TOPIC:

&amp;quot;slates32&amp;quot;:puseznkm wrote: makes sense hope they can see that !![/quote:puseznkm]Some chance... It only exists so we have a right to complain when they don't. <!-- s8) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_cool.gif" alt="" title="Cool" /><!-- s8) -->

decent lads, good work TBN

One of the members of the group is from the HSE who, if you recall, commissioned the report where I got the information and used it to call for a duty increase. You remember; the report where they make the data fit the conclusions they want to draw, then stick the inconvenient facts, which contradict their conclusions, in appendix 2.

From the Department of Daft Ideas c/o Beer Nut Towers:

The thing about the raising of excise duty on alcohol, from our own tiny self-centred point of view, is that by punishing the people who drink vast quantities of takeaway €1-€2 lager, they also punish the rest of us who buy beer in higher price ranges.

Assuming that they go with the HSE and decide to increase the cost of drink, instead of rasing excise duty by a flat amount or percentage, how about setting a minimum price per litre of beer: say about €5.

Everybody wins!

No go. Who would get the extra cash? In a case like this it would be possible for the manufacturer, wholesaler, or retailer to increase their profits, at the expense of government excise revenue, by simply raising the price to just under the €5 per litre mark.

The exciseman wouldn't lose out, as excise and VAT would remain the same. And retailers in the drinks industry always increase their profits when tax or wholesale prices go up, so no change there. If the macrobrewers try to cash in, the retailers are more likely to go elsewhere.