|
Post by shrewed46 on Feb 27, 2015 17:04:59 GMT 1
Lloyds Chief Executive Horta-Osorio salary is 11 million. Of course we are all in it together.
|
|
|
Post by Minormorris64 on Feb 27, 2015 17:14:26 GMT 1
Lloyds Chief Executive Horta-Osorio salary is 11 million. Of course we are all in it together. I'll up you and bid Wayne Rooney approximately 15.6 million
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Feb 27, 2015 18:09:20 GMT 1
Lloyds Chief Executive Horta-Osorio salary is 11 million. Of course we are all in it together. I'll up you and bid Wayne Rooney approximately 15.6 million Wayne's wages aren't propped up by the tax payer though.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Mar 14, 2015 10:29:53 GMT 1
The public's main confusion is with regard to tax avoidance and tax evasion. If there is a confusion between contributing to an ISA and tax avoidance then it is a confusion that is planted there by the people who have the most to gain from conflating the two. In other words it simply isn't the case that with regard to tax avoidance "everybody does it".
The conflation of ISAs with tax avoidance involves a linguistic slight of hand. First of all "tax avoidance" and "tax evasion" are clearly separated on a technical non-standard use of "avoidance" and "evasion" : a thesaurus will suggest to the reader that "avoid" and "evade" are synonyms. There is then a switchback to an everyday use of "avoidance" to say that people avoid tax by contributing to an ISA and therefore ISAs are tax avoidance.
The delineation made between tax avoidance and tax evasion is one of legality. That is then stretched to say that "tax avoidance" is perfectly alright and OK. However, it is not perfectly alright and OK from the point of view of the person doing it for one very important reason - it may not be effective.
Tax avoidance can also looks suspect from the outside looking in. I was recently reading a 64 page document from an global insurance company that claimed to be a detailed guide to the arrangement it was promoting. This document mentioned the tax that the arrangement was an instrument for avoiding only three times and at no stage made mention that it was an arrangement for avoiding that tax.
|
|
|
Post by davycrockett on Mar 14, 2015 10:37:27 GMT 1
I'll up you and bid Wayne Rooney approximately 15.6 million Wayne's wages aren't propped up by the tax payer though. Nor are Horta-Osorio's, he led the Lloyds group to a 7.6 bn. profit last year an increase of 26% on previous year, so hardly 'propped up' by anyone....
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Mar 14, 2015 11:35:34 GMT 1
Wayne's wages aren't propped up by the tax payer though. Nor are Horta-Osorio's, he led the Lloyds group to a 7.6 bn. profit last year an increase of 26% on previous year, so hardly 'propped up' by anyone.... But he wouldn't have been able to make those profits had the government not ploughed £20 billion into that banking group a few years ago. There wouldn't be a bank to run. Admittedly Man United probably need a similar level of investment to get a half decent defence for next season though
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2015 14:11:02 GMT 1
Ssshh! Don't let the truth get in the way of the free market myth!
|
|
|
Post by jamo on Mar 14, 2015 20:13:23 GMT 1
Lloyds Chief Executive Horta-Osorio salary is 11 million. Of course we are all in it together. I'll up you and bid Wayne Rooney approximately 15.6 million Utterly irrelevant comparison Minor but then again I suspect you fully realised that anyway. Rooney's employers are clearly happy to pay him that sum, the Head of HSBC is partly funded by public money and many millions of people are very unhappy about that
|
|