Resend my activation email : Register : Log in 
BCF: Bike Chat Forums


UK Tax Avoider Supremo On TV Tonight

Reply to topic
Bike Chat Forums Index -> Politics & Current Affairs Goto page 1, 2  Next
View previous topic : View next topic  
Author Message
Vincent This post is not being displayed because the poster is banned. Unhide this post / all posts.

smegballs
World Chat Champion



Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Karma :

PostPosted: 18:39 - 28 Apr 2014    Post subject: Reply with quote

I assume that a bill in his companies tax? Or a bill of liable personal income tax?

I take the opinion of don't hate the dodgers, hate the enablers at HMRC. If I had loadsa dosh, 100% guaranteed I would find every trick in the book (well my accountants would) to pay the absolutely legal minimum tax.

As long as the tax avoidance is legal, the fault lies with HMRC for not stitching up loopholes and enforcing collection IMO.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Wafer_Thin_Ham
Super Spammer



Joined: 18 Nov 2005
Karma :

PostPosted: 18:42 - 28 Apr 2014    Post subject: Reply with quote

smegballs wrote:
I assume that a bill in his companies tax? Or a bill of liable personal income tax?

I take the opinion of don't hate the dodgers, hate the enablers at HMRC. If I had loadsa dosh, 100% guaranteed I would find every trick in the book (well my accountants would) to pay the absolutely legal minimum tax.

As long as the tax avoidance is legal, the fault lies with HMRC for not stitching up loopholes and enforcing collection IMO.


Absolutely. Don't hate the player, hate the game. This is fairly typical government misdirection. Whilst the braying mob want Bernie's head, others are quietly filling their pockets. Thumbs Up
____________________
My Flickr
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Polarbear
Super Spammer



Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Karma :

PostPosted: 18:44 - 28 Apr 2014    Post subject: Reply with quote

smegballs wrote:
I assume that a bill in his companies tax? Or a bill of liable personal income tax?

I take the opinion of don't hate the dodgers, hate the enablers at HMRC. If I had loadsa dosh, 100% guaranteed I would find every trick in the book (well my accountants would) to pay the absolutely legal minimum tax.

As long as the tax avoidance is legal, the fault lies with HMRC for not stitching up loopholes and enforcing collection IMO.


I totally agree, but the problem is that Cameron and his Eton crony's don't want to shut the loopholes the conservative party fund donators use. They would get upset and not give them money.
____________________
Triumph Trophy Launch Edition
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 19:26 - 28 Apr 2014    Post subject: Reply with quote

I read a corporate strategy document once that said "Tax is an expense no different from any other, and we will avoid paying that expense to the uttermost extent allowed by law."

Thumbs Up from me, and Middle Finger Middle Finger to another hit piece made by a bunch of sponging parasitical pinkos who pay their mortgages with money wrenched from my pocket and yours.
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

smegballs
World Chat Champion



Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Karma :

PostPosted: 22:25 - 28 Apr 2014    Post subject: Reply with quote

The disconnect is quite apparent it seems. Quite often I hear things like "Don't blame the people claiming benefits. If you want to get angry get angry at the people allowing them to do so" whilst at the same time fostering a kind of personal hate for corparayshuns as if the Tesco PLC (as an entity of its own accord) just kicked down the door rodgered your wife and drank your last beer.

The knife cuts both ways, if "hate the game not the players" (which isn't an unreasonable stance IMO) is the name of the game it applies to "players" on both ends of the spectrum.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts
Vincent This post is not being displayed because the poster is banned. Unhide this post / all posts.

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 10:21 - 29 Apr 2014    Post subject: Reply with quote

Vincent wrote:
What the country loses from the super rich not paying their taxes

How can you lose what you didn't have? Especially if you didn't earn it?

You mean government, not country. £13 billion + of what the government picks from our pockets gets given to the likes of India to fund their space program, remember.

Vincent wrote:
They're "enemies of the nation" IMO.

Well, at least you're honest about wanting to just force the Haves to surrender their wealth. Stand and deliver your taxes.
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

smegballs
World Chat Champion



Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Karma :

PostPosted: 11:11 - 29 Apr 2014    Post subject: Reply with quote

Of course the real problem with the govt isn't income, it is spending. I 'm confident that it would be fair to say: no matter how much money the govt has, they will always manage to spend more*.

It's the way things are set up: "shit its almost the end of the year and we still have 10k left in our budget! Best spend it or something, anything, as they will give us less next year if there is some remaining."

That is how everything works, rather than look for efficiency, people look to justify their existence, budgets and maybe get some more next year. This compounds year on year on year, and the spending keeps going up and up.


*While there has been a handful of years in recent times we have run a surplus, it is most definitely the exception and not the norm. The surpluses themselves have been pissing in the wind compare to the deficits.

https://i.imgur.com/MWOXiUI.png
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

dydey90
World Chat Champion



Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Karma :

PostPosted: 12:35 - 29 Apr 2014    Post subject: Reply with quote

smegballs wrote:
https://i.imgur.com/MWOXiUI.png


Golly, Labour managed to fuck things up much quicker than I thought!
____________________
This post is probably not serious and shouldn't be taken literally.
Past: CBR125,ER6f NINJA 650, ZZR600 Current: VFR750
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

slowlydoesit
Could Be A Chat Bot



Joined: 14 Oct 2012
Karma :

PostPosted: 12:37 - 29 Apr 2014    Post subject: Reply with quote

Vincent wrote:
They're "enemies of the nation" IMO. as for the Govt doing something about it, "they're all in it together" from where I'm sitting Thumbs Down

A heartfelt argument, let down by the complete absence of any objectively verifiable evidence for the point of view expressed. Rolling Eyes
____________________
Kawasaki KMX200 with broken fixed powervalves and a stutter
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Ste
Not Work Safe



Joined: 01 Sep 2002
Karma :

PostPosted: 12:51 - 29 Apr 2014    Post subject: Reply with quote

Joe Public always wants to pay less tax and that's quite socially acceptable. After all, everyone wants more money in their pocket and less of their wages going to the governbent.

How much are people allowed to earn before their efforts to pay less tax mean that they're seen as being worse than Hitler?
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website You must be logged in to rate posts

slowlydoesit
Could Be A Chat Bot



Joined: 14 Oct 2012
Karma :

PostPosted: 13:03 - 29 Apr 2014    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ste wrote:
How much are people allowed to earn before their efforts to pay less tax mean that they're seen as being worse than Hitler?

Excellent question. Especially if the worse-than-Hitler person in question already pays tens of millions in tax every year and provides - directly or indirectly - employment to many people. I don't like anything I've heard or read about the guy myself, but my personal dislike is neither here nor there. If the law allows him to do this, it's hard for me to see the problem.

You could argue that law may need to change. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't but Ecclestone hardly seems to deserve the flaming he's getting for doing what many small businessmen earning £30k a year do routinely: minimise their tax bill.

The politics of envy never goes out of fashion eh...
____________________
Kawasaki KMX200 with broken fixed powervalves and a stutter
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 14:13 - 29 Apr 2014    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ste wrote:
How much are people allowed to earn before their efforts to pay less tax mean that they're seen as being worse than Hitler?

Tuppence ha'penny more than me.

Is always the answer.
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts
Vincent This post is not being displayed because the poster is banned. Unhide this post / all posts.
Vincent This post is not being displayed because the poster is banned. Unhide this post / all posts.
Vincent This post is not being displayed because the poster is banned. Unhide this post / all posts.
Vincent This post is not being displayed because the poster is banned. Unhide this post / all posts.

krarkol
World Chat Champion



Joined: 17 Oct 2012
Karma :

PostPosted: 16:58 - 29 Apr 2014    Post subject: Reply with quote

The loopholes are probably there so the person who came up with the whole thing can take advantage of them.

Like the thing with Jimmy Carr, he got slagged off a lot but I admire the guy! If I knew of loopholes like that I'd definitely be taking advantage of them

One thing I do not understand is Joe Public gets the book thrown at them for stuff like this, where the rich or people involved in politics just get away with a public apology.

I'd happily go on TV and apologise for having £50k worth of expenses in my bank account for example
____________________
Bandit 600 - deaded
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 17:04 - 29 Apr 2014    Post subject: Reply with quote

Vincent wrote:
but what happens if we need to finance another European/World war?

Ste already Godwinned the thread. Tut Tut
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

slowlydoesit
Could Be A Chat Bot



Joined: 14 Oct 2012
Karma :

PostPosted: 18:31 - 29 Apr 2014    Post subject: Reply with quote

Vincent wrote:
Maybe what the Inland revenue should be looking at, is reducing the tax bill for the super wealthy on condition it actually gets paid. However, allowing somebody off £2 billion on the condition they pay £10 million, as in the case of Wanklestone doesn't quite seem right to me.

Initially I thought you were cynical in the usual uninformed way that people are, but having read that post I think you're touchingly naive. If HMRC could have extracted £2bn out of Ecclestone, they would have done so. That's what they exist to do. That's how their masters judge their success. That's how their bonuses are calculated, which in turn determines whether they can afford that deposit on the 4-bed semi in Petworth they want so badly.

I suggest that this is the more likely scenario: HMRC took a good hard look at his affairs and concluded that he was operating within the bounds of the law. Presumably they decided that taking him to court would be unlikely to result in a win - that is, the court find him not guilty.

So instead they offered him a deal. As far as I can see based on the very limited information available, it was essentially a shakedown. "Pay us off, even though we don't have any evidence that what you're breaking any laws, and we'll leave you alone". That's far more disturbing to me than Ecclestone not paying £2bn in taxes he-would-definitely-owe-if-the-law-were-different-but-it-isn't-dammit.

It's not hard to work out why is this happening; just apply "cui bono". Who benefits? I suspect that big tax cases are getting so political that HMRC are unwilling to prosecute unless they are very sure they will win. So instead they're cutting shady deals. HMRC benefits because it can avoid the risk of a highly publicised court case that they will likely lose, while at the same time still squeezing out some revenue. Hurray, the dream of the Petworth semi-detached is nigh! The other party - in this case Ecclestone - may not appear to benefit but probably views the situation as preferable to a court case that they might well win, but that would sap resources over a period of years.

To reiterate what has already been said in this thread or another similar one, the problem is the law, not people using the law to their advantage. Everybody does it. Ecclestone does it. Your local builder does it. The chip shop owner does it. Farmers do it. Only the scale is different.

If it's a genuine problem, by all means change the law. If many people really believe this to be a problem why are they not voting to stamp this out? Because the current arrangements actually suit the majority of small businessmen and professionals and they have no interest in tighter tax schemes. (Ironically those professionals probably include the media clique who made the Panorama program. You can bet that those of them in the higher income brackets aren't voting for stricter tax regimes.)

So what's it gonna be kid Vincent? You gotta coupla options.

You can show some intellectual consistency and integrity and heap vitriol on the heads of the little businessmen of this country for wanting to keep as much as possible from the tax man - don't they understand that the government knows how to spend our hard-earned pennies wisely? - and as much as possible in their own pockets.

Or you can chicken out, prove that class jealousy is your main motivator, and go back to ranting about Ecclestone. Because this dwarf with bad hair has somehow got more money and beautiful women than you can dream of and it's just not fair and he must be punished.

Whatever. I'll be down the White Hart if you need me.
____________________
Kawasaki KMX200 with broken fixed powervalves and a stutter
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

smegballs
World Chat Champion



Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Karma :

PostPosted: 19:01 - 29 Apr 2014    Post subject: Reply with quote

slowlydoesit wrote:
Vincent wrote:
Maybe what the Inland revenue should be looking at, is reducing the tax bill for the super wealthy on condition it actually gets paid. However, allowing somebody off £2 billion on the condition they pay £10 million, as in the case of Wanklestone doesn't quite seem right to me.

Initially I thought you were cynical in the usual uninformed way that people are, but having read that post I think you're touchingly naive. If HMRC could have extracted £2bn out of Ecclestone, they would have done so. That's what they exist to do. That's how their masters judge their success. That's how their bonuses are calculated, which in turn determines whether they can afford that deposit on the 4-bed semi in Petworth they want so badly.

I suggest that this is the more likely scenario: HMRC took a good hard look at his affairs and concluded that he was operating within the bounds of the law. Presumably they decided that taking him to court would be unlikely to result in a win - that is, the court find him not guilty.

So instead they offered him a deal. As far as I can see based on the very limited information available, it was essentially a shakedown. "Pay us off, even though we don't have any evidence that what you're breaking any laws, and we'll leave you alone". That's far more disturbing to me than Ecclestone not paying £2bn in taxes he-would-definitely-owe-if-the-law-were-different-but-it-isn't-dammit.

It's not hard to work out why is this happening; just apply "cui bono". Who benefits? I suspect that big tax cases are getting so political that HMRC are unwilling to prosecute unless they are very sure they will win. So instead they're cutting shady deals. HMRC benefits because it can avoid the risk of a highly publicised court case that they will likely lose, while at the same time still squeezing out some revenue. Hurray, the dream of the Petworth semi-detached is nigh! The other party - in this case Ecclestone - may not appear to benefit but probably views the situation as preferable to a court case that they might well win, but that would sap resources over a period of years.

To reiterate what has already been said in this thread or another similar one, the problem is the law, not people using the law to their advantage. Everybody does it. Ecclestone does it. Your local builder does it. The chip shop owner does it. Farmers do it. Only the scale is different.

If it's a genuine problem, by all means change the law. If many people really believe this to be a problem why are they not voting to stamp this out? Because the current arrangements actually suit the majority of small businessmen and professionals and they have no interest in tighter tax schemes. (Ironically those professionals probably include the media clique who made the Panorama program. You can bet that those of them in the higher income brackets aren't voting for stricter tax regimes.)

So what's it gonna be kid Vincent? You gotta coupla options.

You can show some intellectual consistency and integrity and heap vitriol on the heads of the little businessmen of this country for wanting to keep as much as possible from the tax man - don't they understand that the government knows how to spend our hard-earned pennies wisely? - and as much as possible in their own pockets.

Or you can chicken out, prove that class jealousy is your main motivator, and go back to ranting about Ecclestone. Because this dwarf with bad hair has somehow got more money and beautiful women than you can dream of and it's just not fair and he must be punished.

Whatever. I'll be down the White Hart if you need me.


my response
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts
Vincent This post is not being displayed because the poster is banned. Unhide this post / all posts.
Vincent This post is not being displayed because the poster is banned. Unhide this post / all posts.
Vincent This post is not being displayed because the poster is banned. Unhide this post / all posts.
Old Thread Alert!

The last post was made 11 years, 312 days ago. Instead of replying here, would creating a new thread be more useful?
  Display posts from previous:   
This page may contain affiliate links, which means we may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. By clicking on an affiliate link, you accept that third-party cookies will be set.

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Bike Chat Forums Index -> Politics & Current Affairs All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

Read the Terms of Use! - Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
 

Debug Mode: ON - Server: birks (www) - Page Generation Time: 0.13 Sec - Server Load: 0.48 - MySQL Queries: 14 - Page Size: 149.89 Kb