Keith Duncan, chairman of the Independent Fiscal Advisory Committee, has found tax break plans by the governing Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) and the opposition People’s National Party (PNP) to be “highly aspirational” but incompatible with what the taxpaying public can afford.  

Speaking with Emily Shields (nee Crooks) during Radio Jamaica‘s ‘Hotline‘ daytime programme on Thursday (August 28), Duncan insisted he was not commenting in any official capacity but as a “private citizen”.

The respected financier—who was previously chairman of the Economic Programme Oversight Committee (EPOC), which shuttered in December 2024—pointed to the previous J$1.5 million income tax threshold proposed by the then-opposition JLP, which later implemented belt-tightening measures in power to offset the impact on the national budget.

“I believe they [JLP] got rid of the oil hedge [tax] and put an SCT on gasoline, among other measures… Remember? And it had to be phased in. So it seems we are at that point, running up into a very important and consequential general election,” he began.

“Therefore, for me, these are aspirational. They are nice to have, but do we have the money as a country to accommodate the revenue that is going to be lost from these tax reform measures?” added Duncan.

During a PNP parish meeting in Mandeville on Sunday, Opposition Leader Mark Golding pledged to abolish income tax for Jamaicans earning up to J$3.5 million annually if his party forms the next government.

Golding’s declaration came hours after the JLP unveiled its plan to cut income tax from the current 25 per cent to 15 per cent. Finance Minister Fayval Williams previously announced in March that the Government would increase the income tax threshold to J$2 million over the next three years, up from J$1.7 million.

With respect to feasibility, Duncan seemed unsure how a PNP government would finance its proposed income tax plan, given that the country is already running on a deficit for the 2026-27 fiscal year.

“It will be very difficult [because] the degrees of freedom are very limited inside of ‘discretionary spend’. Now, where could you possibly cut?” he asked.

Duncan also disagreed with the J$55 billion figure suggested as a ‘ballpark estimation’ by Opposition Spokesperson Julian Robinson during Tuesday’s General Election Debates.

“I think it’s somewhere north of that number because each 100,000 increase is approximately J$4.5 billion. So it’s somewhere around, probably, in the J$70 billion range…and that’s annually,” said Duncan.

Duncan further mused that under the JLP’s plan, slashing income tax by 10 percentage points would cost the Andrew Holness-led administration between J$28 and J$44 billion as a “one-time” measure.

Duncan shied away from estimating a GDP growth level that Jamaica would need to attain to achieve the tax cuts, doubling down on the country’s lack of room to fiscally manoeuvre.

“That [financial] room is already accounted for in terms of increasing the cost of delivering programmes or to keep pace with inflationary increases. We definitely know that the fiscal space is extremely limited unless you carve out any level of significant expenditure cuts to match the revenue lost under either proposal. It would have to be phased and be accommodated with either additional taxation measures, as was done in 2016, or if you run a deficit, you’re going to have to borrow to finance that deficit,” he said.