Policy & Resources (P&R) keeps telling us its 3% GST package is the only show in town – the single, unavoidable fix to plug Guernsey’s £50m black hole.
But as the States prepares for a massive autumn tax showdown, how credible is P&R’s claim that its preferred option is the only “credible” one?
Express decided to look at five proposed alternatives to see how they stack up.
From radical flat taxes to targeted tourist levies, supercar surcharges, and wealth reviews, rival options are officially laid and ready to go.
Even P&R’s original full-fat 5% GST plan is still alive in the background – backed by a majority of sitting deputies during the last political term.
So is P&R’s 3% deal genuinely the only way out, or just the committee’s preferred option?
Five alternatives
While P&R wants a 3% sales tax combined with a 15% income tax band up to £28,000, five rival ideas are scrapping for support:
- P&R’s Original 5% GST-Plus Plan: The full-strength baseline that passed in principle before. It pairs 5% GST with changes to social security and income tax allowances to pull in £50m net.
- Dr Andy Sloan’s Flat-Tax Reset: A total system reboot that strips away complex allowances for a single 12.5% to 15% flat rate across wages, business profits, and social security.
- Deputy Hayley Camp’s Targeted Non-GST Package: Completely skips shop-floor sales tax, targeting tourists, transport, and corporate fees to hit £23.8m net—or £44m if States spending cuts actually deliver.
- Deputy David Goy’s Wealth & Luxury Surcharge Framework: Built on his Productivity Incentivisation Tax (PIT), this hits supercars, empty houses, and untaxed asset flows without touching ordinary household shopping.
- Deputies Tina Bury’s “Pause & Check” Mandate: An explicit halt-and-review amendment forcing an independent probe into wealth and asset taxes before any future Assembly can touch a sales tax.
The takeaway
The States record proves other options exist on paper – including one that’s already been voted through (5% GST+).
As with any political proposal, there are pros and cons to each alternative.
Deputy David Goy’s PIT proposals – essentially a suite of wealth taxes – will be attractive to many, but there are legitimate questions about whether they send the wrong signal to the markets given our reliance on the finance industry.
Likewise, Deputy Andy Sloan’s and Deputy Haley Camp’s alternatives both include spending restraints, but many will question whether there really is that much ‘fat’ to cut in the public sector and civil service.
Deputy Goy told Express it was unfair for P&R to claim there were “no credible alternatives”, adding: “To make that claim, you would first have to investigate the alternatives. And I use the word ‘investigate’ in its literal sense.”
Whether P&R’s 3% compromise is the right pick is up to deputies to decide – but claims that there are no other “credible” options on the table are starting look increasingly questionable.
None of the other deputies have had access to the raw data which the five civil servants who did P&R’s modelling tested P&R’s proposals against.
Neither have they been given an explanation of the methodology the civil servants used or the formulae.
P&R asked Guernsey’s elected deputies to come up with credible alternatives.
Given many of them have proposed alternatives, many deputies and members of the public will question whether it’s time for P&R to release its modelling and seriously investigate the alternatives to see how ‘credible’ they really are.
