Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
ken_ichikawa

Best Delete Your Online Stuff

Recommended Posts

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/13/vat_robot/

And suckers keep posting stuff to facebook etc....

Always best to not put too much personal detail on line, but frankly I doubt the incompetent lackeys of HMRC are going to pose too much of a threat to more than a few unlucky souls.

EDIT: There's only so much room in the jails too, so unless they make an example of you, you won't fair too badly if caught and if they do throw the book at you, at worst can expect a few months in an open prison.

You'd have to be defrauding tax in the hundreds of thousands/million plus category to be seriously worried about this.

Edited by General Congreve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'd have to be defrauding tax in the hundreds of thousands/million plus category to be seriously worried about this.

Consider our predicament for a moment :) ..... :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So much for the smaller government... It will take an army of people to wade through these search results...

I always assumed ebay gave them a list of professional sellers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Consider our predicament for a moment :) ..... :o

F4cking hell, you're right Ken, I'm just going to pee my pants, hand it all over HMRC and go long sterling like a good serf.

Come on Ken, seems your having a crisis of confidence recently. I want the old Ken back!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a PAYE sucker all i can say it - good, i hope they screw all these moonlighting tax dodgers up the ****

Every penny they grab back is a penny us salaried mugs won't have to pay.

Yes, I'm sure that is exactly how it will work! :unsure::lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I dont know what it is, thats why I asked, wanted to keep an eye out for it on my own servers thats all, but why do you say that?

On a seperate point, theres plenty of stuff being sold through free add sites like Gumtree, freeadds, classifieds etc not to mention thousands of escorting websites, of which theres a massive influx of eastern european & asians escorts under the pretext of being a student who are not paying tax, and in some cases claiming benefits, some even getting pregnant to get housed more quickly.

Escorts can earn lots of money like this 96year old who still earns £50k a year!

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/856293-96-yr-old-sex-escort-still-earns-50-000-a-year

Well we've just heard today that the head of the Israeli Central Bank is now going for the top IMF job and it is also common knowledge that Israeli technology firms own, control and log the US telephone system , giving them unprecedented access to who called whom and the ability to record any phone conversation that takes place within the US seaboard. This is one reason why when Israel says jump, the US jumps, their are too many congressmen and senators whose careers and lives would be ruined if they vote the wrong way thanks to the info this foreign power now has about their personal lives.

They control many other things stateside, like the airport security that allowed the 911 bombers to board that fateful day (this is fully documented).

Therefore it wouldn't surprise me if they wanted to get their hands on our tax data too for similar reasons.

EDIT: As for the 96-yr old escort, I suppose it keeps sickos from raping old ladies, so it's probably a good thing.

Edited by General Congreve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny how the new NHS 'MONITOR' is the same name as the booklets issued to MASONS by their compart-mentalised MASTER CLASS!

Anyway

Why should MPs be exempt from new law to block tax avoidance?

New tax year, same old MPs. After Budget promises to tackle tax avoidance, Parliament is passing legislation to block several loopholes – but an obscure clause specifically exempts MPs from these new restrictions.

Yes, really. Anyone who thought the denizens of Halitosis Hall had learned their lesson after the MPs’ expenses scandal will be disappointed. But it seems politicians still cannot get their heads round the childhood adage about sauce for the goose and gander – or why their constituents are fed up with buying them duck houses.

A reader who prefers to be known as ‘HTaxpayer’ emailed me to flag up this new scandal. He – or she – said: “Complex and at times draconian draft tax legislation, which has the potential to impact on any employee or employer in the UK, is contained in the Finance Bill.

“HM Revenue & Customs says that this legislation is only there to stop ‘tax avoidance’. However, Section 554E(8) specifically exempts members of the House of Commons and the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority from the new legislation in situations where they are actually caught by it.

“If the legislation is fair and proportional, what is the need for a specific exemption for members of the House of Commons? Why don’t they rely on the same arrangements that every other employer and employee in this country has to rely on?

“If the legislation only targets tax avoidance, why is there a need for a special exemption for MPs?”

Good questions – but not good enough to merit a reply from the House of Commons Media Office. My calls this week remain unanswered and so I can only assume they cannot bring themselves to talk about it.

Undeterred, I asked Richard Mannion of Smith & Williamson if he could shed any light on the mystery. He told me: “The honest answer is that I don’t know why this clause has been inserted into the Bill, but I suspect it’s a question of MPs getting their retaliation in first.

“In other words, if there ever was a possibility that part of their tax arrangements might be caught then they are protected.

“These new rules relate to ‘disguised remuneration’. They are far-reaching and about as complicated as they could get.

“The point about MPs’ expenses is a good one. There are other examples of MPs having special tax breaks which don’t apply to ordinary taxpayers. This goes back many years to when the old Inland Revenue started to apply the letter of the law to MPs’ expenses and Ministers changed the law to relieve pressure from their colleagues.”

Mike Warburton of Grant Thornton said: “The new rules on disguised remuneration are intended to catch complex arrangements designed to avoid income tax through loans made to executives, typically through offshore structures.

“It is difficult to see why MPs need this specific exemption. After the uproar over their expenses, I can’t believe that our elected representatives would dare to indulge in provocative tax avoidance. So why do they need the legislation to protect them?”

Two years ago, I pointed out in this space the fundamental problem with MPs being subject to different tax rules from the rest of us. Unlike any of their constituents, MPs could claim tax-free expenses for second homes, rather than just rented accommodation.

That was one reason they ended up claiming average annual expenses of £135,000 or twice the backbench salary of £63,291 by the time the balloon went up. We are told they have cleaned their act up since then but the best proof of that would be for MPs to be subject to the same tax rules as their constituents. No exemptions, please.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ianmcowie/100009953/why-should-mps-be-exempt-from-new-law-to-block-tax-avoidance/

Nearly a third of the richest 700 companies in Britain pay no tax whatsoever. That’s zero.

(remember vodaphone let off £6Billion tax bill owed recently?)

Imagine that tomorrow you cancelled all your tax payments, and when a bill came from the Inland Revenue at the end of the year, you told them they could have ten percent of what’s due, or nothing. Try haggling. Try telling them you think it’s unfair to tax you because you made it all yourself. Try telling them that you “really” live in a Caribbean island, or Switzerland, or Jersey, and give them an address over there. Try pointing to some obscure loophole you found in the tax code and say it means you owe nothing. See what they say, and remember to send me a nice postcard from your prison cell.

Yet for the people who can most afford to pay their taxes – the super-rich, and massive corporations – this is how Britain works. While we struggle, they are skipping free of paying their share, or any share, of keeping our country running. The notorious billionaire tax fraudster Leona Helmsley said that “taxes are for the little people.” It could be the motto for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs today. It was loose enough under New Labour, but under the Conservatives the few polite coughs and queries directed at the rich are being abolished – and it is you who picks up the bill. The less they pay, the more you pay.

Nearly a third of the richest 700 companies in Britain pay no tax whatsoever. That’s zero. Here’s an example of how it works. For years now, Vodafone has been refusing to pay its taxes, and offering reams of accountancy excuses. Private Eye, based on interviews with people within the Inland Revenue, has calculated they owed in excess of £6bn. But when the Tories came to power, they simply cancelled almost all of the bill. George Osborne then immediately went to India to promote Vodafone, and appointed its head as an official advisor on how we should handle corporation tax. Not long after, Osborne announced £7bn in cuts for the poor – all of which would have been unnecessary if he had got this one company run by his chum to pay its bill.

Similarly, extremely wealthy individuals usually pay nothing. Let’s look at another example of somebody David Cameron thought was doing it so right he appointed him to an official role advising the government: Sir Philip Greene, Britain’s sixth richest man. He runs BHS, TopShop, and Miss Selfridge. These businesses exist on our streets. You can see them every day. Yet for tax purposes, they are “registered” in a small building next to a dentist in Jersey, and with Greene’s wife in Monaco. So he avoids more than £250m a year that you and I have to pay instead. It adds up pretty quickly. Tax Research UK puts the figure from tax evasion and avoidance at £95bn a year – the bill for most of the cuts and tax increases by the government. None of it would have to happen if the rich paid their legal share.

Of course, they argue that they owe nothing to the British people: I made this money, so I’m keeping it. It’s absolutely true they put in a lot of effort and skill and deserve a big share of the rewards. But did they do it entirely alone? Think about Greene again. Imagine if the police didn’t turn up when there was a theft from his shops, and the fire brigade didn’t turn up when they caught fire. Imagine if the bin-men didn’t collect the rubbish at the back. Imagine if the roads that deliver the goods weren’t paved and maintained. Imagine if the staff who worked in his shops couldn’t read or count because they had never been given an education, and simply died when they got sick. All these services are provided by the taxes you and I pay. Greene depends on our services to make his money, but he doesn’t want to contribute a penny towards them, and the government applauds him. There’s a term for that: parasitism.

In public, the government insists, as Nick Clegg puts it: “We will crack down on the super-rich who hide away money overseas.” But the reality is the exact opposite. These people are now being asked to pay even less by the new government.

The Financial Times put it plainly on its front page after the Conservatives won: “Tax office to soften stance on tax avoidance.” In the story, Dave Hartnett, head of tax at the Inland Revenue, apologized to the rich for being “too black and white about the law.” Osborne is sacking great swathes of the tax inspectors who monitor the rich – even though they make their wages back many times over. A senior tax inspector costs us £50,000 a year, and brings in £1.5m. A lower-level tax inspector costs is £25,000 a year, and brings in £300,000. It is ten times more profitable for us to set these inspectors on the wealthy than on benefit fraudsters. But Osborne is firing 25 percent of them, meaning you will have to pay more.

Johann Hari

http://www.johannhari.com/2011/01/17/you-pay-your-taxes-or-go-to-prison-unless-you-are-super-rich-or-a-corporation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didnt know this, any links?

Airport security, read the top bit, then read Media Coverage:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICTS_International

Phones, AmDocs is an Israeli company based in Guernsey that operates systems that support many telephone providers, both in the States and worldwide, here is the Wikipedia link. They effectively have a back door into the entire US network, to to mention many others, see second link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amdocs

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/blackmail.html

Edited by General Congreve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 284 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.