Tweet
The banks can no longer be in any doubt: if the Tories were to win the general election, they will introduce a new tax on them - because David Cameron has today spent around half of the proceeds of that proposed new tax with his promise to introduce a new transferrable tax allowance for married couples.
They've also drawn back the veil a bit further on what kind of tax it would be.
The preferred model of the shadow chancellor, George Osborne, is a tax on banks introduced in Sweden last year.
This is a tax on banks' so-called wholesale liabilities, or what they borrow from other financial institutions, big companies and those with the deepest pockets.
The Swedish tax is levied at a rate of 0.018 per cent, and is rising to 0.036 per cent - and it applies to the total value of taxable wholesale liabilities. That rate of 0.036 per cent is just under a quarter of the proposed rate for a similar tax which President Obama wishes to introduce in the US.
The effect of it is to slightly increase the cost for banks of borrowing to finance their lending and investing.
Mr Osborne wants to raise more than Â?1bn a year from the new tax - which he doesn't think would be such a huge burden on banks as to persuade them to relocate in countries that won't levy such a tax.
He doesn't believe there is evidence of Sweden's banks being damaged by the decision of their government to go it alone and hit them with a new tax. But it is worth noting that the Swedish economy is rather less dependent on banking and financial services than Britain's.
The shadow chancellor is also optimistic that most other developed countries will implement such a tax. Were that to happen, he could then endeavour to raise even more from British banks by increasing the tax rate on banks' liabilities.
As for the timetable, he would not introduce such a tax or the family tax break in the emergency budget he would hold within weeks of a general election.
His hope would be to announce both reforms in his first "proper" budget, in the spring of 2011.
As for Labour, its position on a bank tax is that it would only introduce such a tax if there were an international consensus to do so.
The Libdems would impose a tax on banks' profits rather than their liabilities.
There is one important difference between the Swedish tax and what both Labour and the Tories would do. The aim of the Swedish tax is to generate funds to pay for any future bailout of the banking system, not to provide general revenues to finance other tax breaks or pay down the national debt.
This article is from the BBC News website. ? British Broadcasting Corporation, The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites.
They've also drawn back the veil a bit further on what kind of tax it would be.
The preferred model of the shadow chancellor, George Osborne, is a tax on banks introduced in Sweden last year.
This is a tax on banks' so-called wholesale liabilities, or what they borrow from other financial institutions, big companies and those with the deepest pockets.
The Swedish tax is levied at a rate of 0.018 per cent, and is rising to 0.036 per cent - and it applies to the total value of taxable wholesale liabilities. That rate of 0.036 per cent is just under a quarter of the proposed rate for a similar tax which President Obama wishes to introduce in the US.
The effect of it is to slightly increase the cost for banks of borrowing to finance their lending and investing.
Mr Osborne wants to raise more than Â?1bn a year from the new tax - which he doesn't think would be such a huge burden on banks as to persuade them to relocate in countries that won't levy such a tax.
He doesn't believe there is evidence of Sweden's banks being damaged by the decision of their government to go it alone and hit them with a new tax. But it is worth noting that the Swedish economy is rather less dependent on banking and financial services than Britain's.
The shadow chancellor is also optimistic that most other developed countries will implement such a tax. Were that to happen, he could then endeavour to raise even more from British banks by increasing the tax rate on banks' liabilities.
As for the timetable, he would not introduce such a tax or the family tax break in the emergency budget he would hold within weeks of a general election.
His hope would be to announce both reforms in his first "proper" budget, in the spring of 2011.
As for Labour, its position on a bank tax is that it would only introduce such a tax if there were an international consensus to do so.
The Libdems would impose a tax on banks' profits rather than their liabilities.
There is one important difference between the Swedish tax and what both Labour and the Tories would do. The aim of the Swedish tax is to generate funds to pay for any future bailout of the banking system, not to provide general revenues to finance other tax breaks or pay down the national debt.
This article is from the BBC News website. ? British Broadcasting Corporation, The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites.