The salmon tax is Frp’s « baby »
On Tuesday this week, we dealt with a recommendation from the Finance Committee to discontinue the norm price scheme when determining basic interest tax in the aquaculture. I participated in the debate. Bengt Rune Strifeldt, Frp, Finnmark did not do so.
But strip field writes in the media, including in Altaposten, iLaks, Fiskeribladet and others under the heading «You are going to get a day in Mårå»About Patient Focus and Ojala’s betrayal by tilting the basic interest rate to the salmon industry of 25 per cent. Strip field writes that the Progress Party has been clear against both the basic interest tax and the norm price council. He believes that the basic interest tax should not have been introduced.
Of course, Strifeldt does not mention that the basic rate of salmon farming is a real-born Frp baby. For September 2018, the then Frp leader and Finance Minister Siv Jensen set up a committee, the Aquaculture Tax Committee, chaired by Professor Karen Helene Ulltveit-Moe at the University of Oslo. The committee should look at taxation of the salmon industry.
This is stated in the march order (from September 9, 2018), or the mandate, to Siv Jensen’s selection: «The selection is asked to consider various forms of extra taxation of the aquaculture industry, including basic tax and production fee ».
In November 2019, the Aquaculture Tax Committee delivered its NOU report. The majority in the sample advocated 40 per cent of the basic interest rate on salmon. There are 15 percentage points more than the salmon tax settlement I was involved in with, among others, the Labor Party.
One can only speculate on how the basic interest debate would have been today without Siv Jensen’s tax committee?
During the question hour on February 13, 2019, parliamentary representative Geir Pollestad (Sp), questions to Finance Minister Siv Jensen about why she and the government were so keen to introduce a new state extra tax on salmon farming. The Minister of Finance could not give a clear answer.
I have to vote in all matters. When the salmon tax came on the agenda in the fall of 2022, I quickly realized that Ap, Sp and SV did not agree on the tax rate.
SV’s goal was a salmon tax of 48 per cent. Sp would not accept that. The debate went, and in the meantime I understood that I could get on the rocking in the case, and worked hard to gain enough knowledge until the government contacted the matter. They did this around Easter time in 2023. May 25, 2023, Ap, Sp, Left and Patient Focus agreed on a 25 per cent tax rate plus any request decision on environmental requirements, etc.
During the treatment of the Storting on May 31, 2023, I clearly stated that if it turns out that parts of the tax regime give an unfortunate outcome for the industry, the facility can be adjusted. Had Strifeldt followed with him he had seen in the media that already in the fall of 2023 I contacted the Ministry of Trade and Fisheries and said that we should scrap the norm price and continue the taxation based on the actual price, ie price per kilo above the cage edge.
This means that even though I tilted the salmon tax into the Ministry of Finance’s bank account, I have kept focusing on making the salmon tax better for the industry. Because then it also gets better for the districts.
When the Right submitted a representative proposal to discontinue the norm price scheme, the case again came to consideration at the Storting. The debate was on April 1, and I said I was going to support the minority proposal on the right. When we are going to vote on the proposal in April 8, I do just what I have said I should do. But what does Frp do?
Strifeldt has criticized me for the case of salmon tax – both on FB and in the media. Strifeldt should be able to answer even if he knows something about Frp retaining the salmon tax of 25 per cent, or, reduces Frp the tax rate as the Right does, or will Frp discontinue salmon tax scheme? Before you read further, you can guess what Frp does. You get the answer here:
Frp reduces the salmon tax – they retain it at 25 per cent – ie unchanged – in their draft state budget. It unlike the Right that proposes to reduce the tax from 25 to 15 percent, writes E24. So Frp retains the tax rate, but rejects the party in turn in the case?
To E24, Deputy Hans Andreas Limi says Frp is against the basic interest tax, but that the party prioritizes differently now. Thus, Strifeldt believes that Ojala is a support wheel for the Labor Party. That’s not true. I tilted the salmon tax in the Labor Party and Sp’s direction, but this week I give the opposition right that the norm price calculation must give way to the actual price. What I do is actually a living political craft that stands.
For Strifeldt’s orientation, I have tilted several issues in the direction of the opposition. I briefly mention both option tax and tecvisa as well as the relocation of state jobs. Both cases in favor of, among other things, Finnmark.
How many cases have Strifeldt tilted in favor of Finnmark?
