Jon Bond

Small Island, Big Ideas

Tag: gst

  • Guernsey’s Tax Reform 2026: What It Actually Says, and What It Doesn’t

    Guernsey’s Tax Reform 2026: What It Actually Says, and What It Doesn’t

    After years of Green Papers, Billets, rejected amendments, and deferred decisions, the States of Deliberation are again being asked to vote on a substantive, costed tax reform package. The Policy Letter published this week is the culmination of over a decade of deliberation, and whatever you think of the conclusions, it is a serious piece of work that deserves a serious read.

    So let me try to give you that.

    The Problem They’re Trying to Solve

    The starting point is not in dispute. Guernsey has been running a structural deficit for several years — spending has consistently outpaced revenue, and reserves have been used to paper over the gap. The 2026 Budget estimate puts the structural deficit at around £77 million a year, and that figure is calculated after factoring in the expected £40 million annual uplift from Pillar 2.

    That £77 million is not a rounding error. It is not going to be fixed by efficiency savings alone. The General Revenue Reserve, the buffer that has been absorbing shortfalls, is projected to be exhausted by 2031 on the current trajectory.

    The demographic picture makes this worse. The working age population is shrinking relative to the overall population. Three quarters of all States revenue comes from individuals, personal income tax and social security contributions. That tax base is narrowing as it ages, just as demand for health, long-term care and pension expenditure accelerates. The Policy Letter is honest about this: these pressures will continue to grow for several more decades.

    This is the genuine context for what follows. You can disagree with the solution without ignoring the underlying problem.

    What the Package Actually Contains

    The proposed package has five main components. Here is what each actually does.

    1. Income Tax: Lower Rate, Lower Threshold

    The headline change is a reduction in the basic rate of personal income tax from 20% to 15%, applied to income up to £28,000. Income above that threshold continues at 20%. The personal allowance also rises by £600.

    This sounds like a tax cut, and for most earners it is. But the design matters. The 15% band cuts off at £28,000 which is below the median full-time earnings figure in Guernsey. The policy is deliberately redistributive: lower and middle earners gain more than higher earners in percentage terms.

    The net revenue impact is a reduction of £28 million. The income tax reform is not a revenue-raiser, it is the redistributive counterweight to GST.

    2. Social Security: A Restructured System

    The social security changes are more complex and have been significantly moderated from the November 2024 package. Key changes include:

    • A new social security allowance for employed and self-employed contributors, set at £11,122 (currently the allowance for non-employed contributors), with a longer-term ambition to align this with the income tax personal allowance
    • Employer contributions increasing to 7.6% by 2029 (phased from the current 7.1%), payable up to the Upper Earnings Limit of £196,560
    • A new additional rate of 2.5% for employers and self-employed individuals on earnings between the Upper Earnings Limit and £300,000
    • Employee contributions rising to 8.5% from 2028; self-employed to 14.5%; non-employed under pension age to 8.5%; non-employed over pension age to 4%

    One significant change from November 2024: the proposal to apply social security contributions to all income (including rental income) has been deferred. The Policy Letter is candid about why: concern that this would push landlords out of the market, compounding Guernsey’s already serious housing supply problem.

    The net revenue impact of the social security changes is a gain of £2 million.

    3. Transport: Fuel Duty Down, Annual Vehicle Tax Up

    This is a package of changes rather than a single measure. Fuel duty drops by 25%, broadly bringing Guernsey into line with Jersey, an estimated saving of £130–£140 per vehicle per year for private motorists.

    In exchange, a new annual vehicle tax is introduced, covering petrol, diesel, hybrid and electric vehicles, based on weight and emissions. The range is £25 to £280 for private vehicles, with a median charge of around £132.

    A surcharge is also added to first registration duty for private vehicles valued over £50,000 (starting at £2,500).

    The net revenue gain from transport changes is £7 million. The fuel duty cut is the headline that will get the press coverage; the annual vehicle tax is the structural change that matters for the long term, particularly as electrification reduces fuel duty receipts over time.

    4. GST: 3%, From 2028

    This is the most controversial element, and the one that has dominated debate for years. The proposal is a Goods and Services Tax at 3%, to be introduced from 2028.

    This is a reduction from the 5% that was agreed in November 2024, driven by concern about the inflationary impact. At 3%, the modelling suggests a one-off increase in RPIX of around 1.9% at introduction — down from 3.2% under the previous 5% proposal.

    The GST package includes:

    • Uprating of the States Pension, income support and other benefits to cover the increased cost of living, with those increases introduced ahead of the GST
    • An Essential Costs Relief Payment for those on lower incomes not in receipt of income support
    • An International Services Entities (ISE) scheme, mirroring Jersey’s, allowing finance businesses with international clients to pay a fee for an End User Relief Certificate rather than filing full GST returns. Expected to raise £10–12 million annually
    • A commitment not to increase the GST rate before the 2030 assurance review

    The net revenue gain from consumption tax measures is £55 million, the dominant revenue line in the package.

    A two-thirds majority requirement to increase the GST rate in future will also be introduced, providing a structural protection against rate creep.

    5. Corporate Tax: Modest Adjustments Only

    The headline finding from the Tax Review Sub-Committee, chaired by Deputy Charles Parkinson and including three international tax experts, is that fundamental corporate tax reform is not recommended at this time.

    The Sub-Committee considered five options, including a move to a territorial tax regime and a shift from Zero-10 to Zero-15. Both were rejected. A territorial regime would trigger a full review by the EU Code Group, take 12–18 months to resolve, and carry significant risk of business relocation. Moving unilaterally to Zero-15 was modelled to produce minimal net revenue gain once behavioural responses are factored in.

    What is recommended is a set of targeted adjustments:

    • Extending the 10% intermediate rate to apply to the full profits of regulated businesses (not just the regulated activity), aligning with Jersey’s approach (estimated yield: £0.5 million)
    • Extending the 10% rate to prescribed businesses — accountants, legal firms, estate agents registered with the GFSC (estimated yield: up to £2 million)
    • Modest increases to Guernsey Registry fees (estimated yield: ~£0.5 million at RPIX +5%)
    • Further extension to construction and retail deferred until 2030 at earliest

    The net corporate tax gain in the package is £6 million.

    The Sub-Committee also recommends that P&R opens discussions with Jersey and the Isle of Man about a coordinated move to Zero-15 after their General Elections this year — an interesting recommendation that could be significant if picked up.

    The Numbers in Total

    MeasureNet Revenue Impact
    Income tax changes-£28m
    Social security changes+£2m
    Transport taxes+£7m
    GST + ISE scheme+£55m
    Corporate tax adjustments+£6m
    Spending efficiency savings+£20m
    Total~£62m

    Against a structural deficit modelled at £77 million, this package does not fully close the gap. The Policy Letter acknowledges this. That is precisely why the assurance review in 2030 matters, and why the commitment not to raise GST before that review carries real weight.

    What This Package Is, and What It Isn’t

    The political debate will focus on GST. That is understandable as it is the largest single revenue line, and it affects everyone. But framing this as simply “introducing a tax on food and goods” misses the architecture of the package.

    The income tax reduction to 15% is not an afterthought. For a single earner on £28,000, the saving on income tax alone exceeds the estimated annual cost of GST on their consumption. The benefit and pension uprating is front-loaded, it happens before GST is introduced, not after. The Essential Costs Relief Payment is targeted at those not already captured by income support.

    The distributional analysis in the Policy Letter shows that lower and middle income households are, on average, expected to be better off under the full package than they are now. Higher income households are expected to be modestly worse off. That is a deliberate policy choice.

    Whether you accept that analysis depends on whether you trust the modelling, the mitigations, and the political commitment to hold the rate at 3%. Those are legitimate questions.

    What I Think

    The structural deficit is real. The demographic challenge is real. The reserves position is serious. Anyone who believes Guernsey can grow its way out of this problem without broadening the tax base is not engaging with the numbers.

    The balance struck here, lower income tax rates for lower earners, a modest consumption tax, restructured social security, and restrained corporate tax changes, is a considered one. It is not the package I would have designed from scratch, and there are elements I would push back on. But it is a serious response to a serious problem, with a genuine attempt at a progressive tax approach.

    The question the States must now answer is whether they agree. After twelve years of review, the question is no longer whether to act, it is whether this is the right way to act.

    I’ll be watching the debate closely.

    Jon Bond is Founder and CEO of Evans Bond Limited, an accountancy and advisory practice in Guernsey, and principal of Melius Consulting Limited – a business consultancy. He is also a non-executive chairman of CI Co-op and NED at Sark Shipping. The views expressed here are his own.

  • Watching Jersey Vote: What the 2026 Election Tells Us About Small Island Politics

    Watching Jersey Vote: What the 2026 Election Tells Us About Small Island Politics

    Jersey goes to the polls on Sunday 7 June with 92 candidates fighting for 49 seats. From across the water, the campaign raises questions that are just as relevant in Guernsey – about governance, affordability, and what it actually means to run a small island well.

    I should say upfront: I am not a Jersey voter. I live and work in Guernsey, and my interest in Sunday’s election is that of an engaged neighbour, someone who believes that what happens in Jersey tends, eventually, to matter on this side of the water too.

    But I’ve spent time reading the official manifesto booklet, all 92 candidates across three tiers of government, and what strikes me most is how familiar it all sounds. The pressures Jersey is grappling with in 2026 are not uniquely Jersey problems. They are small island problems. If we’re honest, they are Guernsey problems too.

    The Numbers, First

    The scale of this election is worth reflecting on. On Sunday, our island cousins can vote for up to nine Senators (island-wide), one Connétable (parish-level), and between two and four Deputies (constituency-level). That’s three separate ballot papers, up to 14 votes, and 92 candidates to navigate.

    924917
    Candidates StandingSeats AvailableCandidates for 9 Senate Seats

    Almost every candidate is standing as an independent. The sole exception is Reform Jersey, the only organised political party in the States Assembly, whose leader Sam Mézec heads the Senatorial ballot and whose candidates stand in most constituencies.

    It is also worth noting that automatic voter registration was introduced for this election — you no longer need to sign up. Anyone aged 16+ who has lived in Jersey for 12 months (or 6 months plus 5 years total) is automatically added to the register. You don’t need to be a British citizen. Jersey is running one of the more progressive franchise models in the British Isles.

    What Everyone Is Saying

    Read all 17 Senatorial manifestos back to back and a strange thing happens: they start to blur. Not because the candidates lack individuality, some are striking, but because the policy agenda is remarkably convergent. Almost everyone wants to:

    💷 Reduce the Cost of Living

    GST on food, freight import charges, fuel duty, supermarket competition – nearly universal concern.
    Strongest: Breckon, Kersten Guthrie, Mézec

    🏠 Fix the Housing Crisis

    First-time buyers, planning reform, affordable rentals, brownfield development.
    Strongest: Mézec, Miles, Place

    📊 Control Government Spending

    Waste, IT overspend, public sector efficiency, reserves rebuilding.
    Strongest: Breckon, Place, MacLean, Millar

    🏦 Grow the Economy

    Financial services competitiveness, AI and fintech sectors, inward investment.
    Strongest: Gorst, MacLean, Farnham

    🏥 Deliver Health Reform

    New hospital (still unbuilt), prevention-first approach, integrated primary care.
    Strongest: Binet, Place, Millar

    🌿 Protect the Environment

    PFAS water contamination, marine protected areas, green space, Island Plan.
    Strongest: Luce, de Faye, Gorst

    The convergence is both reassuring and troubling. Reassuring because there’s genuine political consensus on the major challenges. Troubling because when everyone agrees on the problems but the problems persist anyway, you have to ask: why?

    The Candidates Who Stand Out

    With 17 people chasing 9 seats, differentiation matters. Here is how I’d characterise the Senatorial field, not as voting recommendations, but as a guide to the distinct voices on offer.

    Senatorial Candidates — Characterisation
    Candidate Background Key Pitch Standout Feature
    Lyndon Farnham Chief Minister (incumbent) Stability and continuity; Capital Investment Fund; infrastructure The only candidate who has experience as chief minister
    Sam Mézec Housing Minister; Reform Jersey leader First Step homeownership; renter protections; united manifesto Sole party candidate – you know exactly what you’re getting
    Ian Gorst External Relations Minister Financial services competitiveness programme; fiscal restraint Jersey’s most experienced international diplomat
    Elaine Millar Former Treasury Minister, first female Viscount Reinstated the Senator role; cut GP costs; Pension Plus Has experience from Treasury – rare for a first full term
    Alan MacLean Former Econ Dev & Treasury Minister Anti-inflation strategy; AI, fintech, medical tourism Created Digital Jersey and Locate Jersey – returning from private sector
    Helen Miles Former Justice Minister; 30yr public service Freight import reform; 50% affordable waterfront housing Broadest policy range; evidence-based across multiple areas
    Tom Binet Former Health Minister (previously Infrastructure) Health digitisation; prevention-first; hospital progress Proposed a successful vote of no-confidence in his own government
    Bernard Place Nursing and public services background “Not a manifesto of promises — a programme for delivery” The only candidate to explicitly say the public workforce must shrink over time
    Steve Luce Environment Minister (incumbent) Island Plan reform; marine areas; PFAS; farming and fishing The only candidate primarily focused on the physical future of Jersey
    Alan Breckon Former States Member Cut IT waste; remove GST from food; Tourism Board Called out £60m IT budget – arrived without a website or banners
    Serena Kersten Guthrie Elite sports professional Value Jersey priorities: cheaper choices, less waste, rebooted economy Most unusual candidate – applies performance coaching culture to politics

    The Policy Breadth Test

    One useful lens for evaluating candidates is how broadly their manifesto engages with Jersey’s challenges. A Senator represents the whole island, not just one issue. I’ve scored each Senatorial candidate across seven policy dimensions, from cost of living to environment, based on the emphasis and detail in their official manifesto.

    Senatorial Candidates – Policy Breadth Score
    Total score out of 35 across 7 themes. Higher = broader engagement across issue areas.

    Helen Miles
    Cost · Housing · Economy · Health · Safety
    21
    Sam Mézec
    Housing · CoL · Economy · Young People
    20
    Bernard Place
    Fiscal · Housing · Health · Delivery
    20
    Lyndon Farnham
    Stability · Housing · Economy · Infra
    19
    Serena Kersten Guthrie
    CoL · Fiscal · Young People
    19
    Mark Boleat
    Economy · CoL · Housing · Balance
    19
    Elaine Millar
    Fiscal · Economy · CoL · Health
    18
    Alan MacLean
    Economy · Fiscal · CoL · Growth
    18
    Mary Le Hegarat
    Tax framework · Fiscal · Housing
    18
    Ian Gorst
    Finance sector · Fiscal · Environment
    17
    Alan Le Pavoux
    Young People · Community · Charities
    16
    Martin Aliga
    Inclusion · Young People · Health
    15
    Tom Binet
    Health · Fiscal · Economy
    15
    Steve Luce
    Environment · Planning · Farming
    14
    Alan Breckon
    Fiscal scrutiny · CoL · GST
    14
    Karl Busch
    Community wellbeing · Social enterprise
    12
    Guy de Faye
    PFAS · Elderly care
    9

    This is not a ranking of quality. Tom Binet, for instance, has one of the most coherent positions in the field on a subject that genuinely matters, and Guy de Faye was talking about PFAS for years before anyone listened. But breadth does matter when you’re electing someone to vote on everything from planning law to the Social Security budget.

    The Issue That Connects Both Islands

    Here is where I confess a particular interest that goes beyond good neighbourly feeling.

    Several Jersey candidates are calling for GST to be removed from food. Alan Breckon puts the cost at approximately £10 million, and argues it is achievable given the fiscal headroom Jersey expects from rising GST receipts by 2029. Mark Le Chevalier, running for Connétable of St Helier, adds medicines to that list. Multiple candidates cite rising food prices over the last five years as a primary driver of household stress.

    Meanwhile, Guernsey is debating whether to introduce GST in the first place.

    The GST Parallel

    Jersey introduced GST in 2008 at 3%, now at 5%. It generates significant revenue — projected to exceed £140 million annually by 2029. It also generates significant political friction: enough that removing it from food staples is now a mainstream electoral promise. Guernsey should be watching this closely before reaching any conclusions about our own fiscal options.

    I’m not making an argument here for or against a Guernsey GST, that deserves its own post when there is more clarity about how Guernsey considers this issue, but the lived experience of Jersey’s electorate in 2026 is directly relevant evidence. When a mature, functional GST regime produces enough political pressure to feature in practically every election manifesto, that tells you something about what a small island population will and will not tolerate.

    The Hospital Problem

    The new Jersey hospital may be the most important single test case for what effective small island government looks like, or doesn’t.

    The project has been in some form of planning, delay, controversy, and restart for over a decade. Hundreds of millions of pounds have been committed. The site has been selected, reconsidered, and reselected. And as of election week 2026, a construction contract has still not been signed.

    Tom Binet, who has been Health Minister during this current term and is arguably the candidate with the most direct ownership of the hospital file, says site preparation is continuing and contract finalisation is close. I hope he is right. But the fact that “contract not yet signed” is still the position four years into a term, and that this features in virtually every candidate’s manifesto as evidence of government’s inability to deliver, tells you something about the scale of the challenge.

    The Hospital Timeline – In Brief
    Period Status Political Context
    Pre-2018 Site selection controversy Multiple locations proposed and rejected; public debate ongoing
    2018–2022 Planning and design phase Overhill site selected after extensive process; cost estimates revised repeatedly
    2022 Previous government collapses Vote of no confidence; new government under Farnham from January 2024
    2024–2026 Site preparation ongoing Binet as Health Minister moves project forward; construction contract pending
    June 2026 Contract not yet signed Features as failure of delivery across most Senatorial manifestos

    Guernsey has its own major infrastructure decisions ahead. The hospital situation in Jersey is a case study in what happens when political complexity, shifting governments, and structural indecision intersect with a project that simply has to happen. The lesson is less about the hospital itself and more about institutional capacity to deliver.

    The Party Question

    In every mature democracy, and in most of our near neighbours, elections are organised around parties with collective manifestos, collective accountability, and the ability to form coherent governments.

    Jersey’s allergy to party politics is well-documented and genuinely interesting. It stems from a culture of independent representation, a parish system that predates modern parliamentary democracy, and a certain Channel Island instinct for pragmatism over ideology.

    But there is a practical problem with running a government of independents: collective delivery is hard. When every minister was elected on their own individual platform, and their loyalty is ultimately to their own constituents rather than to any governing programme, coherence suffers.

    Reform Jersey, love or loathe their politics, operates differently. They have a collective manifesto at reformjersey.je, a shared track record they are willing to be judged on, and candidates who are explicitly running as a team. That is not the norm in Jersey. It may, over time, become more of one.

    What I’m Watching on Sunday

    A few things will be particularly telling when the results come in:

    Reform Jersey’s performance

    Island-wide indicator

    Sam Mézec’s personal vote and the Reform Jersey Deputy results will signal whether organised party politics is gaining or losing ground. A strong showing could accelerate a structural shift in how the States Assembly works.

    Incumbents’ survival

    Gorst, Millar, Farnham

    The current government is asking for a mandate to continue. Whether experienced ministers Gorst, Millar, and Farnham all get in — and whether they end up in the same government again — will shape the policy direction for four years.

    The outsider candidacies

    Kersten Guthrie, Place, Aliga

    New voices with unconventional backgrounds. Serena Kersten Guthrie (elite sport), Bernard Place (nursing/public services), and Martin Aliga (inclusion advocate) all bring something different. Whether the electorate wants different is always the question.

    Turnout

    Democratic health check

    Automatic voter registration is new. Whether it translates to higher turnout — especially among younger residents — will be a significant data point for democratic reform across both islands.

    The View From Guernsey

    I started by saying this is familiar. Let me be specific about why.

    The top concerns in Jersey’s 2026 election – cost of living, housing affordability, government efficiency, healthcare capacity, and a sense that things are promised more often than they are delivered, are the same concerns I hear in Guernsey. Not similar. The same.

    We face our own housing pressures, our own fiscal debates, our own infrastructure decisions, and our own questions about what lean, effective government for a small island actually looks like. The difference is that Jersey is having those debates very publicly, through an election campaign that at least forces candidates to articulate a position and be judged on it.

    Whatever the result on Sunday, Jersey will have a government by next week. The hospital question will have to be answered. The housing supply will have to be addressed. And the cost of living, which no single government in any island jurisdiction has fully cracked, will remain the defining test of political credibility.

    From Guernsey, I’ll be watching with genuine interest.

    Jon Bond is Founder and CEO of Evans Bond Limited, an accountancy and advisory practice in Guernsey, and principal of Melius Consulting Limited – a business consultancy. He is also a non-executive chairman of CI Co-op and NED at Sark Shipping. The views expressed here are his own.

    Sources: Jersey Election Authority, Official Candidate Manifesto Booklet 2026 (vote.je). All candidate positions are drawn directly from published manifestos. Policy scoring reflects emphasis and detail in the manifesto text, not personal endorsement. Readers are encouraged to read the full manifesto booklet at vote.je.

  • Guernsey’s 2025 Accounts: The Headline Looks Good, The Small Print Is More Complicated.

    Guernsey’s 2025 Accounts: The Headline Looks Good, The Small Print Is More Complicated.

    The States of Guernsey has just released its consolidated financial statements for 2025 and the headline figure will catch your eye: a reported net surplus of £106 million.

    After years of discussion about a structural deficit and the need for fundamental tax reform, that sounds like good news. But read past the headline, and a more nuanced picture emerges – one that has significant implications for every business and resident on the island.

    What the Accounts Actually Show

    The States of Guernsey Consolidated Accounts (including the States itself, plus entities like Guernsey Water, Guernsey Electricity, Guernsey Ports, Guernsey Post, Aurigny etc.) reported:

    • Total revenue: £1.25 billion (up 14.4% from £1.09 billion in 2024);
      • Tax and social security made up £881 million
    • Total expenditure: £1.18 billion (up 6.3% from £1.11 billion in 2024);
    • Net surplus: £106.1 million (compared to a surplus of £20.3 million in 2024);
    • Net assets: £4.08 billion (up from £3.92 billion in 2024);
    • Total debt: £403.5 million.

    On the face of it, the improvement is dramatic — an £86 million swing in one year.

    Why the Treasurer Is Urging Caution

    Here is where it gets interesting. The States Treasurer’s own report, published alongside the accounts, is notably careful about what the surplus actually means.

    The £106 million net surplus figure includes £118.9 million in unrealised investment gains on the States’ £1.73 billion investment portfolio that have not been realised. Strip those out and the underlying operating position is actually in deficit.

    The Treasurer’s report goes further: “With one-off items and unrealised investment valuation excluded and after adjusting for the long-term capital investment requirement (2% of GDP), the underlying financial position of the group had a funding gap to close of some £50 million in 2025.”1

    In other words, the States’ own assessment is that on a sustainable, recurring basis, Guernsey is still spending around £50 million more per year than it earns.

    The One-Off Items That Won’t Come Back

    Two specific items inflated the 2025 figures and are explicitly flagged as non-recurring:

    • £39 million from Pillar 2 tax. Guernsey implemented the OECD’s global minimum tax on the profits of large multinational companies in 2025. The first year produced £39 million of accrued income, but critically, a significant portion of this has been recognised in the accounts now but will not be collected until mid-2027. The cash hasn’t arrived yet, and it is a new revenue stream whose future (and 2025) yield remains uncertain.
    • £34 million in one-off corporate tax receipts. These relate to banking sector tax adjustments from prior years. The Treasurer’s report is explicit: these are not expected to recur in future years.

    Together, those two items account for £73 million of the reported surplus. Without them, and without the unrealised investment gains, the position would look very different indeed. As tax expert Mike Williams has noted publicly, without Pillar 2, the structural deficit would have exceeded £100 million.2

    Despite a £106m Surplus, Cash Fell by £9 Million

    One of the most striking single facts in the accounts is this: despite the reported £106 million surplus, the States’ cash balances actually fell by £9 million during the year.

    How? Because £113 million was invested in infrastructure, assets and major projects during 2025 – capital spending on roads, water, power, ports and other long-term assets. The Group’s cash position moved from a net positive of £4.9 million at the start of the year to a net negative position of £4.4 million by year-end.

    This is a useful reminder that a surplus in the income statement does not automatically mean more cash in the bank.

    The Investment Portfolio: Good Returns, Below Target

    The States’ General Investment Portfolio, which was worth approximately £1.73 billion, delivered a return of 7.2% in 2025. That is a solid return by most measures, and it generated £118.9 million in unrealised gains that flow into the headline surplus figure.

    However, the portfolio’s target return is 8.5%, and its policy benchmark is 9.1%, so performance came in below both benchmarks. The portfolio also paid out £122.5 million during the year to fund capital investment and other commitments, keeping the overall value broadly flat year-on-year.

    The Pension Position Improved Significantly

    One piece of genuinely good news in the accounts is the pension position. The Group’s defined benefit pension liability of £44 million in 2024 has swung to a £6.1 million asset in 2025, a £50.1 million improvement. This is driven by changes in actuarial assumptions and investment performance, and it reduces a long-term financial risk that had been building for several years.

    The Bigger Picture: A Structural Problem That Has Not Gone Away

    The 2026 Budget, published before these accounts, already acknowledged a structural deficit of £77 million that will persist until fundamental tax reform is implemented. The 2025 accounts do not change that assessment, if anything, they illustrate exactly how fragile the revenue base is.

    Deputy Gavin St Pier, the former P&R Committee’s treasury lead, has previously pointed to a fundamental vulnerability: approximately 75% of Guernsey’s public revenues come from personal income tax and social security contributions from the working-age population. That is an unusually narrow base for a government of this scale, and one that is vulnerable to demographic change, economic slowdown, or any shift in the financial services sector.

    What About the GST Debate?

    Our previous blog post about GST highlights the complexities of GST, but even since then the landscape has shifted. These accounts create the real risk that any tax reform will again be kicked down the road by the States Assembly.

    The tax reform picture has shifted since the Budget. The GST-plus package of a 5% goods and services tax combined with income tax cuts to 15% had been the expected solution. However, as of late May 2026, Guernsey Press is reporting that four of the five senior P&R Committee members oppose GST-plus and the committee is now developing an alternative plan.

    The final proposals are expected in a policy letter on 8 June, with a States debate in July. Whatever the outcome, fundamental change to Guernsey’s tax system is now a matter of when, not if. The numbers in these accounts make that clear.

    What Does This Mean for You?

    For businesses and individuals in Guernsey, the 2025 accounts are a useful prompt to consider a few things:

    Tax change is coming. Whether it is GST, higher income tax, extended corporate tax rates, or some combination, the fiscal reality documented in these accounts makes reform inevitable (even if delayed). Planning ahead, understanding your personal and business exposure to likely scenarios, is worth doing now, before the States makes its decision in July.

    Corporate tax rates may change. The possibility of extending the 10% intermediate corporate income tax rate to GFSC-regulated professional services firms is still in play. If you run a regulated business, this could affect your tax position from 2027 or 2028.

    Capital investment is continuing. The States spent £113 million on infrastructure in 2025. That spending supports the local economy, but it also means ongoing capital requirements will keep pressure on the public finances regardless of what happens with the revenue side.

    The Pillar 2 income is not guaranteed. The £39 million recognised in 2025 will not be collected until mid-2027, and the long-term yield of this new tax on multinational profits is inherently uncertain. It should not be counted as stable, recurring income.

    Talk to me

    The next six months will be defining for Guernsey’s fiscal future. Whether you are a business owner thinking through the implications of tax reform, an individual planning your finances ahead of possible changes, or a regulated firm concerned about corporate tax rate changes, my Accounting firm Evans Bond can help you understand your position and plan accordingly.

    Visit our website for more info.

    Jon Bond is Founder and CEO of Evans Bond Limited, an accountancy and advisory practice in Guernsey, and principal of Melius Consulting Limited – a business consultancy. He is also a non-executive chairman of CI Co-op and NED at Sark Shipping. The views expressed here are his own.

    1. States of Guernsey Accounts 2026 ↩︎
    2. Guernsey Press 20th May 2026 ↩︎