Yesterday George Osborne announced proposals for employees to be given shares in their employer, in return for giving up a substantial portion of their employment rights. I could come up with many more reasons why it's a plan so ridiculous that it's surreal, but here's three to be going on with.
- What on earth have employment rights and share ownership got to do with each other? Nothing at all. Why link them in this way? Presumably because the Conservatives want to restrict employment rights and the LibDems want to encourage share ownership, and so they've come up with this surreal hybrid policy. But it's a bit like introducing a law that says you can use more force with burglars in your home, but in return you can't claim relief for pension contributions of more than £25,000 a year. What have those two things got to with each other? Nothing. Exactly.
- The boast is that the owner of the shares won't have to pay Capital Gains Tax on them. But you don't pay CGT on sales of shares in any case until you make more than £10,000 of profits on shares and the like in a tax year. If your employer gives you £2,000 worth of shares in their company, are you likely to sell them for more than £12,000? It's possible but unlikely. In large part, the CGT part of this is just something that the government knows is of minimal cost but sounds impressive.
- In any case, who are you going to sell the shares to, even if you want to? A tiny parcel of shares in a small limited company will be of minimal worth to anybody - even if they are dividend paying, there's no guarantee that will continue into the future. Finding a third party to buy them is likely to be tricky to impossible.
With plenty of sensible things the government could do that people *are* asking for, introducing things like this that nobody seems to want at all is just bizarre.