{"id":7715,"date":"2022-09-26T10:41:50","date_gmt":"2022-09-26T09:41:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.taxpolicy.org.uk\/?p=7715"},"modified":"2022-09-26T13:06:18","modified_gmt":"2022-09-26T12:06:18","slug":"46p","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/heacham.neidles.com\/2022\/09\/26\/46p\/","title":{"rendered":"Impact on Scotland of the abolition of the 45p additional income tax rate"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

If the Scottish Government doesn’t follow the Tories’ abolition of the 45p additional rate, I expect its revenues from Scotland’s own 46p rate will fall by half.<\/strong> <\/em>Here’s why.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In 2017, the Scottish Government raised the additional rate<\/a> from 45p to 46p. They called this the “top rate”. On paper, the differences between Scottish and rest of UK (rUK) rates should have raised \u00a3378m. A year later, HMRC estimated<\/a> the actual figure was \u00a3239m. The top rate alone would naively have raised \u00a327m – the actual figure was \u00a35m.1<\/a><\/sup>This is a corrected version of my earlier post – I posted too quickly and made a sloppy mistake – my apologies, and thanks to those who pointed it out<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Why? “Behavioural response”. That could mean a variety of things:<\/p>\n\n\n\n