Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Ologhai Jones

Tax Avoidance Is Sinful

Recommended Posts

BBC website: Tax avoidance sinful, says Archbishop John Sentamu.

Tax avoidance is "sinful" and tantamount to robbery, one of the UK's most senior clerics has said... It is sinful, simply because Jesus was very clear; pay to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God.

I'm of the view that, if you think the rulebook's broken, attempt to have the rulebook fixed, but if the rulebook says something is legal, stop whining when individuals or company's do their best to--legally--manage their tax affairs to minimise their liability.

Every time someone says anything about tax avoidance, they ought to be considering whether what they're saying applies to people putting a few quid into an ISA. If it still applies, on you go; if it doesn't, STFU. :)

As an aside, the moment someone trots out what Jesus thinks on a subject, then they should receive an immediate poke in the eye. Why do people try to base arguments on received 'wisdom' instead of basing them on actual wisdom, reason and objectivity? The two approaches may even lead to the same outcome if they bothered to think it through, so one can even sometimes achieve the same result without having to sound like a believe-anything idiot.

Whew. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is sinful, simply because Jesus was very clear; pay to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God.

Since when did the fruits of anyone's labour 'belong' to Caesar (aka The State) or to God?

Let me guess, the church will accept payment to God and spend it as He would like too? :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BBC website: Tax avoidance sinful, says Archbishop John Sentamu.

I'm of the view that, if you think the rulebook's broken, attempt to have the rulebook fixed, but if the rulebook says something is legal, stop whining when individuals or company's do their best to--legally--manage their tax affairs to minimise their liability.

Every time someone says anything about tax avoidance, they ought to be considering whether what they're saying applies to people putting a few quid into an ISA. If it still applies, on you go; if it doesn't, STFU. :)

As an aside, the moment someone trots out what Jesus thinks on a subject, then they should receive an immediate poke in the eye. Why do people try to base arguments on received 'wisdom' instead of basing them on actual wisdom, reason and objectivity? The two approaches may even lead to the same outcome if they bothered to think it through, so one can even sometimes achieve the same result without having to sound like a believe-anything idiot.

Whew. :D

People endlessly avoid reason and objectivity. Why else would they believe that taxation isn't extortion and that it is moral to hand over the products of their labour, because thugs threaten them with violence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There seems to be no end of media spin saying how everyone should pay tax etc etc etc/

Not one media outlet or politcal party saying.....taxation is too high, cut taxes, taxation if theft, leave peolpe their own money.

We seem to have accepted the fact someone else should spend our money for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every time someone says anything about tax avoidance, they ought to be considering whether what they're saying applies to people putting a few quid into an ISA. If it still applies, on you go; if it doesn't, STFU. :)

Yeah! STFU! Yeah!

I can't stand those bastards who use their personal tax allowance. Tax cheat mofos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm of the view that, if you think the rulebook's broken, attempt to have the rulebook fixed, but if the rulebook says something is legal, stop whining when individuals or company's do their best to--legally--manage their tax affairs to minimise their liability.

I share this view, but there are many on this site who do not. I spent some time the other day arguing the point with some people who were saying that there is a moral angle to avoiding taxes and there should be some kind of public vote (plebiscite/referendum) to make companies like Google and Starbucks pay taxes here. (their line of reasoning was quite babyish and very confused).

The point is that businesses need certainty over taxation. If there is a loophole in the law (and goodness knows, Gordon Brown's government made the system so complicated that there are bound to be many), then it is the government's job to close it. And it is our job to elect the government we want to tax in the way we want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BBC website: Tax avoidance sinful, says Archbishop John Sentamu.

I'm of the view that, if you think the rulebook's broken, attempt to have the rulebook fixed, but if the rulebook says something is legal, stop whining when individuals or company's do their best to--legally--manage their tax affairs to minimise their liability.

Every time someone says anything about tax avoidance, they ought to be considering whether what they're saying applies to people putting a few quid into an ISA. If it still applies, on you go; if it doesn't, STFU. :)

As an aside, the moment someone trots out what Jesus thinks on a subject, then they should receive an immediate poke in the eye. Why do people try to base arguments on received 'wisdom' instead of basing them on actual wisdom, reason and objectivity? The two approaches may even lead to the same outcome if they bothered to think it through, so one can even sometimes achieve the same result without having to sound like a believe-anything idiot.

Whew. :D

Considering that serious tax avoidance measures are only available to the super rich, and they get to influence the rules, I think this is completely wrong. Legality and morality aren't the same, not even close.

Of course, when the prime-minister bangs on about this, then you're dead right. He's just lying to get votes.

As to the link, there's a good argument that you have a moral duty not to pay tax.

Your tax money is about to buy lots of guns and bombs for Al Qaeda in Syria. We use it to build nuclear missiles, to blockade Iran, and to fund the war in Afghanistan.

Much of your tax money goes straight into the pockets of private business, corrupt local officials and landlords, and a significant amount of what remains is used to bid up prices in the economy, to make you poorer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pay to Caesar what belongs to Caesar

The whole point is that the "extra" avoided tax doesn't actually belong to the government, they just wish it did and are trying to bully people into handing it over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BBC website: Tax avoidance sinful, says Archbishop John Sentamu.

I'm of the view that, if you think the rulebook's broken, attempt to have the rulebook fixed, but if the rulebook says something is legal, stop whining when individuals or company's do their best to--legally--manage their tax affairs to minimise their liability.

Every time someone says anything about tax avoidance, they ought to be considering whether what they're saying applies to people putting a few quid into an ISA. If it still applies, on you go; if it doesn't, STFU. :)

As an aside, the moment someone trots out what Jesus thinks on a subject, then they should receive an immediate poke in the eye. Why do people try to base arguments on received 'wisdom' instead of basing them on actual wisdom, reason and objectivity? The two approaches may even lead to the same outcome if they bothered to think it through, so one can even sometimes achieve the same result without having to sound like a believe-anything idiot.

Whew. :D

..he probably means tax 'evasion',which is criminal ...as tax 'avoidance' is just good financial management, working within the law and tax rules, the responsibility of everybody. It is up to the HMRC to apply the law and Government to introduce laws in conjunction with other States and ensure they are applicable to the 21st Century's cross border virtual industries, services, commerce and the arts....but are Government up to such basic demands ..doh.......if the basics are right everything else falls in to place..... :rolleyes:

Edited by South Lorne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole point is that the "extra" avoided tax doesn't actually belong to the government, they just wish it did and are trying to bully people into handing it over.

If they changed the rules, would 'avoided' tax then 'belong' to the government too then? Why so? It would imply that we only own what we are told we own, which means we don't own anything at all (in any meaningful sense).

Shouldn't people be defining ownership by actions and observations, rather than the whims of some higher authority? It is strange that people accept the latter so blindly.

[i see the point you are making, but taking a step back, it's all a bit daft isn't it?]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That particular bible quote was a favourite of the Nazi party.

They use it to justify the forcefull collection of anything they chose...and apparently, because they say so, it belongs to them..so said jesus.

Which is not what he meant at all...

The context is important...Jesus was being baited to take sides between the rebel Jews and the Romans.

the aim of the questioner was to prove without doubt that jesus was a criminal rebel and encouraging insurrection...when asked about the taxes, he asked the men to bring him something with Proof of ownership...they brought a roman coin with the face of Ceaser on it. The questioners were clearly Hypocrites...he refers to them as such and gives his answer.

The answer implies that ALL coin with ceasars face should be handed to him...not just taxes.

The passage is used also to justify separation of State and Church.....but Jesus was not clear what belonged to whom. He therefore was not seen as a supporter of the rebels, as he said give to Ceasar what belongs to him..and he also said give to God what belongs to him..making him good with the rebels too.

He simply avoided a trap set by enemies with clever words.

As for taxes, they dont have the name of government on them until YOU set aside and decide your Money is now not yours, but belongs to the state...it is therefore YOUR decision to pay taxes.

Edited by Bloo Loo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

The point is that businesses need certainty over taxation. If there is a loophole in the law (and goodness knows, Gordon Brown's government made the system so complicated that there are bound to be many), then it is the government's job to close it. And it is our job to elect the government we want to tax in the way we want.

If companies wanted certainty, they wouldn't try to exploit dubious loopholes in the law.

They are trading risk against reward to achieve a lower tax bill, because they can afford to take the risk. Corporations don't go to prison.

It's naive to treat the law as if it is an axiomatic, mathematical system. It isn't. Whether something is legal or not is often a matter of opinion, and rich companies can take advantage of that because they are in a position to make their case, and effectively to determine the law. Small businesses and ordinary people are not.

If the public disapprove of that, and they have every right to, then they are free to take their business elsewhere. Critics of corporate tax avoidance should be organising boycotts, if that's what they think is right.

The argument that laws, and only laws, should determine how we should behave is a weak, self-serving argument. It's actually very similar to the argument that you have a moral duty to pay tax.

Certainly, government laws are not a replacement for morality or social norms. We all operate within the constraints of social norms, all the time, and companies should not be exempt just because the government gives them a free pass.

Edited by (Blizzard)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That particular bible quote was a favourite of the Nazi party.

They use it to justify the forcefull collection of anything they chose...and apparently, because they say so, it belongs to them..so said jesus.

Which is not what he meant at all....

..yeah...he said use your talents legally...that would include tax management which is basically best practice....so sayeth... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

..yeah...he said use your talents legally...that would include tax management which is basically best practice....so sayeth... :rolleyes:

no, he said return to Ceasar that which belonged to him....the coin....he didnt mention taxes...the questioners did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I share this view, but there are many on this site who do not. I spent some time the other day arguing the point with some people who were saying that there is a moral angle to avoiding taxes and there should be some kind of public vote (plebiscite/referendum) to make companies like Google and Starbucks pay taxes here. (their line of reasoning was quite babyish and very confused).

The point is that businesses need certainty over taxation. If there is a loophole in the law (and goodness knows, Gordon Brown's government made the system so complicated that there are bound to be many), then it is the government's job to close it. And it is our job to elect the government we want to tax in the way we want.

And closing loopholes should be done exclusively via shortening/simplifying the tax code, not by adding to it.

I'm willing to take advantage of my ISA allowance when it seems sensible, but I wouldn't be unhappy if this allowance was scrapped (along with every other means of legal avoidance) in pursuit of the simplest possible tax system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And closing loopholes should be done exclusively via shortening/simplifying the tax code, not by adding to it.

I'm willing to take advantage of my ISA allowance when it seems sensible, but I wouldn't be unhappy if this allowance was scrapped (along with every other means of legal avoidance) in pursuit of the simplest possible tax system.

The point is the Bishop is talking shite....Jesus didnt mention taxes, or paying part of your property to the state, or anything like that.

he simply said if you have the property of the state, and you need to pay it, then hand it back to the owner. If he is not the owner, he has no right to it, implying the feeling you have to be obliged to pay it is entirely your own doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I share this view, but there are many on this site who do not. I spent some time the other day arguing the point with some people who were saying that there is a moral angle to avoiding taxes and there should be some kind of public vote (plebiscite/referendum) to make companies like Google and Starbucks pay taxes here. (their line of reasoning was quite babyish and very confused).

The point is that businesses need certainty over taxation. If there is a loophole in the law (and goodness knows, Gordon Brown's government made the system so complicated that there are bound to be many), then it is the government's job to close it. And it is our job to elect the government we want to tax in the way we want.

That's all fine and well.. but it would require coordinated, international action, in the teeth of serious lobbying.

Morally, it's simply a case that the bigger companies want to do business here, take advantage of out infrastructure, rule of law, educated workers and all the other bits and pieces that make up a first world country - and cost public money - whilst not paying for these services. Whereas local competitors do, of course. Not only is this palpably unfair, but it's also unsustainable - the shrinkage of the tax base leading to chronic government deficits, leading to cuts in spending and hence demand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest eight

The point is the Bishop is talking shite....Jesus didnt mention taxes, or paying part of your property to the state, or anything like that.

Edit: Oops, replied to wrong post.

Edited by eight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. Government is sinful. Maybe the god botherer is happy financing the warmongers in Washington and London, but im not.

Still, i wouldnt expect better from a man who believes in pixies.

specially when he cant even read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is the Bishop is talking shite....Jesus didnt mention taxes, or paying part of your property to the state, or anything like that.

he simply said if you have the property of the state, and you need to pay it, then hand it back to the owner. If he is not the owner, he has no right to it, implying the feeling you have to be obliged to pay it is entirely your own doing.

Which is exactly as it should be.

If the state can dictate what it says you own, then you own nothing at all. On what grounds do they claim ownership of everything?

People should forget this poxy, framed, debate about tax avoidance and start looking at the woods, rather than the trees. What is ownership? Who defines it? Who abuses it?

If someone says 'The state defines ownership... just... because', then they haven't got their thinking cap on. They've just succumbed to the propaganda and have failed to think about it themselves - that's exactly what the state wants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing that is so unfair about this is not so much the avoidance of tax the big boys can get away with, because it is legal because that is what the tax law allows them to do.....it is the uneven playing field for young start up and SME who do not have the means or ability to compete with their price and generate profits huge corporations who can pay the best brains to see they pay as little tax as they can, more in their own coffers......it stunts growth, and stops innovation dead....one rule for one, the ones with the most, another rule for those with the least that in the end will give up trying to give it a go or move to places that are more favourable for business......government therefore lose,lose. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There seems to be no end of media spin saying how everyone should pay tax etc etc etc/

Not one media outlet or politcal party saying.....taxation is too high, cut taxes, taxation if theft, leave peolpe their own money.

We seem to have accepted the fact someone else should spend our money for us.

There's a difference between the rentier elite, corporates, landowners and so on for whom taxes clearly need to be far higher

and the proles, for whom taxes need to be far lower

Conflating the two is what the former do, since they control all governments.

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.

  • 242 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.