Taxation
A thoughtful question is taxation fair on businesses and is it destroying the planet? It combines economics, politics, and environmental policies, so let me try to put over, my thoughts on it, hopefully clearly. How do businesses and consumers react to continual tax changes? And whether the tax system encourages or discourages businesses and environmentally harmful behaviour.
1. Does raising taxes increase resource use?
Not inherently. Higher taxes do not automatically require more materials, goods, or services to be produced. What actually increases resource use is economic activity, not taxation by itself. Examples:
• If a business raises prices or production to maintain profit margins after a tax increase, that can increase resource use.
• If taxes fund construction, infrastructure, military spending, or other material-intensive projects, that uses resources.
• If taxes are used for education, healthcare, conservation, or public services that are actually of benefit to the public, resource use is relatively low.
So the relationship is indirect, not automatic.
2. Do you think the politicians give any real concern, for the planet we live on?
This varies widely:
• Some politicians strongly prioritize environmental policy, green energy incentives, conservation programs and implement carbon taxes.
• Others prioritize economic growth at any cost, for jobs and political survival, and may resist environmental regulations they see as costly or unpopular but maybe are necessary for business and the planet.
• Some balance both concerns, depending on their voters and their party.
There is no single answer because political motivations differ by country, ideology, and individual.
But it is true that political survival and tax often influences decision-making. Policies with long-term benefits but short-term costs (like climate policy) are harder to push through.
Taxation Continued
3. Are politicians mainly protecting their own high-paying positions?
Many business people feel this way, especially when there is:
• Lack of transparency
• Lobbying influence from other politicians to intrigues higher taxes
• Slow or weak environmental financial help for businesses to adapt
• Perceived disconnection between politicians and business people and there employees
However, this is not universally true. There are some politicians, activists, scientists, and public servants who genuinely work to address issues with buisinesses — but their influence can be limited by politics, economics, and other pressure from politicians .
4. Would lower taxes help the planet?
Not necessarily. Lower taxes can sometimes increase resource consumption because people and companies spend more, produce more, and consume more especially plastics.
Environmental impact depends far more on policy structure, such as:
• Carbon taxes which are usually put onto businesses and not always onto the public
• Pollution regulations which are however mostly past entire onto businesses to fund. With no help
• Renewable energy incentives, which the uk taxes
• Sustainable agriculture programs but the uk taxes there farmers instead of letting them use the money to improve.
• Urban planning and transit investment but road tax is often used for other thing instead of the roads
Taxes can be a tool to reduce environmental damage if designed well. But how often is it done badly and overpriced. The Scottish government are very good at getting it wrong like the two ferries being built, at this time.
Taxation Continued
5. What actually destroys the planet?
Main factors include:
• Overconsumption of resources
• Fossil fuel burning but the government is taxing the very thing that can help.
• Deforestation but in Scotland we plant a enormous amount of trees
• Industrial agriculture but we need food, but again farmers are taxed and prevented from improving, by lack of money.
• Waste and pollution is a big problem but industry is singled out as the bad one, consumers create a great deal of waste and pollution
• Lack of global coordination on environmental policy
Taxation is not on this list but it should be. Government priorities and policy choices do matter, but they are only part of the equation.
Yes, taxation can increase economic pressure on businesses, but the extent depends on several factors:
• Higher taxes (such as corporate income tax, payroll tax, property tax, or sales/VAT obligations) reduce a business’s net profits and available cash flow.
• When taxes rise, businesses may respond by increasing prices, reducing investment, cutting costs, or slowing hiring.
• Small and medium-sized businesses tend to feel tax pressure more strongly because they have fewer financial reserves and less capacity to absorb additional costs.
• In some cases, well designed taxes can support economic stability if they fund infrastructure, public services, or incentives that eventually benefit businesses but most of the time they don’t.
• The overall impact depends on the tax type, industry, profit margin, and the general economic environment.
Some Politicians are prepared to keep saying we need the money “to fund the public purse. It is their favoured get-out clause” but they never really justify it. Why don’t they, just stop spending “money” they don’t have? “A business” can’t just extort, more money’ from its customers without losing them. “Businesses have to do something; politicians don’t” So why are business people and their employees voting for them? Some politicians understand what businesses “go through” to make a profit, that is sufficient for them to survive and expand, but most politicians don’t and do not care even when they, imply they do.
-
-
Here's a clear and straightforward explanation of why empty non‑domestic (commercial) properties are still charged business rates, how owners manage these costs, and whether current rate levels are financially sustainable.
Why business (non‑domestic) rates must still be paid on empty properties
Business rates are charged on empty commercial properties because:
• The tax is based on the property’s existence, not its profitability.
The government views commercial property as an asset that has value, even when unused. But if it is unused, how can it have value.
• Rates fund local services. Local authorities rely heavily on business rate income to fund essential services such as waste collection, roads, and public infrastructure. Empty properties still benefit indirectly from these services. But only when Open.
• To discourage long‑term vacancy. Charging rates on empty properties is meant to incentivize owners to bring properties back into use, preventing town‑centre decline and dereliction. But the traditional business models do not work now..
• Councels had "empty property relief" periods but now full rates apply.
How owners are expected to afford rates, when the property has no revenue
Many owners struggle, but the system assumes that:
• The owner has capital reserves or financing to cover ongoing property costs (similar to how a homeowner pays council tax even if unemployed). But if unemployed or on low incomes they get a grate amount of financial help.
• Empty property is considered a business risk.
Owners are expected to price this risk into their investment or development plans. This maybe true of big companies but it is fare from true, for small independent businesses.
• Relief schemes exist: But these schemes often do not help or fully offset the cost.
In reality, some owners cannot afford the rates and may: • Sell the property if they can.
• Let it at a reduced rent: Which often happens.
• Convert it to another use (e.g., residential) if they can and have the money to do so.
• Abandon it or go into insolvency: Which is the increasingly, the way things are going.
Is the current increase in non‑domestic rates financially sustainable for commercial properties? Short answer: For many businesses and landlords, no — not in the long term.
-
Short answer: For many businesses and landlords, no — not in the long term.
• Commercial landlords are experiencing high vacancy rates, especially in retail and office sectors, due to online shopping, remote work, and economic slowdown.
• Rates have risen faster than commercial rental income, meaning the tax burden can exceed what the property earns.
• For some businesses, business rates are one of the largest operating costs, sometimes surpassing rent.
• Many small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) cannot absorb the increases, leading to closures, forced downsizing, or relocation.
• Property owners with empty buildings face especially severe strain, as they must pay full rates without income.
• Various business groups and economists have warned that the system is outdated and contributes to urban decline.
Conclusion: The current level of business rates — especially after recent increases — is widely regarded as financially unsustainable for many commercial properties, particularly those that are vacant or low-income.