winkie Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 .....most people would like to be able to save on tax so as to enable their kids to go to private schools. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dryrot Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 Well, Eurocrats pay 15% tax. Mme Lagarde of the IMF pays no tax. And we did'nt hear howls of vengeance over Brian Clough's liking for brown paper bags full of cash... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winkie Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 http://metro.co.uk/2016/04/05/panama-papers-david-cameron-finally-clears-the-air-on-family-investments-5797172/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Democorruptcy Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 If all people can avoid tax via say by using ISAs, it is only fair that all people should have access to other legal tax avoidance entities such as trust funds, off shore shell cos etc......this should be advertised freely, widely and openly and made available to all, not only to the very wealthy who because of expert advice made available to them, knowledge and contacts can benefit from these special flower tax saving loopholes.......only fair that the very wealthy are on the same advantage as the rest.....or close down special benefits and join the rest, those with the least who pay all their taxes due. Are you saying that because the little people can stick a few thousand of already taxed income into an ISA, it's only fair the very wealthy can avoid paying tax at all, using offshore vehicles etc.? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winkie Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 Are you saying that because the little people can stick a few thousand of already taxed income into an ISA, it's only fair the very wealthy can avoid paying tax at all, using offshore vehicles etc.? No, it is only fair that all people have the same access to all available tax saving instruments......not only the wealthy, who overall may or may not pay a much smaller percentage of their wealth in taxes.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
porca misèria Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 (edited) I love this one. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/britain-should-not-crack-down-on-tax-havens-as-it-would-destroy-their-livelihoods-senior-tory-mp-a6969121.html Dominic Grieve chiming in with a plea for the poor tax exiles and their plight. Cracking down on their main industry could destroy their livelihoods apparently. I can't wait to hear his thoughts on the steel workers of South Wales. The man is obviously a fountain of compassion. Quite staggering, that he's still spouting that level of glib excuse. Don't you worry your pretty little head about it. Indeed. Grieve's comments are seriously out of step with the spirit of our time. The fact that he cannot see this, despite his personal views, demonstrates a massive lack of judgement and shows how out of touch these people are. Perhaps they should be reminded of Cuba. The 0.1% and their shills are well on their way to provoking a backlash that I can only imagine will be socialist in nature. Could Grieve's nonsense become the "duck house" of this story? I think he is out of line here. There will be some politicians, and certainly people around them (you want that directorship when you retire, Sir Humphrey) keen to kick this into the long grass. But I expect Cameron would like to take this seriously insofar as they'll let him. Though having said that, I've been wrong on Cameron before. Once upon a time I thought he was going to roll back some of Blair's police state. Until the evidence proved me wrong. Edited April 5, 2016 by porca misèria Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frankief Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 (edited) Well, Eurocrats pay 15% tax. Mme Lagarde of the IMF pays no tax. And we did'nt hear howls of vengeance over Brian Clough's liking for brown paper bags full of cash... And the Rolling Stones went to live on the French Riviera - bloody cheek! Good album though. Seriously guys, if you were a multi millionaire who had come by his wealth either by way of inheritance, hard work or ill gotten gains, wouldn't you be the same? Or would you happily hand 45% of your cash [top rate of income tax?] to the government who will no doubt spend it wisely! Or stick it in the bank and get a laughable 1.5% [less tax] Edited April 5, 2016 by frankief Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybong Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 (edited) So Dave's remembered how many houses he has. Not so long ago he couldn't remember. Edited April 5, 2016 by billybong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Masked Tulip Posted April 5, 2016 Author Share Posted April 5, 2016 Icelandic PM just resigned. Rumours of a canoe last seen heading towards Panama have not been confirmed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
porca misèria Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 And the Rolling Stones went to live on the French Riviera - bloody cheek! Good album though. Seriously guys, if you were a multi millionaire who had come by his wealth either by way of inheritance, hard work or ill gotten gains, wouldn't you be the same? Or would you happily hand 45% of your cash [top rate of income tax?] to the government who will no doubt spend it wisely! Or stick it in the bank and get a laughable 1.5% [less tax] At the time of the rolling stones, you could've paid something around that 45% on incomes below £1k. The top rate was in the ballpark of twice that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Masked Tulip Posted April 5, 2016 Author Share Posted April 5, 2016 And the Rolling Stones went to live on the French Riviera - bloody cheek! Good album though. Seriously guys, if you were a multi millionaire who had come by his wealth either by way of inheritance, hard work or ill gotten gains, wouldn't you be the same? Or would you happily hand 45% of your cash [top rate of income tax?] to the government who will no doubt spend it wisely! Or stick it in the bank and get a laughable 1.5% [less tax] I can remember the days - back in the 70s and 80s - when if you were an actor or pop star that went overseas to avoid tax you were basically ostracised by the establishment here. 2 or 3 decades later and you get knighthoods, damehoods or BBC Sports Personality of the Year awards and stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
200p Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 (edited) GOLD JUST REACHED $2000! Meh I'd expect the elite to put in buy orders for gold as the ultimate private store of wealth. Therefore some people were in the loop of this leak, some were not. I.e. Icelandic Prime Minister. Edited April 5, 2016 by 200p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frankief Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 (edited) I can remember the days - back in the 70s and 80s - when if you were an actor or pop star that went overseas to avoid tax you were basically ostracised by the establishment here. 2 or 3 decades later and you get knighthoods, damehoods or BBC Sports Personality of the Year awards and stuff. Nowadays - just get your face shown on BBC Sports Relief or similar and you are bullet proof - the press can't touch you then, and you don't even contribute any cash - the public send it in for you! Edited April 5, 2016 by frankief Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
200p Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 Conspiracy Part 3 Quantitative Easing Conduit Re-diversion (QEC). With the success of PPI compensation in the UK, the world shall receive compensation for tax evasion. In the UK; free £50,000 grant towards a new property, and £2000 for each person to spend as they wish (in selected shops). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wonderpup Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 (edited) Snowden exposes the irony of Cameron calling for privacy after his father's tax details were leaked : "Oh, now he's interested in Privacy !" Yep- compare and contrast the establishment's enthusiasem for having access to every detail of the lives of the great unwashed with their own claims that their personal data is to be kept 'private'. Hypocricy runs deep in these people. All of the arguments in favour of the plebs having no right to keep their data private- to prevent crime and terrorism- must also apply to tax havens which can be used by both criminals and terrorists to hide their money- right? Edited to add this quote from the outfit that was hacked; “We believe there's an international campaign against privacy. Privacy is a sacred human right that is being eroded more and more in the modern world. Each person has the right to privacy, whether they are a king of a beggar,” it said. A 'sacred human right' that seems to be reserved for that small minority of humans who have a need of their services? Edited April 5, 2016 by wonderpup Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saving For a Space Ship Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 (edited) If all people can avoid tax via say by using ISAs, it is only fair that all people should have access to other legal tax avoidance entities such as trust funds, off shore shell cos etc......this should be advertised freely, widely and openly and made available to all, not only to the very wealthy who because of expert advice made available to them, knowledge and contacts can benefit from these special flower tax saving loopholes.......only fair that the very wealthy are on the same advantage as the rest.....or close down special benefits and join the rest, those with the least who pay all their taxes due. +1, suprised the doc thread on the Welsh town that grouped together to go off shore with tax below, did not get more interest http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?/topic/208135-the-town-that-took-on-the-tax-man-off-air/ Rewatch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6y9FCNM268 Edited April 5, 2016 by Saving For a Space Ship Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spyguy Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 The law Firm involved has 441 US clients. But of course none of them are named in the report. lol. Why? The Us started Delaware have more than enough dodgy methods for mercans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spyguy Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 The law Firm involved has 441 US clients. But of course none of them are named in the report. lol. Why? The Us started Delaware have more than enough dodgy methods for mercans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dgul Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 http://metro.co.uk/2016/04/05/panama-papers-david-cameron-finally-clears-the-air-on-family-investments-5797172/ great. So: ‘I own no shares,’ the PM said today. ‘I have a salary as Prime Minister, and I have some savings which I get some interest from and I have a house which we used to live in which we now let out while we’re living in Downing Street. ‘And that’s all I have. I have no shares, no offshore trusts, no offshore funds – nothing like that.’ No shares? Nothing in the family name? Nothing in their children's names? And even after all that - for his father's estate, was there any money hidden away? Is his inheritance greater than it should be due to tax avoidance. The funny thing about politicians is I'm not really that interested in their family affairs. Extramarital sex, homosexual experimentation in the past, etc, etc, don't bother me. But what really bothers me is when they make a political story of something, and then squirm away from it when it turns out that they are dirtier than the rest. DC here is an example*. If he'd not made a fuss about off-shoring tax etc - if he'd said 'that is the way it works' - or perhaps 'that is a private matter for Starbucks' - then I'd say he has a right to now say it is a private matter. He is guilty of the worst sort of hypocrisy and I really don't think he has the moral standing to continue in his position. * another example is John Major with his 'back to basics' campaign. Or Tony Blair pretending to be a socialist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
campervanman Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 75000 UK homes owned by 1%' ers in tax havens http://www.theguardian.com/news/commentisfree/2016/apr/05/millennials-rent-trap-panama-papers-british-property-housing-young-people Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pig Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 Is there actually anything in this story beyond the relatively obvious ? Not condoning it mind, just saying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheCountOfNowhere Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 75000 UK homes owned by 1%' ers in tax havens http://www.theguardian.com/news/commentisfree/2016/apr/05/millennials-rent-trap-panama-papers-british-property-housing-young-people CPO them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steppenpig Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 (edited) great. So: No shares? Nothing in the family name? Nothing in their children's names? And even after all that - for his father's estate, was there any money hidden away? Is his inheritance greater than it should be due to tax avoidance. I notice he didn't say he wasn't a beneficiary of any trusts. or he didn't "have" any onshore trusts. Or that he had not previously benefited from anything. Or other close members of his family hadn't.... hopefully there is more dirt waiting. Edited April 5, 2016 by Steppenpig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ah-so Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 Reading this part, I find myself considering the nature of "the establishment"? What is it exactly? How do you know you are in it or is it the case that you have to ask you definitely are not in. Owen Jones wrote a book about it, without realising that he is part of it in most people's eyes. And is membership like a club with minimum entry? Or is it a very broad spectrum. I wonder whether I am unwittingly a member of "the establishment". Is there a test to see how many boxes I tick? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BorrowToLeech Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 I notice he didn't say he wasn't a beneficiary of any trusts. or he didn't "have" any onshore trusts. Or that he had not previously benefited from anything. Or other close members of his family hadn't.... hopefully there is more dirt waiting. His prime ministers salary didn't pay for his education did it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.