³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

On the latter point, it goes without saying that, as part of the budget-setting process, in his capacity as acting Cabinet Secretary for Finance and the Economy, the Deputy First Minister will have discussions with all colleagues across the Government, which will inform policy. With regard to the impact of the tax change, I note the forecasts of the SFC for the coming years. I appreciate that, underneath those headline numbers of the revenue that is raised, there can be regional variations, and we will have to be alive to those issues and consider them carefully. However, fundamentally, as much as there is a policy intent, as I mentioned earlier, to support first-time buyers, there is also a policy intent to raise revenue. The nature of the devolution settlement is that the Scottish Parliament has limited levers at our disposal, so we have to take a balanced approach.

The Deputy First Minister set out clearly the Government’s strategic priorities for the budget: tackling child poverty, reform of public services and a just transition to a net zero economy. Ultimately, those will have to be resourced through the revenue that we raise, a significant portion of which we raise directly, together with what comes through the block grant.

Policy decisions must take account of behavioural aspects and applicability to other policy areas, but revenue raising in itself is of significant importance, because we have to raise that revenue to be able to deploy it to support a lot of those other policy objectives. I am happy to give an undertaking to consider the points that have been made about how we can provide more information and data on the behavioural impact that those tax policies have as we go forward.

There are monthly updates from Revenue Scotland on the performance of LBTT, so we monitor it very closely. I regularly engage with Revenue Scotland directly to understand the performance of the tax and some of the impacts that could be emerging. It is something that we keep under continuous review. As has happened previously in the context of the pandemic, when there is a need to adjust policy to reflect circumstances—granted, they were exceptional circumstances—that is something that the Government is able and, if required, willing to do.

Yes. We consider that in the round. It is also a very important point in understanding tax differentials between Scotland and the rest of the UK. As we touched on earlier, it could be pointed out that there are lower thresholds for LBTT than there are for stamp duty. That is reflective of the Scottish property market, but we also recognise that, in other areas, council tax is lower in Scotland than it is south of the border. We also have a lower poundage for NDR, which means that 95 per cent of our non-domestic properties have a lower tax liability than properties south of the border have.

I agree with Ross Greer entirely that it is important to look at the impact of the net revenue that we are raising and of any behavioural consequences because of the differential between Scotland and another part of the UK.

Yes. That is the point that I made to Mr Mason. I recognise that the private rented sector plays an important role for many people. We want a range of tenures to be available, but many individuals face a challenge in buying their first property or in moving from one property to another to reflect a change in circumstances, so the policy intent behind what we do with the ADS is to support first-time buyers.

As I mentioned in my answer to Liz Smith, the review was initiated in the early part of last year. However, given the review’s complexity, and in recognition of many of the issues that were raised as part of it, we are giving careful consideration to it. As I said, we will be providing our response to the review shortly. That will cover a number of issues that have been raised and that I know are of concern to members across parties.

As part of the process of deliberating on public policy, we consider a range of views and opinions from different organisations, which we balance against each other. Particular taxes can have particular impacts on the particular sectors, individuals or organisations that are liable for those taxes; however, the revenues that are raised have an impact on the people who benefit from public services.

Decisions have to be taken in the round. We cannot be in a silo where we just focus on one aspect or implication. The context in which we find ourselves is that there is a cost of living crisis and our public services are facing unprecedented pressure. It is an absolute imperative, and it is our moral responsibility, to ensure that we are properly resourcing our public services. That means taking proportionate, fair and balanced decisions with regard to how we utilise the tax levers that are at our disposal.

I do not have that figure in front of me, but I am happy to come back to the committee on that if there is a means of providing greater detail at a granular level.

My point, Mr Lumsden, is that I am not responding to comments when I have not had an opportunity to study them in detail and to understand the full context.

The reality is that we face a challenge in housing; that is recognised, and we are taking action across a range of Government areas to tackle it. The challenge and the proximate cause of the challenge are not down to the specific policy decisions of any one Government but are influenced by a series of much broader global factors, not least the global pandemic that we are just coming out of and significant cost inflation as a result of the broader macroeconomic challenges. There is no suite of policies or set of interventions that could address that.

Our policy around LBTT is demonstrably raising revenue. We have had a buoyant property market in Scotland. We have seen significant revenue raised through LBTT over the past year, above and beyond the corresponding block grant adjustment. The level of transactions and the revenue raised demonstrates to me, and to any fair and impartial observer, that the policy is delivering on its objective to raise revenue. That revenue can be used to support vital public services, including the delivery of homes and the services that communities require.

We are seeking to support first-time buyers and other people to be able to buy their own homes.

I am conscious of the committee’s considerable interest in this area, and I repeat my strong appreciation of the concerns that local government has expressed. We have given careful consideration to the matter as part of the ADS review, and I will be in a position to set out the Government’s response to that in the near future.

Our decisions on tax are taken in the round as part of the overall budget process, in the context of the Government’s existing policy commitments. There are clear commitments around housing, in particular on the supply of affordable housing. The policies that we undertake overall with regard to residential LBTT reflect the characteristics of the Scottish property market, as was touched on earlier, with regard to average house prices.

We take account of broader economic factors, and decisions are taken in a way that is consistent with the policy objectives in other areas. In decisions around tax, there is, as much as there can be, a clear focus on revenue raising. We do not take things in isolation, which is why we said at the outset that a key part of the intent behind the ADS—as has been the case since it was introduced—is to provide support for first-time buyers.