Anti-Prosperity Duty [APD]
Bagso - That APD consultation document you link to in post No.2389 is an excellent find.
I have to admit to some reservations concerning the proposals, however. It seems that the cost of any reduction in APD will have to be borne directly by local government (and not by the treasury). One must wonder whether bleeding-heart local councillors will have the desire to reduce or axe Anti-Prosperity Duty if the resulting revenue shortfall will have to be shouldered by other priority service areas such as social services, day centres and refuse collection. There is even a risk that councillors of certain political leanings may prefer to INCREASE the burden on travellers to fund their pet causes locally.
Unfortunately, many of the benefits to be drawn from axing Anti-Prosperity Duty accrue to the region's economy generally, and not directly to council funding. Local politicians may prefer an assured income-stream from taxing travellers rather than difficult-to-quantify improvements in the broader local economy.
I hope I'm being too cynical on this, but I have my doubts.
By the way, there is an option to provide feedback on the topic via a link provided in the consultation document. I am minded to raise this concern with them, not that I expect to get very far with it! Other regulars here may wish to express their opinions directly to the decision-makers as well?