Director poses options to tax

(CNS Business): Local financial expert and director of one of Cayman’s largest business conglomerates, Don Seymour, is the latest person to wade in on alternatives to the premier’s direct tax proposals, many of which appear to have been ignored. Seymour has proposed an infrastructure fee based on miles driven that could bring in some $40 million, as well as directorship fees, boat licensing fees, garbage fees attached to water bills and a liquidator fee. However, despite the premier’s calls for solutions, most of Seymour’s ideas appear to have been rejected. Warning that government will not collect on the payroll tax, Seymour is mystified why government has not consulted anyone on such a critical issue.

“This is the most important decision that our country has ever faced yet it’s evident that our community was not consulted on such a drastic change in our economy,” said Seymour, who is the managing director of DMS Offshore Investment Services and the founder of the dms conglomerate, one of Cayman’s most successful homegrown businesses.

“It’s inexplicable that the government would hold a referendum to gauge public sentiment for OMOV [one man, one vote] yet unilaterally decide that it’s acceptable to impose direct taxation. A question that significant should have been on the referendum ballot as the taxation decision was literally announced days after the vote. Imposing direct taxation makes OMOV seem trivial; and even Greece consulted its people,” Seymour told CNS Business this week.

One of a number of people from the private sector who are believed to have offered options to the payroll tax, Seymour said government had to find a rational as well as sustainable approach to balancing its budget.

“It cannot expect to finance its deficits on any one segment of our community,” he said.  “Implementing a payroll tax would remove our competitive advantage in attracting talent to the Cayman Islands. It would also dramatically increase the cost of doing business, simply because the employer pays the employee.”

The tax added to work permit fees would make it considerably more expensive to hire in Cayman than any competing jurisdiction, Seymour said, as he warned that collecting and enforcing would be costly and virtually impossible. “The government is trying a hit an extremely fast moving and ingenious target with the payroll tax. There is little chance that payroll tax legislation can keep pace with the speed and agility of tax structuring in the private sector.”

Although there has been virtually no consultation on how government can address its mounting public financial crisis during this budget cycle, Seymour said he had been asked about the directorship fee, but even he did not know whether government had followed through with his recommendations or had come up with another plan because he had not been shown any details.

in addition to his suggestion about the directorship fee, he proposed an infrastructure fee that could raise around $40 million for roads and infrastructure. With 55,000 registered vehicles in Cayman that are licensed and inspected by DVL, all of which have odometers, government could implement a road user fee of 10 cents per mile and collection would require only a simple software change at DVL.

He said the fee could be varied and higher for commercial or luxury vehicles and less for eco-cars and drivers in the eastern districts could get annual credits. “It’s a very flexible structure to accommodate the varied needs of the community,” Seymour added, but government has dismissed it on the basis that it will hurt poor people.

“The fear that the infrastructure fee would impact poor people is not well founded. Poor people don’t own cars,” he said, speaking from knowledge because of the many people he supports in the community. “Having any car in Cayman brings expenses. Government requires the car to be registered and insured. To be registered it needs to be road-worthy so it needs to be maintained properly, which means repair expenses and mechanics are not cheap. Insurance is not cheap. Fuel is not cheap.”

Seymour also suggested a liquidator fee. Insolvency, he said, is a major business in Cayman and a fee of $5 - $10 per insolvency hour would be insignificant when added to a bill but could raise many millions for government. “Every structure that is established eventually dissolves so it is justifiable that CIG earns a fee at the beginning, during and now at the end of the life of the structure, since a proper functioning infrastructure is needed throughout to support the industry,” he said. “These funds could be earmarked for the construction of the new court house that is so badly needed by the judiciary.”

Like most people in the private sector, despite being Caymanian and not impacted by the tax, Seymour warned of the real dangers associated with this type of tax.

He also said the discriminatory nature of the tax was not just between expatriates and Caymanian employees but between government employed expatriates who will not be caught in the payroll tax net and private sector ones who will.

“Even if discrimination between Caymanians and expats is permitted under the Constitution, surely discrimination between public and private sector employees must not,” he added. 

Comments

Here's my suggestion for a simpler and fairer alternative to Don Seymour's idea of a road usage fee based on miles travelled:  replace the flat fee for an annual car licence (currently $185 if I recall correctly) with one based on the engine capacity of the car.  I would suggest $0.10 per c.c. of engine capacity.  All log books show the cc of the engine, so it would not require any significant change to the system.
On that basis those driving smaller-engined (and therefore almost invariably more economical and less polluting) vehicles would pay less than those driving large, expensive vehicles.  A 1.6L car would even, at that rate of fee, be slightly cheaper to license than at present.  However, a 5.7L SUV would be charged $570.  Since the vast majority of the 55,000 cars on the roads have engines bigger than 1.8L, many of them considerably so, this would raise several millions of dollars in revenue. 
But most importantly it would do so in an absolutely equitable manner, and at no additional cost to collect.
I can see the point that a mileage-based fee penalises those with long commutes to work, or who have to drive for medical or other reasons (it also creates an incentive to the dishonest to falsify their odometer reading).  But under my suggestion it does not matter how many miles you drive, and it is in essence a voluntary tax. You may have to drive, but you do not have to drive a monster truck.  And let's face it, if you can afford a 5 litre car, you can afford $500 a year to license it.
Yes, cutting expenditure should be the priority, but we have to face the reality that some additional revenue will have to be raised.  If that is the case, let it at least be fair, easy to collect and hard to evade. I believe my suggestion meets those tests.

Everyone please stop with ideas of how to raise revenue that the govt will just waste. Ideas should be to save money. Stop spending on ridiculous project eg the free solar panels. (15mil). Stop the freeness.

How much is the Directorship Fee, and will it only be appied against non-Caymanian Directors?  LOL!

“Having any car in Cayman brings expenses. Government requires the car to be registered and insured. To be registered it needs to be road-worthy so it needs to be maintained properly, which means repair expenses and mechanics are not cheap. Insurance is not cheap. Fuel is not cheap.”
 
Mr. Don Seymour, I'm afraid that you are contradicting yourself here.  I have a very modest car. I struggle to pay all those fees that you have outlined. I cannot possibly afford to pay any more but it is critical that I have my car since there are a number of issues, one being medical, and unfortunately the bus system is still not great.  Better than it was but they do not cover all routes and there is still a fair amount of walking involved.  Due to a medical condition, I cannot undertake that.
I know that you do a lor for the community and I want to commend you for that. However, this suggestion is not a good one unless you are prepared to personally help those of us who need it. For starters, you could lower the motor vehicle insurance rates offered by your company.

Seymour for Premier!  Some excellent suggestions.

the problem is the government is refusing to make cuts, they need to meet the issue half way...

Most East End drivers do a average of 10000 to 25000 miles per year on their cars so it looks like the new license fee for those would be around $2500.00 per year, I think we pay enough already with the gas taxes per gallon and the car fees to licensing depart along with duty cost on the car when you import it, it is quite simple tell the Gov't to stop spending wastefully then come back to us in 10 years with new revenue ideas
 
 

Seymours idea on cars was plains daft. How can you penalize people from East End and North Side that travel to George Town each day. As to poor people there are a lot of kids starting work that borrow from the banks to get new hot rod cars. Don you do not know your own people. Stick to providing thousands of directorships.
As to liquidation fees. Accountants provide lots of services including audit, accounting, company management, directorships and insolvency services and they pay very large fees for their licences. Why discriminate against liquidators. Way out man.

Can someone please explain why abandoned buildings such as the old Hyatt are left without heavty fines for every month or year they're kept their? I know the threat has been made but has there been any follow through? Following up on all the abandoned buildings would collect revenue and keep the island looking better wouldn't it?
Also why are large corporations such as the Ritz allowed to keep a running tab of outstanding duties owed without a payment plan?
Lastly why is a source of revenue such as simple traffic violations turned into an expense by sending them through the court system? The police give you a ticket and pay it at the DMV. Seems pretty simple to me. Of course I'm not referring to violations that could result in suspension of license.

According to this articlehttp://cnsbusiness.com/content/cima-regulates-17-trillion  the Cayman Islands regulates $1.7 Trillion. A small fee of 0.004% of each funds' assets under management would generate $68M in revenue for the Islands annually, meanwhile costing each fund $800 (for a fund with assets of $20M), $2000(for a fund with $50M) and $200,000 (for a fund with $5B).  
As the numbers show, this 'community enhancement fee' will have but a small impact on funds' overall financial position, but a tremendous impact on the financial position of the Island.
Though some may argue that it will drive away funds from establishing here...compared to our top competitors, I'm sure this micro fee could be justified.
Fund Administrators are looking at tremendous increases in expenses (due to the fact that workers will demand more$ to compensate for new tax) which ultimately  means a less talented workforce or less profit.
--
My $0.02
SM
 

The "fund business", which is the engine of Cayman's Financial Economy, is not an indentured servant that will endure tyranny on a whim.  It is free to come and go as it likes, and it will flee if adversely penalized.  Introduce any new additional costs which reduce our competitiveness and the business case for Cayman changes.  The mere contemplation of taxation, introduces uncertainty, which repells serious investors.     

Certainty amoungst investors comes from knowing that a country has a stable government. The fee therefore would be a contribution directly to keeping the country that they depend on, in a state that remains beneficial for them. Win-Win situation. Everything has a price, even the stability of a nation. And what better way to stabalize than by taping into the very resource that has helped shape our growth all these years.
The biggest problem is communication, if it looks like an unfair tax - and is percieved to have no clear benefit to the fund managers, then why on earth would they want to stay here? Right now  they are probably thinking funds will be hit next...That being said if this strategy  was communicated in a way that they would understand the reason for it - to keep stability without introducing income tax - I'm sure they would be willing scrape a  few crumbs our way.
 
SM

No-one actually believes crap like this, do they?

No they won't.  They only reason they deal with Cayman is to keep those "crumbs" in their pocket. They don't come because you're such fine and generous people.

Your argument is not logical. If setting up shop in Cayman saves a fund $10 more than the competitor, you're saying that they'll move if we charge $0.10 and they still make $9.90. You're saying that they'd rather accept $9.90 less by moving to somewhere else? Does that makes sense to you?
I am well aware that these funds are not here because of the aesthetics the island has to offer or the 'generous people' that you so sarcastically make reference to. It is common sense to know that they are here because it is financially benefical.  
The point being: There is a margin to work with and adjusting that margin by a small amount (0.004%) will make but a small difference (crumbs) for them, but a large benefit for us.
You say they'll move because of the idea of direct taxation, I say they'll move quicker if theres no one here to process information and more importantly if the country faces political instability.  
SM
 

Stepping back, recall that Cayman was amongst the first of the offshore jurisdictions to 'comply'; that was considerably prior to the spectre of FATCA, and even today, Europe renews its intention in company with the major ONshore powers, to sort out OFFshore.  Seems to me that Cayman energy is wasted by the widening of on-island divisions when resources need to be combined to maintain Cayman's dominance in offshore finance. I therefore find Seymour's discussion (and some others) an initial step back from the brink.

A tax is a tax is a tax!  I say we address the unnecessary and unbelievable abuse in the spending of government funds before trying to milk the public more.  STOP THE WASTE!  STOP THE FRAUD!  STOP THE GRAFT!  STOP THE ______________! (You name it!)

I don't agree with the proposed miles driven charge.  Some people people on modest incomes need a car to be able to keep their employment and the expenses of operating the car for that purpose already represent a major proportion of their income.  It would also hit people doing school runs and the like unfairly.  The people that would pay the least are those on the SMB strip that only drive from home to an office and George Town and back; yet many of those are the people with the highest incomes.
In any event if it was thought to be the right thing to tax why not just increase the price of fuel as consumption is mileage based and larger / inefficient cars would automatically pay more?  Which may additionally have a spin of environmental benefit as it would incentivise people to buy more fuel efficient and electric vehicles.
I think the suggestion elsewhere that the Government take half of the spread on the US$/CI$ exchange rate is a good one.  The exchange rate is fixed so the banks are currently making 2.4% on these transactions for nothing.  In Bermuda where I believe the dollar is pegged at the same value as the US$ the banks get no such benefit as US$ and Bermuda currency can be used interchangeably.  For avoidance of doubt the US$/CI$ exchange rate should be legislated to stay at the same rate so customers would not notice a difference, it would merely reduce the "money for nothing" earnings of the banks.
 

I don't usually agree with this man, although he has obviously done a great deal to where he has gotten today, which I respect.  And I do agree with some of the suggestions but most of all, how can the government waste so much money on nonsense to keep themselves in office and (apparently) not a penny on searching out alternative solutions that would keep the UK happy, balance the budget and maybe even secure more voters to them??  I don't care who comes up with the solutions, I spend my money on charitable contributions weekly and I see the return.  I refuse to pay into a fund that will be swallowed by the big black hole of a pocket Mckeeva has. 
It's a sad time for Cayman.  It's hard for us, as Caymanians, because even though we are finally coming together, we are not being heard. Very disheartening and very frightening.

Instead of the road user fee why not just charge everybody $5 per day for sunshine? If it rains we wont have to pay, but if there is sunshine we have to pay...

Don Seymour suggesting a tax on directors is like turkeys voting for Xmas - they have so many directorships at dms between Don and his cronies that if the tax per appointment was decent enough dms could alone fill the budget deficit?

As you said they have so many directorships at dms, so if he's proposing a fee for the directorships, would his company not have to pay out the nose? So he's making the suggestion because he understands the term "sustainable income" and acknowledges the CIG's need for an increase in revenue!

No - his suggestion is irrelevant - it's a done deal, but it's better to agree with something you can't stop, than object and be seen to be unable to stop the measure from being introduced?

It's the old 'Not invented here' syndrome at work again.
This is exactly the same brickwall that blocks re-cycling, alternative energy, electric cars, in fact anything that makes sense. 

Thank You Mr Seymour,
Mr. premier continues to claim that only those that "wish to harm the Cayman Islands" and "Create conflict in the community" oppose his new tax. 
It is very comforting to have repsected business people like Mr. Seymour and Mr. Travers giving their unbiased opinions.  People of thier stature cannot be ignored.  We need more of these big business men to weigh in. If we all get together Mr. Premier cannot bully any more.  He will have to listen because he cannot bully the whole island. 
THANK YOU again Mr. Seymour for having the guts to step forward.  You are not alone, we are all here with you.

Thank you for these suggestions, I do hope someone in Government is listening.

Why can't government just balance the books properyly and stop wasting government funds.  End of!

because votes in West Bay are REALLY expensive

Exactly.  Why should everyone else have to pay for their incompetency?

Agree 100 percent.

This poor person lives in the Eastern districts because I can't afford to live in town.  I have caught the bus for the last 5 years and have finally managed to get an old, but roadworthy car.  Compared to the absolutely appalling bus service we have in the Eastern Districts, I now actually get home in daylight and have a whole extra 2 hours a day.  I am also able to get back out on a night after 8.00 pm, after the (useless) bus service has stopped.  I have also discovered that other than the initial outlay in purchasing my vehicle, the cost of petrol per week is only marginally more than I paid to catch the bus.  So I don't take Mr Seymour's comments about this proposed infrastructure tax lightly, nor do I appreciate it.  For once, I am with the government on this one - this will only make us poor people suffer more.

I recall CIMA implemented introducing the regsitration of master funds this year. The Honourable Mr  Bush (the Premier) - stated that the fee would raise and addtion $7million dollars per annum.
As this was not researched properly many of the expected master funds, did not meet the required definition and did not have to register.
I fear that the 10% proposed enhancement will be the same. Optamistic budgeting, but not enough research.
Statistically - there will be some people leaving now, particularly those in the middle income range of $37-$80k as other jursidiction pays better (even after tax). These people will be replaced after a few months - but at what cost. There will be the loss of the expected 10% fee, the loss of pension withdrawls, the loss of rental income and other monies spent around the island by this group of people. therefore we will not be able to obtain the expected 2012/13 revenue stream.
I am sure based on the audit general reports we will outspend our budgets (all goverments due) so we will therefore be in a worse position that expected.
Then what do we do??????
To all goverment officals, and the premiers office, Caymanians, Status holders and work permit holders - the cayman islands owes a significant amount of debt exess of $64million.
Why has the goverment not asked the people who live here (all of us) to donate or contirbute to reducing the debt?
If there are 45000 people in the island and at a min 5000 who earn over $150k a year, there are more than 100 firms who make greater than $10million profit a year - could the goverment just ask for a pledge and contribution to eliminate the debt.
The maths is easy:
5000 weathly indivudals donate $10,000 ($1,000 per month for 10 months) = $50 million
20 000 middle income (45-149K) to low income donate $1000 ( $100 per month for 10 months) = $20million
100 firms donate $100,000 = $10million
That is roughly $80 million dollars - that should eliminate the debt.
No taxes, no increased fees, fixes our country in 1 year.
and goverment can look at implementing a 5% enhancement fee to work permit instead of paying it to pension but the 5% pension contirbution by an employer would remain to ensure the investment power of the pension funds is not hurt.
These are alternatitives - unless Goverment asks we will not know if the people of Cayman would do so, but I would if it means stabilizing our country.
  
 

Oh great, so those of us who simply cannot afford to live on SMB, South Sound and GT who have moved to the Eastern Districts would have to pay more taxes because we have further to travel to work?  I think an infrastructure fee based on mileage is a ludicrous suggestion which only hits the poor people yet again.

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <!-->
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.