (business) rates, applied to retailers licensed to sell alcohol and linked to volume of sales”

and the

“creation of a new local public health tax that applies a levy to the sale of alcohol in the off trade”.

How do you see such policies being delivered, if they were to be implemented? How much money would they raise? Have you thought through exactly what you mean by “volume of sales”? Would it be 5p for every bottle of spirit or something per meterage? Will you explain how such policies would work, if the Scottish Government decided to take them forward?

The next item on our agenda is consideration of a note from the clerk in relation to the Scottish Government and Scottish Parliament working group to improve budget information on climate change. Members have received a paper that contains background information on the group, along with a joint letter from the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and the Economy and the Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero, Energy and Transport setting out proposed next steps.

Members are invited to note the update in the letter and the fact that the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee will be taking the lead on this piece of work.

I ask the clerk whether she has anything to add to the information in the paper.

Thank you for that. Members seem to be in agreement that we note the letter.

As the next item on our agenda is consideration of a work programme paper in private, I now close the public part of the meeting.

There would obviously be an issue in respect of large and smaller retailers, but I note that you are also seeking hypothecation of that money. That is not really what we do with taxation; taxes usually go into a big pot, and then ministers decide how to spend them. There are consequentials that might go straight to the national health service, for example, because that is a political decision that tends to be made. Is it “hypothecation” that you are looking for?