Since being elected as MP for Tatton in 2001 George Osborne, 35, has enjoyed a rapid series of promotions that saw him become Shadow Chancellor in May 2005.
Although he had been widely tipped for the Tory leadership himself, Mr Osborne decided not to join the race to succeed Michael Howard and became David Cameron's campaign chief. Underlying his closeness to the leader he helped elect, Mr Osborne's own office - and that of Oliver Letwin, head of party policy - are now adjacent to Mr Cameron's own.
Before entering parliament Mr Osborne was speechwriter and political secretary to William Hague. A committed Atlanticist and supporter of the war in Iraq, Mr Osborne has adopted a cautious approach to tax policy since he became the party's Treasury spokesman. He has emphasised the need to put economic stability before tax cuts although he has emphasised tax simplification and lower taxation of business. He has also championed the interests of start-up media businesses who fear being crowded out by the BBC.
Mr Osborne is married with two children.
Please use the comments thread below to raise questions for George or email questions to Tim.




















Why are the Conservatives so worried about the idea of discussing tax cuts?
Would you put yourself up for re-selection under the new selection rules, against A-List or local candidates if necessary?
Posted by: James Maskell | July 05, 2006 at 09:38
Will you pledge to cut the number of types of taxation to give your discussion of tax simplification a measurable benchmark to judge its delivery?
Posted by: Chad | July 05, 2006 at 09:42
Nigel Lawson liked to abolish one stupid or irritating little tax at every budget. What would be the first victim of your simplification programme?
Posted by: Don Jameson | July 05, 2006 at 09:48
Will you abolish stealth taxes? And promise not to land us with any new ones? Give us transparancy? We are not idiots, no matter what G. Brown thinks.
Also make sure new taxes hit the target, not some poor sod with a limited income that had not crossed GB's radar!
Posted by: Annabel Herriott | July 05, 2006 at 09:54
Would you as a Chancellor to undertake a cost/benefit analysis of our membership of the EU?If not ,why not?
Posted by: michael mcgough | July 05, 2006 at 10:13
What do you do with your time, nowadays?
Posted by: Og | July 05, 2006 at 10:16
As part of your commitment to simplify taxation, will you pledge to raise the tax thresholds to take everyone on the minimum wage out of tax completely, at the same time abolishing Brown's massively complex tax credits?
Posted by: Huntarian | July 05, 2006 at 10:20
Inheritance tax, and stamp duty on residential house purchases, whether in their own right or at present levels, are particularly unfair because they are levied upon income or capital that has already been taxed at least once. Would you make it a priority to work towards their abolition or substantial reduction?
Posted by: David Cooper | July 05, 2006 at 10:21
Do you agree that highly polluting red diesel should no longer be available to leisure boaters at 6.4p a litre tax compared to 47p a litre for Ultra Low Sulphur Diesel as used in cars and lorries?
The government is minded to ask the Commission for a further 5 year derogation from EU standardisation at the higher rate, in December. My concern is environmental, and competitive as a designer and builder of green powerboats that conserve fuel.
Posted by: Henry Mayhew | July 05, 2006 at 10:26
"Would you as a Chancellor to undertake a cost/benefit analysis of our membership of the EU?If not ,why not?"
A very interesting question Michael, and it touches on the point raised by Liam Fox about if costs get too high.
What is "too high"? If Osborne is not prepared to define it, then it would confirm a libdem blank cheque approach.
Posted by: Chad | July 05, 2006 at 10:29
How would you define 'economic stability?'
Posted by: malcolm | July 05, 2006 at 10:55
You have spoken favorably about the idea of a "Flat tax", but recently you seem to have downplayed the idea. Have you read Hall and Rabushka's book on this topic, and do you agree with the main ideas, e.g. by having all income taxed at the same rate it is easier to tax business income, so that the tax base can be increased and thus the rate of tax can be low, hence increasing incentives?
Also, do you agree with the idea that people should only be taxed on what they take out of the economy, so that savings and capital gains should not be taxed?
Posted by: Jonathan Powell | July 05, 2006 at 11:11
I understand that you want to share proceeds of growth between tax cuts and public spending. Before the election will you give more clarity on what that means? Specifically, by telling the electorate our target for the proportion between sharing the proceeds of growth between tax cuts and public spending over the economic cycle / or the lifetime of the parliament.
Posted by: Mark Clarke | July 05, 2006 at 11:12
1)In a new Conservative Government, what would be the long term economic policy and intended effects?
2) Can you make any suggestions as to the housing market boom - why has there been such an increase? Has it had economic benifits in the wider context? How can we go about ensuring young people can afford to join the ladder?
3)Public Schools - retain charitable status? and University Funding - what can be done to ensure our best universties can compete with the privately run institutions in the United States?
Posted by: Aaron | July 05, 2006 at 11:16
"2) Can you make any suggestions as to the housing market boom - why has there been such an increase?"
Should the Bank of England include house prices (no other asset just house prices) in its inflation target to prevent a repeat of the runaway inflation seen in 2001-2002?
(it's funny how government's seem disinterested in controlling booms, even no-more-boom-n-bust-Brown)
Posted by: Chad | July 05, 2006 at 11:23
What you do to encourage the use of the extended family as child carers rather than trying to force people to use nurseries or registrated childminders?
What is your view on the governments underhand attempts to change the tax rules on trust funds?
Where do you stand on the US extradition of the 3 NATWEST bankers who the SFO have cleared of any crime?
Posted by: Howard Stevenson | July 05, 2006 at 11:57
Before the next election, could you set out in 20 words the Conservatives' economic strategy.
Could you have a stab at doing it now?
Posted by: Victoria Street | July 05, 2006 at 12:00
What is the Treasury good at and therefore should continue doing, and...
What is the Treasury bad at and therefore should discontinue doing?
Posted by: Victoria Street | July 05, 2006 at 12:01
Would you introduce transferable tax allowances between registered partners/married couples where one does not work? This would assist long-term family care for the sick and the elderly, as well as children.
Posted by: sjm | July 05, 2006 at 12:04
Why do you insist on sticking so firmly to what are essentially Marxist economic attitudes?
Posted by: Chris Hughes | July 05, 2006 at 12:48
Will you maintain Labour's tax and spending commitments for the first two years of a Conservative government?
Posted by: BuiltTooFast | July 05, 2006 at 13:39
Do you support the call from the TaxPayers' Alliance to establish a Dynamic Analysis Division within HM Treasury to investigate the positive effect on incentives and growth of a reduction in the tax burden ?
Posted by: William Norton | July 05, 2006 at 14:49
To encourage personal saving and investment would you consider separating earned and unearned income for tax purposes, so that each adult would have:
a) A personal tax-free allowance for earned income
b) A separate personal tax-free allowance for interest and dividends
thereby removing the need for complex and restrictive schemes such as ISAs?
Posted by: Denis Cooper | July 05, 2006 at 15:00
Would you consider:
a) A very substantial increase in child benefit, automatically payable to the responsible parent of every child; while
b) Abolishing the over complicated, and therefore over bureaucratic, costly and downright oppressive means tested child tax credit system?
Or, alternatively, retaining the child tax credit system but extending legal aid to the parents who are driven out of their minds or bankrupted, so they can sue the Inland Revenue for punitive damages
Posted by: Denis Cooper | July 05, 2006 at 15:09
Do you find your relative youth is a disadvantage in Westminster?
Posted by: David Banks | July 05, 2006 at 15:11
Would you consider changing the basis of inheritance tax, so that for greater simplicity and fairness the executor may wind up the estate of the deceased and distribute the proceeds according to his wishes without paying inheritance tax, but with each if the beneficiaries then being liable for inheritance tax on cumulative legacies in excess of an inflation-adjusted lifetime allowance?
Posted by: Denis Cooper | July 05, 2006 at 15:15
Why don't you do more campaigning with the Taxpayers Alliance?
Posted by: anontory | July 05, 2006 at 15:52
Would you consider reforming Capital Gains Tax on investments, removing the taper but allowing unused annual allowances to be rolled over to future years, with inflation adjustment, thereby ensuring that passive long-term investors are not unduly penalised if they find it necessary to realise a substantial tranche of their investments in a single tax year?
Posted by: Denis Cooper | July 05, 2006 at 16:01
Do you agree that Stamp Duty on house purchases is an archaic and inequitable transaction tax which should be phased out, and replaced by a fairer Property Gains Tax levied on the increase in the value of house when it is sold, after adjusting the original purchase price upwards to ensure that a modest annual real rate of return will be tax-free? With the clear proviso that any homeowner who purchased his property under the existing system and paid Stamp Duty will not also be expected to pay Property Gains Tax when he sells that property.
Posted by: Denis Cooper | July 05, 2006 at 16:13
Would you contemplate reducing national business taxes in areas of the country where the per capita GDP is significantly below the national average, to attract productive private investment to those areas, increase private sector employment opportunities, reduce dependence on public sector employment partly financed by taxes raised in other areas of the country, and reverse de-population?
Posted by: Denis Cooper | July 05, 2006 at 16:24
That's enough questions from you Denis!
Posted by: Editor | July 05, 2006 at 18:36
I am sure that you will agree that one of the biggest stumbling blocks we have faced at the past three general elections was that we had lost our reputation for sound financial management.
So what can, and will, you do to restore the Electorate's trust in us as a party with regard to the nations' finances?
Posted by: Matt Davis | July 05, 2006 at 18:42
Do you regard yourself as a Thatcherite?
Posted by: TaxCutter | July 05, 2006 at 18:57
Are you concerned that your swift promotion to Shadow Chancellor has denied you a broader political experience? Does it concern you that virtually any move from your current position would be viewed by most people as a demotion?
Posted by: free democrat | July 05, 2006 at 20:52
I am a Company Director/entrepreneur. If I invest £1 million in business project and I get it wrong, I lose the £1 million. If I get it right, I might double my money - before tax. After tax/ NI etc , I would get maybe £400,000. Priot to Gordon Brown I could take out £600,000 from my company. Could you even up the the odds to encourage investment activity, or shall I plan to carry on living a quiet life now?
Posted by: william | July 06, 2006 at 07:37
Should we replace tax credits with a tax breaks system?
Posted by: dizzy | July 06, 2006 at 08:08
Enough questions. Thanks everyone!
Posted by: Editor | July 06, 2006 at 13:38