Selon le pré-projet de budget du gouvernement, le seuil de la taxe est fixé à 25 000 £ et devrait toucher 20 000 personnes. Néanmoins, selon Chris Roebuck, « il y a une possibilité que la taxe touche beaucoup plus de personnes. »

« À ce seuil, n’importe qui travaillant dans le secteur de l’investment banking peut être touché et non pas seulement ceux qui font le plus de profits. Ces personnes vivent dans un monde où, contrairement à la grande majorité du public, les bonus constituent 50% de leur salaire. Elles considèrent donc les bonus comme part intégrante de leur paye. Elles sont certainement en état choc ce soir. La plupart pensaient que le Chancelier choisirait de toucher les personnes gagnant plus de 250 000 £ par an. Cependant, les recettes engrangées par l’Etat auraient été bien moindres.

Le Chancelier a choisi de façon assez judicieuse de fixer le seuil au niveau du salaire national moyen. Si vous obtenez un bonus supérieur à ce que la moyenne des gens gagne par an, vous serez touché par cette taxe.

Comment l’industrie bancaire va-t-elle réagir ?

Oui, quelques personnes vont peut-être quitter la City, mais une augmentation d’impôts de 10 % n’est pas suffisamment significative pour se traduire par un départ massif.

Oui, il y aura des mécontents mais peut-être que la plupart d’entre eux vont se dire qu’ils devraient accepter leur sort et que ces 10% pourraient être reversés aux écoles, aux hôpitaux et à d’autres importants services publics.

La City doit néanmoins être protégée de ceux qui, à l’étranger, souhaitent fragiliser sa position en tant que premier centre financier mondial. Toute taxe supplémentaire sur l’industrie bancaire devrait être levée de manière globale et non pas seulement à Londres. »

Vous trouverez ci-dessous la totalité des commentaires de Chris Roebuck, en anglais :

"The proposal by the Chancellor of a 10% levy on bank bonuses in addition to normal tax gives both sides a chance to return to some form of normal relations after the cross fire of the past weeks. Working on the fact that most bankers are going to be on 40% tax anyway then this is in effect an extra 10% on the bonus. £25,000 is a low figure for it to start at hitting, according to the Government, about 20,000 people. However there is a possibility that it will hit many more.

"At this level virtually anyone in investment banking will be hit. Not just the top performers but also graduates and support functions such at IT, HR and premises. These are not the high flying bankers the public thinks of. It’s just they exist in a world where, unlike the majority of the public, about 50% of their total pay is traditionally in bonuses, so they view the bonus as part of their normal pay. These people may well be in shock this afternoon. Most suspected the Chancellor would have hit those on £250k or above. However the total revenue gained would have been significantly less than by including more people even on smaller bonuses in the net.

"It is likely that the Chancellor thought that the impact of the cash injections from the Government could well have had the effect of stimulating the market to enhance the bonuses of bankers more than would have happened if he has not injected the cash. From his view he is merely taking back the benefit he gave.

"The Chancellor cleverly set the limit at roughly the same figure as the average national wage. So if you get a bonus of more than most people earn in a year you take the hit. That has important implications for how the banking industry responds to this. Yes a very few people might leave the City, but for most the 10% difference on a one off tax isn’t going to be significant enough to cause them to rush abroad. Yes there will be moans and groans but maybe most bankers will now have got to the point where they think they need to graciously accept their fate and agree to donate that extra 10% to the schools, hospitals and other important public services under pressure. Taking steps to avoid the tax could be perceived very negatively by those outside the banking industry.

"The Government now needs to ensure that having made the City 'pay its dues' it now works hard to ensure that a level playing field is maintained across the global financial markets. The City must be protected from those abroad who wish to undermine its position as the world's financial centre and any further taxes on the industry must be levied globally not just in London."

By Chris Roebuck, Honorary Visiting Professor at Cass Business School

Laurent Leloup