Seòmar agus comataidhean

The tax advisory group looked at the overall tax position. It considered many themes, including the public’s understanding of tax and the coherence of the tax system. For example, if you increase the public’s understanding, are they more likely to then adhere to and pay their taxes? It considered the burden of tax, and we had a look at some of the HMRC data on behavioural issues. The group’s input was more about tax in a general sense rather than on specific rates.

I take the point. We just need to bear in mind the dynamics of who sits around the table in the tax advisory group. On the one hand, the STUC has a particular view of what should happen vis-à-vis tax, which is very different from the views of business organisations that sit around the table. They will say different things to me.

We then have the tax experts, who are a little bit more dispassionate, I guess, in their view of behaviour, and we also have local government, which has its own views. That means that there is not one view emanating from that advisory group, but a range of views. What I—and we collectively—tried to do was to pull as much of that as we could into a coherent tax strategy. Nevertheless, many of those views will not be able to be reconciled.

We should undertake to have further discussions about it. I have no in-principle objection and I take the point that our engagement with the debate in committees was perhaps lacking some interest, so we need to reflect on that—we should not just ignore it. However, it would take some time to put in train the very different set of arrangements that would be needed for a finance bill. We should take the issue away and have further discussions about the implications not just for the Government but for the Parliament and parliamentary time. We are happy to do that.

It is a challenge. The teams know that it is a challenge, but they stand ready, once they have the financial envelopes, to rapidly run the numbers through to make sure that we can produce that information for 25 June. The only other option would have been to go to September, and I felt that, given the committee’s strong views, that would have been even more challenging. I am keen to get that information out.

It will require a big effort, but some pillars of the work on the delivery plan and parts of the MTFS are being constructed now. The figures for the spending outlook will be slotted in.

I think so. That was one of the live areas in the tax advisory group’s discussions. Research shows a low understanding of the different systems. Not everybody knows that we have devolved taxes or that income tax is devolved. That is not unique to Scotland, as people’s understanding of the tax system generally is probably quite low, but we have a more complex system.

We have commissioned external research by Ernst & Young on international best practice in tax communications, and we will publish that at the end of May. It has helped to inform us on topics such as tax literacy. We know that the higher tax literacy is, the better the compliance level. If people understand tax and are brought into the system, if you like, they have better levels of compliance.

We want to continue to look at how we can raise awareness. The guide “Your Scotland, Your Finances” is quite a good explainer, but we want that information to reach a wider audience. There is more work to be done.

It might not be everybody’s bag, but we are hoping to have the first tax conference in autumn. We do not want it to be attended by just the great and the good of tax experts and everybody who likes to talk about tax.

I think that there is something about financial literacy generally. It is important that young people are financially literate, not just about tax but about basic protections, given the amount of scams and people’s level of vulnerability in the digital world. It is really important that young people have those tools so that they can understand and navigate through a complex system and the risks. Anything that can be done to improve that would be good.

I could not possibly say. I would hope so—I would be disappointed if they were not.

The spending review might provide an opportunity to look a bit more broadly at the current position and also into the future around whether, for example, digital investment could help with reform and transformation. We could look at how we are embedding that and whether that means that things might be delivered a bit differently. It is not that I am against attempting it at all; it is just that, given the limited room for manoeuvre of large chunks of money, it would quickly become quite challenging.

Well, as I say—

On simplification of the tax system and ensuring that people can understand it, including the different tax bands as well as what is devolved and what is reserved, the tax advisory group discussed that issue on more than one occasion. Obviously, in Scotland, we have a different bands system. I would argue strongly that the system here is more progressive, but I accept that it is more complex. Therefore, it is even more important that people are made aware of the fact that it is a different system. As I said earlier, greater awareness is likely to ensure closer compliance.