MooseBreath Posted 10 February 2015 Posted 10 February 2015 I love the inconsistency / hypocrisy in both left/right entrenched diatribe when it comes to tax/welfare. Banks helping the mega rich / corporations avoid contributing millions to state? Good business sense / complete evil! Unemployed single mother with five kids on benefit? Complete evil / needs our help. Heh. If you recognise the benefits to the country of a thriving business community and compare them with the benefits to the country of large scale welfare dependency then the hypocrisy soon disappears.
Finnegan Posted 10 February 2015 Posted 10 February 2015 You think it's impossible for a business to be profitable and also pay it's taxes? Or you think, for example, Jimmy Carr dodging his taxes was a boon to our economy? (Despite my leftist views, I should establish, I'm not defending our welfare bill either.)
MooseBreath Posted 10 February 2015 Posted 10 February 2015 No I think businesses should pay tax in line with the intention of the tax system within the country they operate and not to do so is somewhat immoral. However with the benefits they bring it's not hard to see why some people might go a bit easier on them than they do a benefit lifestyle that contributes absolutely nothing.
Rincewind Posted 10 February 2015 Posted 10 February 2015 One of the Monday night poker players runs a pub and somebody asked him if he had some good deals at his bank and he replied 'Nah my bank manager is too honest.'
Guest MattP Posted 10 February 2015 Posted 10 February 2015 I love the inconsistency / hypocrisy in both left/right entrenched diatribe when it comes to tax/welfare. Banks helping the mega rich / corporations avoid contributing millions to state? Good business sense / complete evil! Unemployed single mother with five kids on benefit? Complete evil / needs our help. Heh. It's not really hypocrisy, it may look like it on the surface but it isn't. even if a buisness doesn't pay it's tax (which they should of course) they are still providing jobs and wages that contribute tax and enhance the economy, it's in no way comparable to the welfare state in any form which is just pure take without contributing a thing. You're ahead into Rincewind territory by trying to make comparisons. Banks want to attract the wealthy, to do that of course they'll try and help people pay less tax. Man City want to the best attract footballers so they pay their tax for them (often offset as lower amounts in so many ways).
Guest MattP Posted 10 February 2015 Posted 10 February 2015 Speaking of tax dodgers, the Guardian is begging for cash again despite having millions stashed away in the Caymans. http://order-order.com/2015/02/10/pollys-precarious-guardian-has-850-million-cash-reserves/ Polly Toynbee has a full page advert in today’s Guardian asking readers to “become a Founder member” for £540-a-year. In other words write them a cheque because the £1.60 they pay to read the paper isn’t enough to save it from its “precarious” position: As Press Gazette points out, the “precarious” Guardian currently has cash reserves of £850 million since selling its stake in Autotrader last year. Cynical tax strategies have kept the Guardian afloat whilst simultaneously campaigning against tax avoidance. Amazingly £850 million has built an endowment that will allow the unpopular paper to lose money in perpetuity. All without paying any corporation or capital gains taxes for years…
leicsmac Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 It's not really hypocrisy, it may look like it on the surface but it isn't. even if a buisness doesn't pay it's tax (which they should of course) they are still providing jobs and wages that contribute tax and enhance the economy, it's in no way comparable to the welfare state in any form which is just pure take without contributing a thing. You're ahead into Rincewind territory by trying to make comparisons. Banks want to attract the wealthy, to do that of course they'll try and help people pay less tax. Man City want to the best attract footballers so they pay their tax for them (often offset as lower amounts in so many ways). A definite and loathable truth, if it turns out (as in this case) that it was evasion rather than avoidance. Isn't anyone else tired the idea of realpolitik being applied to this (as in you have to look out for no.1 always) and of money being the be all and end all? Speaking of tax dodgers, the Guardian is begging for cash again despite having millions stashed away in the Caymans. http://order-order.com/2015/02/10/pollys-precarious-guardian-has-850-million-cash-reserves/ If that's the case then the HMRC should have a knock on their door too. Some more recent figures would help, though I daresay the situation would have changed litle between now and then.
ozleicester Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 Wheres the reality TV show about these government cheats? Im sure there is s sh*tload of fat fvcking "white Dee bankers" in nice suits and shiny cars wandering about town doing whatever the hell they please. These fvckers have defrauded the government out of 20 billion.. thats BILLION!!!, but... you can bet the next front page will be about some chav who as been caught having a smoke and a bet and is costing the government less than a 100 quid a week.. If that little bastard does that for 4600 years, he still wont have stolen as much of "your" money as these fvckers. This "Evasion Vs Avoidance" argument is crap... its legal for lazy scum benefit scabs to act the way they do and still get their benefits, perhaps they just have a work "avoidance" plan and so therefore should be free to get away with what they can?
Stadt Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 What the difference between evasion and avoidance? I'm guessing one is paying less and the other paying none at all?
Jon the Hat Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 Avoidance is the legal arranging of your financial affairs to minimize tax. Evasion is illegally and fraudulently not paying tax by not declaring all your taxable income.
Steven Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 Wheres the reality TV show about these government cheats? Im sure there is s sh*tload of fat fvcking "white Dee bankers" in nice suits and shiny cars wandering about town doing whatever the hell they please. These fvckers have defrauded the government out of 20 billion.. thats BILLION!!!, but... you can bet the next front page will be about some chav who as been caught having a smoke and a bet and is costing the government less than a 100 quid a week.. If that little bastard does that for 4600 years, he still wont have stolen as much of "your" money as these fvckers. This "Evasion Vs Avoidance" argument is crap... its legal for lazy scum benefit scabs to act the way they do and still get their benefits, perhaps they just have a work "avoidance" plan and so therefore should be free to get away with what they can? Punt the idea to Channel 4.
davieG Posted 14 February 2015 Posted 14 February 2015 HMRC failed to prosecute tycoon over tax evasion By Richard BiltonBBC Panorama Jump media player Media player help Out of media player. Press enter to return or tab to continue. HMRC has failed to prosecute a wealthy tycoon who did not pay tax for 24 years as Richard Bilton reports Continue reading the main story Related Stories HSBC whistleblower: There are 'more revelations' HSBC whistleblower's email surfaces HSBC 'helped clients dodge tax' Tax inspectors failed to prosecute a wealthy tax cheat who did not submit returns or pay any tax for 24 years, documents seen by BBC Panorama show. HM Revenue and Customs had concluded that Paul Bloomfield, a property investor involved in the redevelopment of Wembley Stadium, was a UK resident and liable for 20 years' tax. Mr Bloomfield was on a list of HSBC clients with secret Swiss accounts. HMRC said it would not comment on an individual taxpayer. 'Money box' Mr Bloomfield enjoyed luxury homes, a boat, helicopter and private jet. His personal fortune was estimated at £60m in 2006 but when the taxman finally caught up with him five years later Mr Bloomfield was not prosecuted. His is the most extreme case of tax evasion to emerge following the HSBC scandal and is likely to lead to further questions about HMRC's treatment of wealthy tax cheats. The latest Panorama revelations came from the minutes of two meetings between Mr Bloomfield and HMRC investigators in 2011. Mr Bloomfield told HMRC that, despite his lavish lifestyle, he did not own any property or have any income. The notes of the meeting say: "Bloomfield advised that he has never paid a bill and never received a bill and when he needed money it was sent to him." "When pressed, Bloomfield confirmed that his living expenses are paid from wherever there is money. In his words there is a box somewhere which contains money and he arranges for the bills to be paid." Mr Bloomfield claimed an offshore company paid his rent and that another company paid for "the use of a Boeing 757, the use of a boat and a helicopter". Some of the cash came from a Gibraltarian law firm, Marrache and Co, which closed in 2010 after the three brothers who ran the firm were arrested. Benjamin, Isaac and Solomon Marrache were jailed for fraud last year. Continue reading the main story HSBC's Swiss accounts in numbers 106,000 clients with Swiss bank accounts 203 countries involved $118bn total assets held in Swiss accounts 11,235 clients from Switzerland held $31.2bn 9,187 clients from France held $12.5bn 7,000 clients from UK held $21.7bn Source: ICIJ/Panorama Reuters Mr Bloomfield told HMRC that at one point he had a credit card from Marrache which allowed him to draw down £15,000 a month for living expenses. He claimed he had lived overseas, as well as in the UK, but the tax investigator concluded that Mr Bloomfield was resident in the UK and was liable for tax for the past 20 years. The documents show the taxman also missed a straightforward opportunity to prove Mr Bloomfield's dishonesty. At one of the meetings, he told HMRC that "he had never had an account in an offshore bank". But the leaked HSBC files show Mr Bloomfield had an account at HSBC's Private Bank in Geneva in 1993. The taxman already had the HSBC files at the time of Mr Bloomfield's interview - so it should have been easy to show that he was lying. Trappings of wealth Richard Brooks, a former tax inspector who now works for Private Eye, said Mr Bloomfield should have been prosecuted. "If you haven't paid any tax and you're given a chance by the Revenue to come clean, especially when the amount is on this scale, and you don't, then you can expect to be prosecuted. That is what you would expect." Mr Bloomfield lived at several upmarket addresses in Kensington and Knightsbridge. He left his last known address - a luxury apartment in Hyde Park Gate - without paying the rent. In April 2014, a London court ordered Mr Bloomfield to pay a former business associate, Mohammad Ghadami, £110m in damages. Mr Ghadami told Panorama that Mr Bloomfield enjoyed all the trappings of wealth. "It wasn't true he had no income, he had a few cars, a few drivers, security, a very expensive wife, an aeroplane," said Mr Ghadami. "One thing he had, it was money. And he had so much organisation - accountants and lawyers - to work for him and to hide the money for him." Mr Bloomfield is now thought to be living in Spain, but he failed to respond despite repeated requests for a comment. An HMRC spokesman said: "We don't talk about identifiable taxpayers. We take a wide range of factors into account when deciding the right course of action."
Benji Posted 14 February 2015 Posted 14 February 2015 The whole thing really pisses me off to be frank. I'm completely pro-business and I want to live in a country which encourages success, allows people to thrive and, if they so desire, make as much money as they can. But from that is a moral obligation that you pay your way for benefitting from that society. The tax system really needs sorting out; it needs simplifying and the veil of corporations (domestic and international) lifting to stop some of these f'kers taking everything but giving nothing. I'm not going to sit on a high horse and attack people's morals, it's always easy to accuse others when in everyday life people usually make choices based on what's best for them/their families. Anger should be directed at the tax system which should be much more transparent: lawyers, accountants, tax advisers etc. have manipulated tax laws into a complete mind****.
Webbo Posted 14 February 2015 Posted 14 February 2015 Anger should be directed at the tax system which should be much more transparent: lawyers, accountants, tax advisers etc. have manipulated tax laws into a complete mind****. I agree.
Spiritwalker Posted 14 February 2015 Posted 14 February 2015 If you recognise the benefits to the country of a thriving business community and compare them with the benefits to the country of large scale welfare dependency then the hypocrisy soon disappears.I find it amusing some people spend their life criticising the welfare state oblivious that they are a ' blink of an eye'from dependence on it.
Rincewind Posted 14 February 2015 Posted 14 February 2015 I find it amusing some people spend their life criticising the welfare state oblivious that they are a ' blink of an eye' from dependence on it. Plus it seems that people still cannot grasp the fact that the vast majority of those on benefits are actually working, mainly in low paid or part time jobs. There is in fact a sygnificant amount of benefits going unclaimed that people are unaware of.
MooseBreath Posted 14 February 2015 Posted 14 February 2015 I find it amusing some people spend their life criticising the welfare state oblivious that they are a ' blink of an eye' from dependence on it. If I lost my job I wouldn't be dependent on it for several years, enough time for me to completely retrain if necessary. In retirement I'm not even planning on receiving any state pension, if I do it'll be a bonus. If I'm badly injured or suffer a severe illness I'll need it, but I don't think anybody is arguing that those suffering in such away sshouldn't be entitled to support.
MooseBreath Posted 14 February 2015 Posted 14 February 2015 Plus it seems that people still cannot grasp the fact that the vast majority of those on benefits are actually working, mainly in low paid or part time jobs. There is in fact a sygnificant amount of benefits going unclaimed that people are unaware of. Makes you think, doesn't it. All these benefits on offer that people obviously don't need otherwise they would take them up. Why are they on offer in the first place?
Rincewind Posted 15 February 2015 Posted 15 February 2015 They are not on offer. They are not known about. You would not know about all the schemes available to you regarding tax if it was not for your accountant. The Government bodies will not go out their way to inform people about what is available to them. You are in the position of having a well paid job with a good future pension. Nothing wrong with that. No doubt you have worked hard to achieve it.
MooseBreath Posted 15 February 2015 Posted 15 February 2015 You said there is a significant amount of benefits going unclaimed. My question is, if people are getting by just fine without claiming these benefits, why are they available? They're obviously not needed. Whatever those benefits are they should be withdrawn across the board.
Rincewind Posted 15 February 2015 Posted 15 February 2015 How do you know they are getting by? Some people just do not know or have the learning capacity to know where to get help. Some people are too proud to ask for help. While I was working I did not know what was available but through contacts I have gained some knowledge. How would it be for someone that struggle with this kind of thing.
Strokes Posted 15 February 2015 Posted 15 February 2015 How do you know they are getting by? Some people just do not know or have the learning capacity to know where to get help. Some people are too proud to ask for help. While I was working I did not know what was available but through contacts I have gained some knowledge. How would it be for someone that struggle with this kind of thing.Life on benefits should be a struggle, otherwise why would anyone work?
Frank to be Posted 15 February 2015 Posted 15 February 2015 These tax avoiders are a national disgrace!
ozleicester Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 Fvck me.. its now up to 153 BILLION ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY THREE BILLION POUNDS!! Can you even begin to imagine how many welfare recipients would have to cheat the government to get that much? Anger should be directed at large corporations and the subservient little shts that bow down to them, take all of the money away from chasing the 100 pound a week benefit scroungers and invest it in getting the correct tax return from scumbag corporate criminals. Thats an investment that would pay dividends.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.