The ASI's 2016 Budget response got excellent coverage in a number of national newspapers, including the following: The Telegraph covered Executive Director Sam Bowman's commentary on the Chancellor breaking 2/3 of his own fiscal rules:
Sam Bowman from the Adam Smith Institute, a think-tank, suggested that Mr Osborne does not believe his own plans are feasible.
“Mr Osborne’s deficit reduction plans for this Parliament always seemed improbable but lowered growth forecasts make this plain to see,” he said.
City AM featured the ASI Budget responses three times, covering our comments on Osborne breaking his fiscal rules, and a general budget overview written by Sam (page 16) and Ben Southwood's comments on the corporation tax cuts:
Ben Southwood, head of research at the Adam Smith Institute, said: “Corporation tax is – as George Osborne said – one of our least efficient taxes, destroying huge amounts of economic activity for each pound it raises in revenue. Cutting it from its current rate to 17 per cent by the end of the parliament will put upwards pressure on productive investment and on workers wages, though the move is small.”
The Daily Mail covered Sam's comments on the sugar tax:
Sam Bowman, of think-tank the Adam Smith Institute, said: ‘A tax on sugary soft drinks is the first step on the road to fat taxes and sugar taxes more generally.
It makes little sense to tax sugary drinks on their own, rather than sugar more generally – a couple of Mars bars are just as bad as a bottle of Coke – but the Chancellor probably reckons the public won’t care if he only targets soft drinks. Once the tax is in place, he will follow the lead of other “sin taxes” and raise it higher and higher, and impose it on more and more things. The costs of this tax will likely be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices, so it will be regressive.’
And The Times (Scotland) also featured our sugar tax comment:
That view was backed up by Sam Bowman, executive director of the Adam Smith Institute, who said that the sugar tax would mean higher prices for consumers.
The IBTimes covered Sam's comment on the Budget's failure to take the lowest-paid out of National Insurance contributions:
Bowman, the executive director of the Adam Smith Institute, on personal tax allowance:
"Raising the personal allowance is a good thing, but National Insurance thresholds have been left alone again. The Adam Smith Institute has campaigned for years to take the lowest-paid workers out of tax, and progress in raising the personal allowance is to be welcomed. But there has been no movement in National Insurance contributions, which are an income tax in all but name and kick in at much lower income levels than income tax now does – at just £8,060 per year. The Chancellor should target his income tax cuts on the poor and focus on raising National Insurance thresholds."