Since he said he expected a protest I wish to register one to the letter of Gary Campbell (South China Morning Post, January 17). He calls for a widening of the tax 'net' to gather more revenue from those who are in the lower levels of income in Hong Kong and, by implication, tightening the social safety net. It may be true that a minority 'of taxpayers are bearing the majority of the tax burden'. But certainly this is true in most developed societies. However, I would deny the allegation that those on the government's Comprehensive Social Security Assistance are 'driving around in fancy cars'. Not on the allowances provided. I would remind readers that in Hong Kong from the years 1996 to 2000 income tax payers in the top bracket received a three per cent reduction in rates while those at the bottom received no reduction. A three per cent rise in taxes on those in the upper level would simply be a return to the rates of 1996, which was about the date of the beginning of the slide into the government deficit. Your correspondent seems most concerned about the government spending on infrastructure projects and social welfare. Concerned citizens are right to carefully scrutinise government spending. But don't lay the blame and responsibility for government spending on the poorest in our community. The same issue of the Post quotes the World Development Report 2003 making the shocking announcement that Hong Kong ranks 96th out of 111 countries in the gap between the rich and the poor. Only 15 countries have a worse gap between rich and poor than Hong Kong. If those citizens in the upper brackets paid their employees a decent wage then those in the lower brackets would have more income on which to pay taxes and the government might not have to provide such an extensive safety net. These social services are partially paid for by my taxes also. The social services system of Hong Kong makes it possible for many employers to have such a cheap workforce. I gladly pay my share of this safety net although I do not have any employees at all. If the net is weakened by an unfair tax rate for the rich, then a just society certainly must institute a minimum wage, a mandatory 40-hour week, unemployment insurance, and other fair employment practices. Many people choose to do business in Hong Kong because taxes are low. The upper-level US income tax rate is 28 to 38 per cent (plus state and other taxes) and taxes are even higher in some European countries. Mr Campbell and those like him who want to lobby against higher upper-level taxes and reduce social services should listen to the chairman of the American Chamber of Commerce, who said we should all count our blessings. He was really talking to those in the upper income brackets, not to those at the other end. They do have it pretty good up there. I think people should stop complaining. They should pay a 'fair' share or be willing to accept the employment standards that other developed countries have. JERRY JUERGENS, Sai O
