Last year’s announcement of yet another high street taskforce had me channelling the cultural icon that is Brenda from Bristol as I shouted across the office “What, another one??!!”.

I must admit I’ve not kept a close tally on the number of grandly convened high street advisory bodies, but we must surely be into the hundreds by now. Or maybe it just seems that way.

Sir John Timpson’s effort has been far more focused and productive than most of his predecessors’. His panel of retail experts at least had some grounding in the nuts and bolts of retail.

In fact, I even worked with one of them in the dim and distant past. But as with pretty much every other report into the plight of the high street, I’ve yet to see any of the recommendations acted on.

Having just become a councillor on a local authority that owns a shopping centre (ill-advisedly in my humble opinion), I’ve begun to see how little scope there is for political intervention to help retailers.

I’ve only had one frustrating meeting on the subject so far, but it was apparent that bureaucracy and financial imperatives will always trump higher ideals. Token gestures are far cheaper than rent or rates cuts.

Speaking of token gestures, the introduction of a digital services tax – dubbed the Amazon Tax – is soon to be imposed on some online giants.

Such a tax has oddly been supported by Tesco’s Dave Lewis, and of course there’s a general mumble of affirmation from the masses as the media reports on Amazon’s, and others’, ludicrously slim tax liability in comparison with their earnings.

A bad tax

It will probably surprise many of my regular readers to learn that I’m not really a fan of this move. A specific tax targeted at one sector of an industry seems stupidly regressive to me. Even if there were some commitment to directing the additional revenue to helping the ailing high street (and I don’t think there is), it just feels wrong-headed.

Much of the success of companies like Amazon is allegedly based on the exploitation of their workers and the rude embrace of taxation loopholes, but those issues won’t be solved by forcing them to bung an extra 2% on their prices, which will inevitably be passed on to consumers.

The other argument is that it ‘levels the playing field’, which it doesn’t. Instead, it tips it in a different direction. While I agree that Amazon et al have been guilty of some pretty fancy footwork in the tax avoidance boogie, that’s part of a broader problem with our general taxation system.

“Bolting on targeted taxes rather than sorting out these inherent issues is lazy, myopic thinking and sets a dangerous precedent”

But remapping that regulatory labyrinth is far more demanding and a lot less newsworthy for an unpopular government.

Bolting on targeted taxes rather than sorting out these inherent issues is lazy, myopic thinking and sets a dangerous precedent. It opens a door to something I’ve been warning about for a number of years now.

We might start with a tax on the big players, but once we’ve got comfortable with the principle, it won’t take a massive political leap for a future Chancellor to extend an online purchase tax to everyone. That then leaves many smaller players open to another drain on their resources, doubly so if they also operate real-world stores.

If any future government wanted to terraform the retail environment they could simply get on with reforming business rates or commercial leasing practices like they’ve been promising since the beginning of time. But just typing that sentence gives me a feeling of déjà vu that makes my head spin.

What I’ve learned over the past 30 years in retail is that waiting for positive government intervention to solve the high street’s problems is a bit like the development of fusion power – it’s probably possible and definitely desirable, but it will always be 20 years away.