“We have been unequivocal for many years in opposing a goods and service tax as it would have a negative impact on some key sectors of the economy,” said the Chairman of the CGi, Dave Newman. 

“We agree with Deputy Trott on income tax. Since GST was first mooted, our preference has always been for modest rises in the levels of income tax, an increase in the annual fee for businesses, the review of some capital investments and the introduction of a health supplement to generate the necessary funds.  

“We are surprised that the States consistently passes over income tax as a way forward. It is accepted that P&R is in a difficult position and no-one wants to see any rise in their personal costs, but income tax and social insurance reform – especially for higher earners – are by far and away the most efficient and equitable way for collecting additional revenues.” 

Income tax could easily be raised without needing to set up a new department to administer GST, according to the CGi. 

“The mechanism for collection exists, so changes could easily and quickly be introduced without the huge costs of administration for government and all businesses, that a GST would have required,” continued Mr Newman. 

“Any rise in income tax could be introduced for a period of timeand then changed or removed, as required. 

“We would be happy to work with the States, alongside other organisations to explore these options as outlined.” 

P&R has intimated that introducing a GST could cost between £40million and £42million.