Steve Williams

Motion put to the States: To insert an additional proposition as follows: “SHOULD PROPOSITION 1 AND PROPOSITION 2 CARRY 3 (a) To agree that the Committee for Housing shall have the right of first refusal over the future use of the land at Lukis House, Swissville and Garden Hill for the delivery of Affordable Housing and mixed tenure housing, with such use to be given priority over alternative uses of the sites, subject to the Committee for Housing confirming the suitability and viability of the land for housing development; (b) To direct the Committee for Housing, in consultation with the Policy & Resources Committee, to identify the land required for housing development at these sites and undertake an outline viability assessment in order to identify preferred development strategies; (c) To direct the Committee for Housing to confirm its intentions for the use of such land no later than 31 December 2028 or 18 months before the planned opening of the new Children's Hub, whichever is earlier; (d) To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to reserve the land identified by the Committee for Housing under sub-paragraph 3(b) for housing purposes and, subject to any necessary statutory and property approvals, to make the land available for housing development following its vacation by the existing Health and Social Care users; (e) To direct the Policy & Resources Committee, not to allocate or commit any of the land at Lukis House, Swissville or Garden Hill to alternative uses until the Committee for Housing has had the opportunity to exercise its right of first refusal under sub-paragraph 3(a) unless the Committee for Housing has failed to confirm its intentions within the timeline specified in sub-paragraph 3(c).”

Voting Pour delivers this

Gives the Committee for Housing first refusal on sites for affordable and mixed-tenure housing.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: SHOULD PROPOSITION 1 AND PROPOSITION 2 CARRY 3 (a) To agree that the Committee for Housing shall have the right of first refusal over the future use of the land at Lukis House, Swissville and Garden Hill for the delivery of Affordable Housing and mixed tenure housing, with such use to be given priority over alternative uses of the sites, subject to the Committee for Housing confirming the suitability and viability of the land for housing development; (b) To direct the Committee for Housing, in consultation with the Policy & Resources Committee, to identify the land required for housing development at these sites and undertake an outline viability assessment in order to identify preferred development strategies; (c) To direct the Committee for Housing to confirm its intentions for the use of such land no later than 31 December 2028 or 18 months before the planned opening of the new Children's Hub, whichever is earlier; (d) To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to reserve the land identified by the Committee for Housing under sub-paragraph 3(b) for housing purposes and, subject to any necessary statutory and property approvals, to make the land available for housing development following its vacation by the existing Health and Social Care users; (e) To direct the Policy & Resources Committee, not to allocate or commit any of the land at Lukis House, Swissville or Garden Hill to alternative uses until the Committee for Housing has had the opportunity to exercise its right of first refusal under sub-paragraph 3(a) unless the Committee for Housing has failed to confirm its intentions within the timeline specified in sub-paragraph 3(c).

Voting Pour delivers this

Gives the Committee for Housing right of first refusal on land for affordable and mixed-tenure housing.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: 7. To agree that an excess repairs allowance may be given to a landlord, from 2026, for the cost of repairing, maintaining, insuring and managing a let property based on the expenses incurred in the actual calendar year, rather than it being based on the expenditure incurred in the previous five years (this allowance not to create a loss), with any transitional provisions as deemed necessary when the legislation is drafted.

Voting Pour delivers this

Eases the excess repairs allowance for landlords' repair and maintenance costs on let property, moving towards tax relief for repair costs.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: Whether, after consideration of the Policy Letter ''Tax Reform 2026'' dated 8 June 2026, they are of the opinion: 1. To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to implement the package of tax reforms to make Guernsey and Alderney more financially sustainable as set out in sections 9 and 10 with the rates and thresholds as described in Appendix 7, save that, in relation to GST, food produced or grown by small independent suppliers is to be taxed at a rate of 0% and not at 3%, and with the following clarifications, and subject to the following: A) the Policy & Resources Committee, working with the Committee for Employment & Social Security, shall not bring GST into operation unless: i. the associated personal income tax and social security contribution mitigations are in force and operational, and are being applied through the relevant deduction, collection and assessment arrangements, before GST becomes chargeable; ii. the approved GST-related increases in the States Pension, income support and other benefits have taken effect, with payments at the increased rates commencing before GST becomes chargeable; and iii. the Essential Costs Relief Payment arrangements are in force and operational; for the purpose of this Proposition, an intention to apply relief retrospectively, make compensatory payments later or complete the necessary systems after GST has commenced shall not constitute implementation of the Mitigation Measures; b) the Policy & Resources Committee: i. shall defer the commencement of GST where any of the conditions in this Proposition 1(a) cannot be met; ii. shall revise the implementation timetable so that those conditions are met, including any necessary alignment with the commencement of a tax or contribution year; and iii. shall report promptly to the States on the reason for the delay, its financial implications and the revised timetable; c) no authority otherwise given under this item shall permit GST to commence in advance of compliance with those conditions; d) the Policy & Resources Committee and the Committee for Employment & Social Security, before any instrument bringing GST into operation is made or submitted for approval, shall publish a joint implementation assurance report: i. identifying each Mitigation Measure, its commencement date and the date from which its financial effect will be delivered; ii. setting out the evidence that the necessary legislation, staffing, systems, payroll interfaces, assessment arrangements and payment processes are ready to deliver the measures in accordance with this Proposition; and iii. identifying any outstanding implementation risks and explaining how those risks have been addressed, including the arrangements for receiving and determining Essential Costs Relief Payment Claims; e) where compliance depends upon an event occurring after publication of that report, the Committees shall publish confirmation that the event has occurred before GST becomes chargeable, if the conditions cannot be met, the terms under this proposition at 1(b) shall apply notwithstanding any commencement date previously appointed; f) the legislation implementing GST shall give effect to these commencement conditions and shall not confer power to dispense with them by administrative decision; and

Voting Contre delivers this

Main Tax Reform 2026 proposition implementing the package including GST; Contre is consistent with opposing GST.

Why this counts against the promise: Deputy Steve Williams had promised voters that he opposed the introduction of GST, yet on 2 October 2026 he voted Pour on the motion to direct the Policy & Resources Committee to implement a package of tax reforms that included the introduction of GST, a vote directly inconsistent with his manifesto commitment to oppose GST.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: 1A To agree, notwithstanding Proposition 1, the following: i. to implement the package of tax reforms to make Guernsey and Alderney more financially sustainable as set out in sections 9 and 10 with the rates and thresholds as described in Appendix 7 in the first year of implementation SUBJECT TO the rates and thresholds progressing as follows: with effect from 24 months following the implementation of changes to Income Tax and Social Security contributions and the introduction of a GST: o Social Security contributions allowance: £12,600 (provisional*); o Higher rate of Income Tax threshold: £30,500 (provisional*); o Pre-emptive increase in pensions and other benefits: 0.6%; o Essentials Costs Relief Payment: set to reflect the estimated impact of a 4% GST on a basket of essential goods as described in Billet d’État No III of 2026; o GST: 4%; and, with effect from 48 months following the implementation of changes to Income Tax and Social Security contributions and the introduction of a GST: o Social Security contributions allowance: £13,000 (provisional*); o Higher rate of Income Tax threshold: £33,000 (provisional); o Pre-emptive increase in pensions and other benefits: 0.6%; o Essential Costs Relief Payment: set to reflect the estimated impact of a 5% GST on a basket of essential goods as described in Billet d’État No III of 2026; o GST: 5%. *monetary thresholds to be adjusted for inflation prior to implementation ii. with the Committee for Employment & Social Security to recommend to the States of Deliberation annually uprating: o the personal Income Tax allowance; o the Social Security contributions allowance; o the Higher Rate of Income Tax threshold; o the Essentials Cost Relief Payment; and o the rates of the States Pension, Income Support and any other impacted benefits by a minimum of RPIX to ensure that the real value after inflation of the protection incorporated in the package of reform is maintained.”. iii. to include within the Fiscal Policy Framework a fiscal rule that GST shall not exceed 5%.

Voting Contre delivers this

Proposition 1A implements the tax reform package (including GST); Contre opposes GST introduction.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: 1. To substitute in Proposition 1 the word “and” for the full stop and to insert, immediately after Proposition 1, the following additional Proposition: “1A To agree, notwithstanding Proposition 1, the following: i. to implement the package of tax reforms to make Guernsey and Alderney more financially sustainable as set out in sections 9 and 10 with the rates and thresholds as described in Appendix 7 in the first year of implementation SUBJECT TO the rates and thresholds progressing as follows: with effect from 24 months following the implementation of changes to Income Tax and Social Security contributions and the introduction of a GST: o Social Security contributions allowance: £12,600 (provisional*); o Higher rate of Income Tax threshold: £30,500 (provisional*); o Pre-emptive increase in pensions and other benefits: 0.6%; o Essentials Costs Relief Payment: set to reflect the estimated impact of a 4% GST on a basket of essential goods as described in Billet d’État No III of 2026; o GST: 4%; and, with effect from 48 months following the implementation of changes to Income Tax and Social Security contributions and the introduction of a GST: o Social Security contributions allowance: £13,000 (provisional*); o Higher rate of Income Tax threshold: £33,000 (provisional); o Pre-emptive increase in pensions and other benefits: 0.6%; o Essential Costs Relief Payment: set to reflect the estimated impact of a 5% GST on a basket of essential goods as described in Billet d’État No III of 2026; o GST: 5%. *monetary thresholds to be adjusted for inflation prior to implementation ii. with the Committee for Employment & Social Security to recommend to the States of Deliberation annually uprating: o the personal Income Tax allowance; o the Social Security contributions allowance; o the Higher Rate of Income Tax threshold; o the Essentials Cost Relief Payment; and o the rates of the States Pension, Income Support and any other impacted benefits by a minimum of RPIX to ensure that the real value after inflation of the protection incorporated in the package of reform is maintained.”. iii. to include within the Fiscal Policy Framework a fiscal rule that GST shall not exceed 5%. 2. To delete Proposition 3 and replace it with: “To direct that before any increase in the rate of GST from 3% to 4%, or from 4% to 5% shall take effect, the Policy & Resources Committee shall publish an assurance review from the independent Fiscal Policy Panel affirming that in the Panel’s opinion the increase is consistent with the Fiscal Policy Framework and is necessary and appropriate having regard to the island’s fiscal, economic and inflationary environment and the impact of economic conditions and the proposed increase on lower- and middle income households. In the event that the Fiscal Policy Panel’s assurance review concludes that the scheduled increase in the rate of GST does not satisfy the requirements herein, the scheduled increase shall not take effect and shall instead be deferred for at least 12 months until the Panel concludes that the requirements have been met.”. 3. In Proposition 4, to insert after the words “to give effect to the above decisions” the following: “, and to direct that such legislation include provision requiring that any resolution to approve legislation that seeks to vary or repeal the legislative protections referred to in paragraph 10.4, and outlined in Resolution I. 2 of Billet d’État No III of 2026 made on the 26th February 2026, shall be deemed to have carried only if not less than two-thirds of the Members present vote in favour.”. 4. To insert an additional Proposition: “To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to take all such steps as are necessary to ensure that the States are provided with the opportunity to consider in the 2028 Budget Report options for an additional lifetime tax allowance (an Additional Earnings Allowance) in respect of otherwise taxable earned income to incentivise younger earners to remain, return or establish in the island.”. 5. To insert an additional Proposition: “To direct the Policy & Resources Committee and the Committee for Housing to take all such steps as are necessary to ensure that the States are provided with the opportunity to consider in the 2028 Budget Report options to introduce a tax-free Guernsey Property Savings Account (GPSA) to incentivise and better enable saving by first-time buyers for the purposes of buying a home in Guernsey or Alderney.”. 6. To insert an additional Proposition: “To direct the inclusion within the scope of longer-term work (envisaged in Appendix 3 of the Tax Review Sub-committee’s report) an examination of the role of Social Security contributions in Guernsey’s revenue base.”. 7. To replace the additional proposition to be inserted by Amendment 24 with the following: “To direct the Policy & Resources Committee, in consultation with the Committee for Employment & Social Security, as part of the Government Work Plan Super Priority ‘Shape and Strengthen the Focus on Early Years and Families,’ to consider the re-introduction of child tax allowances or credits, alternative tax or Social Security measures, and existing measures including, but not limited to, Family Allowance, charge of child and dependent relative tax provisions, reporting as soon as practical to the States of Deliberation with recommendations which should include costed, targeted measures that most effectively support families with the costs of raising children.”.

Voting Contre delivers this

Amendment 55 commits the States to implement the tax reform package including GST; Contre opposes it.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The deputy promised to oppose GST and favour other ways of raising income, but this amendment to a larger tax-reform package sets GST rates at 4% and 5% in later years, adds a 5% cap and review safeguards, and bundles in unrelated propositions on allowances, savings accounts and child tax measures, so the vote cannot be cleanly attributed to supporting GST itself.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To delete all propositions and insert: 1. To agree that consideration of the proposed Goods and Services Tax and the associated Income Tax and Social Security contribution reforms detailed in the Policy Letter shall be deferred until a further review of revenue-generation options has been conducted. 2. To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to investigate the introduction of a tax on insurance premiums. 3. To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to return to the States no later than March 2027 with its findings and proposals for the introduction of a tax on insurance premiums, alongside and as an alternative to the proposals for GST detailed in this Policy Letter.

Voting Pour delivers this

Defers GST pending a further review of revenue-generation options, consistent with opposing GST while seeking alternatives.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The deputy promised to oppose GST while supporting alternative revenue measures, and this motion would defer GST and investigate an insurance premium tax as an alternative, which aligns directionally with the promise, but voting against it does not clearly contradict the promise because the deputy could reasonably prefer a different mechanism, timeline, or set of alternatives to deliver the same stated goal.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: In Proposition 1 after “Appendix 7” insert the following: “, subject to replacing the proposed goods and services tax with an increase in the standard rate of income tax from 20 percent to a single rate at 22 percent, which increase is to be done as soon as practicable”.

Voting Pour delivers this

Replaces GST with an income tax rate increase, i.e. opposing GST while backing an alternative way to raise States income.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise opposed GST and favoured alternative income-raising measures, which aligns directionally with this amendment replacing GST with an income tax rise, but the promise did not specifically commit to a 2% income tax rate increase as the preferred alternative, so voting against this particular mechanism does not plainly contradict the promise.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To delete propositions 1, 2 and 3 and to substitute therefor: “1. To agree that the individual standard rate for income tax should be 22% for 2027 and 2028 and at 20% for 2029 and onwards. 2. To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to investigate an increase to the Maximum liability on income for non-Guernsey sources (including Guernsey bank interest and income derived from Guernsey exempt investment schemes, which are non-resident for Guernsey tax purposes) and the maximum liability – worldwide income and to report back to the States via the Annual Budget for 2028.”.

Voting Pour delivers this

Substitutes an income tax rate of 22% for the proposed package, an alternative revenue measure in place of GST.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The promise opposed GST and supported alternative income-raising measures, but this motion concerns income tax rate adjustments and a review of maximum liability thresholds—one specific alternative mechanism—so voting against it could reflect disagreement with the particular approach rather than abandonment of the broader commitment to raise income through non-GST means.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To substitute in Proposition 1 the word “and” for the full stop and to insert, immediately after Proposition 1, the following additional Proposition: “1A. To direct, notwithstanding Proposition 1, the Policy & Resources Committee: a) not to continue with “the Reserved Measures”, so defined as: i. the introduction of a goods and services tax (“GST”) ii. the proposed International Services Entity arrangements insofar as those arrangements are dependent upon, or form part of, the introduction of GST; and iii. any reductions or restructuring of personal income tax, any associated payments, allowances or mitigations, which are intended to offset or redistribute the effects of GST; b) to continue with the development and implementation of the remainder of the tax reform package provided those measures are capable of proceeding independently of the Reserved Measures; c) to report to the States by October 2027 with regard to: i. the receipts from Pillar Two arrangements and the best available estimate of the recurring annual revenues arising from them; ii. recurring expenditure reductions and efficiencies which have been implemented, including but not limited to progress against the approximate £20 million assumption incorporated within the financial forecasts; iii. an updated assessment of the States’ financial position, including the General Revenue Reserve, investment performance, infrastructure requirements, financing commitments and debt-repayment obligations; iv. updated demographic, workforce and public service demand projections; v. progress in addressing the outstanding operational, staffing, systems and administrative issues within the Revenue Services, together with an assessment of its readiness to implement and administer any additional taxes; vi. updated implementation and administration costs associated with the Reserved Measures, including expenditure already incurred and any avoidable, unavoidable or abortive costs; and that the original propositions of this report shall not seek approval for the Reserved Measures; d) put not before the States any proposals in relations to the Reserved Measures until after the report outlined in 1A(c) has been considered by the States.”.

Voting Pour delivers this

Directs P&R not to continue with the reserved measures (including GST); Pour advances opposition to GST.

Why this counts against the promise: Deputy Steve Williams, who promised to oppose the introduction of GST while supporting alternative measures to increase States income, voted Contre on 30 September 2026 on a motion that would have directed the Policy & Resources Committee to set aside GST and related measures pending a full reassessment, thereby voting against the course of action most consistent with his own manifesto commitment.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To sursis the propositions until such time that the Chief Financial Officer has provided the States with a comprehensive report on the States financial position or 31st July 2028, whichever is earlier and to direct the Policy & Resources Committee to return the States with a tax reform package that does not include a goods and services tax.

Voting Pour delivers this

Sursis directing P&R to return with a tax reform package that does not include a GST; Pour advances opposition to GST.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The deputy promised to oppose GST while supporting alternative income measures, but voting against this sursis motion could reflect opposition to the delay mechanism or the procedural approach rather than a change of heart on GST itself, since a deputy could still oppose GST while preferring to address it through a different process or timeline.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: At the end of Proposition 1 insert the words “, subject to excluding the following: “a) the introduction of a goods and services tax; b) the changes to social security contributions; c) the introduction of new, and changes to, transport taxes”.

Voting Pour delivers this

Amendment excluding the introduction of GST from the tax reform package; Pour advances opposition to GST.

Considered and set aside: voting this way is not clearly a breach of the promise. The deputy promised to oppose GST but the motion bundles that exclusion together with two other distinct fiscal measures (social security contribution changes and transport taxes), so voting against it need not mean the deputy supports GST introduction rather than objecting to one of the other excluded items or to the bundled framing.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To delete all propositions and to substitute therefor: “1.To agree a goods and services tax shall not be introduced, and: (i) to rescind Resolution I. 1B. and Resolution I. 1C. of Billet d’Etat No. XIX dated 14th October, 2024 made on 8th November 2024; and (ii) to direct the Policy & Resources Committee to cease all preparations for the introduction of any goods and services tax.”.

Voting Pour delivers this

Amendment to agree GST shall not be introduced and cease work on it; Pour advances opposition to GST.

Why this counts against the promise: Deputy Steve Williams, who promised voters he was not in favour of GST and supported alternative means of increasing States income, voted Contre on 16 July 2026 against a motion to rule out the introduction of a goods and services tax and halt all preparations for it, a vote that directly undermined his own manifesto commitment to oppose GST.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To delete Propositions 1 to 3 and substitute therefor: “1.To agree that neither the proposed Goods and Services Tax nor the associated Income Tax and Social Security contribution reforms detailed in the Policy Letter shall be introduced as part of the Tax Reform Programme. 2.To agree that the proposed Transport Taxes shall proceed as set out in this Policy Letter at Paragraph 9.7 and as more specifically described therein. 3.To agree that the proposed Corporate Tax amendments shall proceed as set out in Paragraph 9.21 of this Policy Letter and as more specifically described therein, excepting that at the third bullet point of paragraph 9.21, the term “ISE” shall be substituted with “Corporate Levy” (and this substitution shall take effect wherever relevant). 4.To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to develop and bring before the States proposals, for implementation on the same timetable as the tax measures proposed in this Policy Letter where reasonably practicable, for the introduction of a Corporate Levy payable by registered Guernsey companies, having regard to the work previously undertaken by the Tax Review Sub-Committee, and including consideration of whether such levy should comprise: a fixed annual levy payable by each registered company; a levy differentiated according to the size or scale of the undertaking, including consideration of whether existing company classifications may provide an appropriate and proportionate basis for differentiation; or such other structure as the Committee considers best achieves the objectives of fairness, administrative simplicity and efficient revenue collection. 5.To direct the Committee for Economic Development, in consultation with the Policy & Resources Committee, to develop and bring before the States, on the same timetable where reasonably practicable, proposals for the introduction of a Visitor Levy in accordance with the extant States Resolution, with all revenues arising from such levy to be paid into the General Revenue Account and not hypothecated for expenditure by any particular Committee or industry sector. 6.To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to revise the implementation programme and associated implementation budget for Tax Reform to reflect the removal of the proposed Goods and Services Tax and associated Income Tax and Social Security contribution reforms, including the consequential reduction in implementation cost, implementation activity, systems development, staffing and administrative requirements. 7. To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to return to the States with: 1. a revised implementation programme; 2. a revised implementation budget; 3. revised estimates of one-off implementation costs; 4. revised estimates of ongoing administration costs; 5. revised estimates of annual recurring revenues; and 6. revised staffing assumptions, reflecting the alternative package approved under this Proposition within a period that results in the States being capable of meeting the proposed implementation timetable as proposed within the Policy Letter. 8.To direct the Policy & Resources Committee to return to the States with an assurance review in 2030 as set out in section 12 of the Policy Letter, the scope of which shall be adjusted, where necessary, to take account of the removal of GST and Social Security measures from the package under these proposals and the application of those measures considered herein.”.

Voting Pour delivers this

Amendment to drop the proposed GST and associated reforms from the Tax Reform Programme; Pour delivers opposition to GST.

Official voting record →

Motion put to the States: To delete all propositions and to substitute therefor: “1. To agree a goods and services tax shall not be introduced, and: (i) to rescind Resolution I. 1B. and Resolution I. 1C. of Billet d’Etat No. XIX dated 14th October, 2024 made on 8th November 2024; and (ii) to direct the Policy & Resources Committee to cease all preparations for the introduction of any goods and services tax.”. View this proposition's information page on gov.gg

Voting Pour delivers this

Amendment to agree that a GST shall not be introduced and to cease work on it; voting Pour directly delivers opposition to GST.

Why this counts against the promise: Deputy Steve Williams, who promised voters he opposed the introduction of GST, voted Contre on 26 February 2026 on a motion to agree that a goods and services tax shall not be introduced and to direct the Policy & Resources Committee to cease all preparations for GST, a vote that worked against delivering his own stated opposition to the tax.

Official voting record →