|
|
Post by Purpledawn on Apr 8, 2016 9:30:38 GMT
Are there any words, any words at all, that can be used to accurately describe a man who willingly avoids (evades, ducks, runs screaming from, gives the middle finger to or whatever verb or compound verb you choose) paying his taxes whilst de-funding the health service and reducing the benefits that the poor and disabled receive? Tory scum would do. Any more suggestions? |
|
|
|
Post by standing stone on Apr 8, 2016 11:00:49 GMT
the only word in my head at the moment is RESIGN ...
|
|
|
|
Post by sc on Apr 8, 2016 11:58:42 GMT
4 words in my mind "What are the facts?" once I know the truth, I'll have a think about how to react  |
|
|
|
Post by Zenrider on Apr 8, 2016 17:41:23 GMT
The American equivalent have been spared so far, as this was not one of their preferred havens. That said, will be interesting to find who may have had money passed through this bank. Sometimes it's the unknown names that have the most power. Until a few years ago, people really didn't know who the Koch Brothers (pronounced coke) were. I have a feeling their influence of wealth is more global then many know.
The wealthy have lobbied to get rid of the inheritance tax, I say we need to raise it. They call it a death tax, I call it a makeup tax, for all the taxes they avoid in these kinds of ways. Then again, it probably doesn't even do that, which makes one wonder when is enough, enough for these sociopaths? As it is, the America we have now, is not the America that was dreamed of by the leaders of the Revolution. It's the opportunists that followed that will and have largely already, destroyed that dream.
I've been saying for a while, and perhaps a few others, want to know who's in control of the problems in the world? Bust open the 'secret' banks. Bet the other 'tax' and wealth hiding havens have computer security IT's working like crazy.
However, this sounds like an inside job and one can hope the person who released this information can keep themselves safe.
Of course, a lot of what's going on proves why net neutrality is so important. Those same wealthy people that control everything, control much of the corporate owned media. There is nothing they'd like more then to censor the internet. Republican front runner Trump has already stated controlling the media would be something he's like to do.
Anyway, here's a video that proves one doesn't have to be smart to accumulate wealth. I love the old guy that gets out and stands in front of the dumbass taking pictures (think that's what he's doing) with his phone. The look on his face priceless.
|
|
|
|
Post by sc on Apr 8, 2016 18:59:38 GMT
Changing the subject slightly, another classic from Cassettebiy's Snoopers Act
|
|
|
|
Post by digitalmonkey on Apr 9, 2016 18:57:52 GMT
I'm trying to work out if the PM has actually done anything wrong from a legal perspective? Is anyone able to enlighten? I can see he has handled the situation quite poorly but he says he sold his shares on becoming PM. Its a different question entirely about the legitimacy of these tax havens in the first place. In fairness, no political party can be looked upon well in this regard; I'm not sure what substance for calls of the PMS resignation are unless there is evidence of criminal activity.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zenrider on Apr 9, 2016 21:21:43 GMT
BTW, the inheritance tax in the states only effects about the top .6 percent, not even a whole percent with plenty of loopholes to avoid most of it, of the wealthiest Americans.
|
|
|
|
Post by sc on Apr 9, 2016 21:26:31 GMT
I'm trying to work out if the PM has actually done anything wrong from a legal perspective? Is anyone able to enlighten? I can see he has handled the situation quite poorly but he says he sold his shares on becoming PM. Its a different question entirely about the legitimacy of these tax havens in the first place. In fairness, no political party can be looked upon well in this regard; I'm not sure what substance for calls of the PMS resignation are unless there is evidence of criminal activity.
Hi DM, Obviously there is a lot of carification needed as what this whole fuss is about and that has not been helped by the PM's unclear remarks, not a good week for him or by default the remain campaign, which does make you think "Who is fuelling this?". I will try to explain what happened as far as I understand it, but I do still hold by my previous post in that I want to know the facts. Some basic starting points: 1) Osbourne's position on Tax Evasion and I quote ""Tax evasion is morally repugnant," he writes (Osbourne). "It's stealing from law-abiding people, who face higher taxes to make good the lost revenue." 2) Tax Evasion is a legal term and a criminal act, it is where you deliberatly carry out acts to evade paying tax that you should be required to pay. 3) Tax Avoidance is NOT the same as Tax Evasion. What the alleged trust sounds like it is: a) A general rule of tax is that it is paid to the country and at the rate set by the Country in which it is earned. So if you have a clothes factory in India that makes a profit then it pays tax on that profit in India to the Indian Government. All straight forward so far. b) Investors (wealthy people, businesses with surplus cash, pension funds etc) would like to invest their money globally rather than just in their own country, such as an American or a Frenchman may want to invest in and help expand the Indian factory and in turn get a decent return. c) In order to do this safely or with reduced risk rather than putting all the money in one Factory, the money is spread around many companies in many countries. To do this you have a chunk of money (pool of money from all the investors) called a Fund or a trust. That Fund is invested on your behalf by a fund manager, there are no raw materials and it has a global market so the fund or pot of money can be held anywhere it's contributors could also be from many countries. d) As the "Fund" makes a profit the "Fund" pays Tax in the country that it is based. e) Returns from the trust are paid to it's investors in the country that they reside and they pay tax on that profit. Some Countries want to encourage Trusts and Funds to be set up and run from their Countries as it brings money and professional staff to their Country. To do this the offer very low or even zero Corporation Tax (Also called Tax Havens) on these companies, the result is that Tax is only paid twice rather than the normal three times. i.e. the Indian Factory pays tax to India, The Fund pays say 0% tax to the government in which it is registered, profits paid to the investors pay Tax in their Governments. So the only lose in tax is to the Tax Haven Country, the gain is that there is more profit for the investors or pension fund. If that is what has happened, it is not illegal, if it is we will probably lose a huge chunk of our pensions. It seems to me that a lot of quantum leaps have happened where Tax Haven seems to equal Tax Avoidance which seems to equal Tax Evasion, but they are all different things. If, this is the sort of Fund that is being talked about then the worst I think the PM can be accused of is being Politically Clumsy by fudging things this week. But I could be wrong PS I am not a Financial Advisor or a Tax Advisor so you cannot rely on anything I have posted here |
|
|
|
Post by olirow on Apr 10, 2016 0:39:25 GMT
There's an assertion, often promoted by the right wing press, that taking action for the sole purpose of avoiding tax is somehow ok. Whether it is legal or not makes no difference, it isn't.
|
|
|
|
Post by sc on Apr 10, 2016 8:54:11 GMT
There's an assertion, often promoted by the right wing press, that taking action for the sole purpose of avoiding tax is somehow ok. Whether it is legal or not makes no difference, it isn't. It's not about left or right wing, in this Country you pay differing levels of tax depending on where you live, if you choose to live somewhere where there is low Council tax, no one says your avoiding paying tax because of that decision. In the same way as districts in the UK charge different levels of tax so different countries around the world charge differing levels of tax, in order to either encourage or restrict commercial activity. That is not Right or Left wing it is simply that they use different tax bands. Personally, I think it is a very sad day for politics that the PM has published his Tax Affairs to try and proof himself. It is a very personal thing to do for yourself and your family, I doubt that anyone reading this has even ever shown their friends their tax return. But now he has set the precedent and all UK Political Leaders will be expected to do the same in the future of risk being instantly mistrusted. Many potentially great leaders will simply think that it is wrong to have to disclose what money Mum gave them and when to public and so just not bother with politics. I am sure in the past there would have been some great Tax return "Reads" like Winston Churchill or Tony Benn, but I think it is right to keep it private. I do fear that this whole thing has been fuelled by blind hatred of the word "Conservative" (rather than what actions have occurred) and or the dislike of anyone wealthy. Rather than anything based on facts. I still could be wrong, the trust may turn out to be dodgy but it seems to be the same as any pension fund, or any investment invest vehicle that works on a global scale and pays different taxes in different Countries. The obvious way to stop this in the future is to stop any UK money being used to invest abroad. |
|
|
|
Post by digitalmonkey on Apr 10, 2016 20:08:28 GMT
There's an assertion, often promoted by the right wing press, that taking action for the sole purpose of avoiding tax is somehow ok. Whether it is legal or not makes no difference, it isn't. I do fear that this whole thing has been fuelled by blind hatred of the word "Conservative" (rather than what actions have occurred) and or the dislike of anyone wealthy. Rather than anything based on facts. I agree absolutely.
What worries me also is how much the EU referendum debate is potentially having an impact on this. I caught the Andrew Marr show today and during the Paper Review headlines it was the Observer that provided some balanced reporting on it while certain others - that could be considered Tory supporting publications - seem to be launching a personnel attack on the PM.
Also ridiculous today that the £200,000 he received from his mum made the news. Anyone fortunate enough to be in position of wealth would consider their options regarding the inheritance tax which is in effect a double tax as the money has already been taxed on.
|
|
|
|
Post by Purpledawn on Apr 10, 2016 22:39:07 GMT
I'm trying to work out if the PM has actually done anything wrong from a legal perspective? Is anyone able to enlighten? I can see he has handled the situation quite poorly but he says he sold his shares on becoming PM. Its a different question entirely about the legitimacy of these tax havens in the first place. In fairness, no political party can be looked upon well in this regard; I'm not sure what substance for calls of the PMS resignation are unless there is evidence of criminal activity.
Maybe they didn't break any laws.....but members of the political class and top 5% didn't break the law which the political class and top 5% decide get made.  They said 'we didn't break any laws' when the expenses scandal came to light. Of course they didn't because the MPs hadn't created any laws to say the MPs were breaking the law! This time, some of the political class and top 5% invested in a fund which deliberately ensured they would pay no tax. As members of our society, they use our infrastructure and resources, but they DID NOT want to contribute. I contribute. No doubt you contribute. But they didn't want to. And they made sure that that no laws would be passed to make them contribute. They've been caught out. Whilst it wasn't 'against the law' they are morally on dangerous ground. The point is - WE'VE BEEN TOLD LIES, WE'VE BEEN TOLD THAT WE HAVE NO MONEY. Crucial public services have been cut to the bone by the very people WHO ARE NOT PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE. MP's are in parliament to serve US, they are public servants and should create laws for the OVERALL GOOD not to serve themselves and their friends. This leak is proof that they don't care about the public. It also proves that we are not 'all in this together'. We have been conned and lied to and for that reason I must agree with standing stone when she says 'RESIGN'. |
|
|
|
Post by sc on Apr 11, 2016 8:12:47 GMT
I'm trying to work out if the PM has actually done anything wrong from a legal perspective? Is anyone able to enlighten? I can see he has handled the situation quite poorly but he says he sold his shares on becoming PM. Its a different question entirely about the legitimacy of these tax havens in the first place. In fairness, no political party can be looked upon well in this regard; I'm not sure what substance for calls of the PMS resignation are unless there is evidence of criminal activity.
Maybe they didn't break any laws.....but members of the political class and top 5% didn't break the law which the political class and top 5% decide get made. They said 'we didn't break any laws' when the expenses scandal came to light. Of course they didn't because the MPs hadn't created any laws to say the MPs were breaking the law! This time, some of the political class and top 5% invested in a fund which deliberately ensured they would pay no tax. As members of our society, they use our infrastructure and resources, but they DID NOT want to contribute. I contribute. No doubt you contribute. But they didn't want to. And they made sure that that no laws would be passed to make them contribute. They've been caught out. Whilst it wasn't 'against the law' they are morally on dangerous ground. The point is - WE'VE BEEN TOLD LIES, WE'VE BEEN TOLD THAT WE HAVE NO MONEY. Crucial public services have been cut to the bone by the very people WHO ARE NOT PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE. MP's are in parliament to serve US, they are public servants and should create laws for the OVERALL GOOD not to serve themselves and their friends. This leak is proof that they don't care about the public. It also proves that we are not 'all in this together'. We have been conned and lied to and for that reason I must agree with standing stone when she says 'RESIGN'. Hi PD, I don't think it is just the Political Class (did you really mean that? I'm not convinced we have one anymore) or the top 5% I would not be surprised if most of the population do it unwittingly via pension funds. You say that they "deliberately ensured they would pay no tax" Where did you find that out? I do not read any of the UK press (It's all biassed). As far as I am aware the PM did pay tax on it and on a fund like this, tax is paid by the originating companies in which you invest which is likely to be abroad, but I struggle to see anyone objecting to someone investing and supporting a third world company for example, it usually is a win win, the country need money and pays a good return to get it. The Fund that makes the investments around the World pays Tax in the Country in which it is established, and then the investors get a return from the fund that is paid to them and they pay tax in their resident Country. Where are they not paying tax? Yes you can say The Fund only pays zero or a low tax because it's in a Country with a low tax rate, but should therefore all Countries in the World charge the same rates of tax? Or must all contributors to a fund all be from one Country and reside in one Country and run the fund from one Country. I do agree that some financial practices and instrument are wrong and should be banned or made illegal (Gordon Brown did for a while) for example Short Selling and Credit Default Swaps (although I must admit they are bloody useful), if I ruled the World they would be banned in a jiffy I am not saying it is right, but money does need to flow around the World to make the World work. I do worry this is being stirred in an oportunistic fashion by the Leave Campaign, who do cover a sizeable chunk of the right wing and equally far left. We all knew this EU campaign would get messy! |
|
|
|
Post by Purpledawn on Apr 11, 2016 22:37:57 GMT
I'll let Dennis have the last word.....
|
|
|
|
Post by sc on Apr 11, 2016 22:48:24 GMT
Dennis is brilliant and keeps the House of Commons alive with his wit ........ I love him |
|
They said 'we didn't break any laws' when the expenses scandal came to light. Of course they didn't because the MPs hadn't created any laws to say the MPs were breaking the law! 
