|
Post by MartinB on Aug 14, 2010 8:20:38 GMT 1
"My family are not tax exiles, they just happen to live in Monaco" - Phillip Green. Very depressing, but predictable, is the emphasis on cracking down on benefit fraud and no mention of a similar attitude towards tax evasion. It is reported that 30% of Britain's major companies pay no corporation tax and 60% pay less than £! million a year and tax evasion is at the rate of £70 billion per year. People need to think why it is that the media and politicians point the finger at the poor both here and abroad but ignore the rich and powerful who do not pay their fair share. The likes of Philip Green etc to my knowledge aren't involved in tax evasion at all. If they are I would expect them to be in court. Tax avoidance is what they do. There is a massive difference between the two. Tax evasion is illegal whilst tax avoidance is legal. Trying to stop tax avoidance is incredibily difficult because as soon as you write laws, a team of accountants will be working out how to keep out of the tax net. Oh and I am happy to be another person as a namby pamby liberal
|
|
|
Post by ratcliffesghost on Aug 14, 2010 8:27:54 GMT 1
"My family are not tax exiles, they just happen to live in Monaco" - Phillip Green. Very depressing, but predictable, is the emphasis on cracking down on benefit fraud and no mention of a similar attitude towards tax evasion. It is reported that 30% of Britain's major companies pay no corporation tax and 60% pay less than £! million a year and tax evasion is at the rate of £70 billion per year. People need to think why it is that the media and politicians point the finger at the poor both here and abroad but ignore the rich and powerful who do not pay their fair share. Oh and I am happy to be another person as a namby pamby liberal can you explain the progress on these two bits of the liberal election manifesto then Introducing a Mansion Tax for properties worth over £2 million Closing tax loopholes that unfairly benefit the wealthy
|
|
islaymalt
Midland League Division One
Posts: 420
|
Post by islaymalt on Aug 14, 2010 17:24:18 GMT 1
Introducing a Mansion Tax for properties worth over £2 million Closing tax loopholes that unfairly benefit the wealthy Stop asking Martin awkward questions Ghostie. If I recall, he constantly carps on about Jamo et al only seeing one side of the arguments and then almost hyperventilates if his beloved Tories are critisised - however justifiably. Me thinks he's in for a rough few years
|
|
|
Post by MartinB on Aug 14, 2010 19:03:43 GMT 1
Introducing a Mansion Tax for properties worth over £2 million Closing tax loopholes that unfairly benefit the wealthy Stop asking Martin awkward questions Ghostie. If I recall, he constantly carps on about Jamo et al only seeing one side of the arguments and then almost hyperventilates if his beloved Tories are critisised - however justifiably. Me thinks he's in for a rough few years Never claimed to support anybody polictially. I just get hacked off with Labour spin. The talk on this thread was about tax evasion, just pointing out the difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion which people seem to be missing.
|
|
|
Post by jamo on Aug 14, 2010 23:43:27 GMT 1
Well lets seperate the issue then martin and just talk about tax evasion.
Do you think it acceptable that in excess of £70 Billion is denied the exchequer annually by big business and multi millionaires, most of whom are tory party members and contributors.
And quite a few of us get fed up with tory spin..sorry that should read tory/liberal spin
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2010 11:18:08 GMT 1
[Never claimed to support anybody polictially. I just get hacked off with Labour spin. The talk on this thread was about tax evasion, just pointing out the difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion which people seem to be missing. your politics is given away martin by the way you dont seem to be getting hacked off at all with tory or tory puppets spin. and quite frankly, making the definition between avoidance and evasion in this context is spin worthy of the prince of darkness himself.
|
|
|
Post by MartinB on Aug 15, 2010 11:24:41 GMT 1
Well lets seperate the issue then martin and just talk about tax evasion. Do you think it acceptable that in excess of £70 Billion is denied the exchequer annually by big business and multi millionaires, most of whom are tory party members and contributors. And quite a few of us get fed up with tory spin..sorry that should read tory/liberal spin Jamo thanks for proving my point exactly If big businesses and multi millionaires had denied £70 billion by tax evasion there would have been loads of court cases. What they have done is tax avoidance which is legal. I take it Jamo you deliberate overpay tax to HMRC for the good of the Country? If not perhaps you should be practising what you are preaching here because that is what you are asking businesses to do. I take it the sort of thing you are talking about is things like non-dom tax status for people who are big supporters of policital parties? If so totally agree it should be stopped and lets start with the Labour supporters who fall into that caterogy. This is what hacks me off the Labour party/supporters bleat about it but they have people doing the same thing. Also are you happy with the way the Labour party have been very quiet about the massive mortgages the NHS under PFI deals. Why is that I ask myself? Oh because they approved them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2010 11:44:52 GMT 1
[Also are you happy with the way the Labour party have been very quiet about the massive mortgages the NHS under PFI deals. Why is that I ask myself? Oh because they approved them. would those be the same pfi deals scrutinised this week by the coalition government and described as "value for money" because they not only pay for the new construction costs, but also cleaning, portering and maintenance for the life of the contracts?
|
|
|
Post by monkee on Aug 15, 2010 11:48:47 GMT 1
lovely the way that all of you defend your favourite liars and thieves, what a wonderful system we have.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2010 11:58:38 GMT 1
lovely the way that all of you defend your favourite liars and thieves, what a wonderful system we have. clever observation monkey, but they are what most of us call opinions. got any on the subject you would like to share?
|
|
|
Post by monkee on Aug 15, 2010 12:07:52 GMT 1
lovely the way that all of you defend your favourite liars and thieves, what a wonderful system we have. clever observation monkey, but they are what most of us call opinions. got any on the subject you would like to share? only my distain for the whole system matroon, they keep getting away with it and the population just blames the opposition. Divide and rule and change every few years to keep each group of supporters happy. we are governed by the political class, it really doesnt matter who is in "power", so all your opinions only serve to reinforce a broken system.
|
|
|
Post by africanshrew on Aug 15, 2010 12:31:39 GMT 1
"My family are not tax exiles, they just happen to live in Monaco" - Phillip Green. Very depressing, but predictable, is the emphasis on cracking down on benefit fraud and no mention of a similar attitude towards tax evasion. It is reported that 30% of Britain's major companies pay no corporation tax and 60% pay less than £! million a year and tax evasion is at the rate of £70 billion per year. People need to think why it is that the media and politicians point the finger at the poor both here and abroad but ignore the rich and powerful who do not pay their fair share. The likes of Philip Green etc to my knowledge aren't involved in tax evasion at all. If they are I would expect them to be in court. Tax avoidance is what they do. There is a massive difference between the two. Tax evasion is illegal whilst tax avoidance is legal. Trying to stop tax avoidance is incredibily difficult because as soon as you write laws, a team of accountants will be working out how to keep out of the tax net. Oh and I am happy to be another person as a namby pamby liberal I agree, but by its nature this appointment is political - as such I think suitability goes beyond not committing a crime. For example I wouldn't expect a government advisor to the NHS to be on the board of a tobacco company. During the expenses row Cameron and Clegg both made a big deal of the fact that that those in positions of power should not hide behind loopholes - then they appoint Green. Glad to see support for the namby pamby liberals on aid!
|
|
|
Post by MartinB on Aug 15, 2010 18:11:15 GMT 1
[Never claimed to support anybody polictially. I just get hacked off with Labour spin. The talk on this thread was about tax evasion, just pointing out the difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion which people seem to be missing. your politics is given away martin by the way you dont seem to be getting hacked off at all with tory or tory puppets spin. and quite frankly, making the definition between avoidance and evasion in this context is spin worthy of the prince of darkness himself. Oh so who did I vote for then at the last election?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2010 18:34:39 GMT 1
your politics is given away martin by the way you dont seem to be getting hacked off at all with tory or tory puppets spin. and quite frankly, making the definition between avoidance and evasion in this context is spin worthy of the prince of darkness himself. Oh so who did I vote for then at the last election? No idea, are you getting hacked off with the tory or lib dem spin?
|
|
|
Post by The Shropshire Tenor on Aug 15, 2010 19:51:21 GMT 1
As my post appears to have triggered the evasion v. avoidance discussion I would like to point out that I did not accuse anyone of evasion.
I simply repeated a statement Sir Phillip Green made on the Today programme, I try not to use a slegehammer to make a point and thought that his words spoke for themselves.
I then went on to express my opinion that the rich and powerful are in a position to evade/avoid tax and that this does not atttract the same opprobrium as so called benefit scroungers.
|
|
|
Post by Jonah on Aug 15, 2010 21:03:10 GMT 1
Well lets seperate the issue then martin and just talk about tax evasion. Do you think it acceptable that in excess of £70 Billion is denied the exchequer annually by big business and multi millionaires, most of whom are tory party members and contributors. And quite a few of us get fed up with tory spin..sorry that should read tory/liberal spin Please explain how these Tory voters evade the tax then Jamo-Matron? And when you prove to me there is away defend the Labour lot doing the same thing
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Aug 15, 2010 21:21:17 GMT 1
The most interesting news I heard last week was that the National Audit Commission is going to become productive rather than parasitic by carrying on what it was doing previously.
Extraordinary.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Aug 15, 2010 21:23:54 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by Jonah on Aug 15, 2010 21:24:34 GMT 1
The most interesting news I heard last week was that the National Audit Commission is going to become productive rather than parasitic by carrying on what it was doing previously. Extraordinary. And simplistically that means?
|
|
|
Post by MartinB on Aug 16, 2010 7:40:11 GMT 1
Oh so who did I vote for then at the last election? No idea, are you getting hacked off with the tory or lib dem spin? Proves my point once again Matron, Labour supporters making claims which when you question it they don't know. This is what annoys me. From your previosu statement it should be clear who I voted for. On the subject of the current Government spin as you call it. I will do the same as I did when Labour came to power and give them two years to see what happens rather than jumping to stereotypical claims as you like to do. With Labour they started off well but then tried to treat us all like idiots e.g. Conservative MP has affair it is sleeze, Labour MP has affair it is private and nobody elses business. Or announcing the same spending three times without anything happening. I see the current Government position is a bit me trying to lose some weight which I know I need to do. I have cut out all the things I see as treats (spending cuts) and increased my exercise levels (tax increases). My wife thinks I am doing too much of both, but I think it is the only way to get where I need to be. Time will tell who is right, but I could not carry on with my previous eating and exercise levels which we both agreed on it is all about timing. The one thing I don't like at the moment with the current Government actions is before the elections it was said that quangos would be slashed. We seem to have gained some more organisations like this rather than losing them.
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Aug 16, 2010 8:31:06 GMT 1
If big businesses and multi millionaires had denied £70 billion by tax evasion there would have been loads of court cases. What they have done is tax avoidance which is legal. Many ways of "Tax avoidance" are not "legal" in an ethical sense, they are just not yet "unlawful" because it takes a while to find out how the exchequer is being cheated and then laws can be passed. Doing something which patently damages others but benefits you with the excuse "it is not illegal" is hardly the basis of their "big society" is it?
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Aug 16, 2010 8:35:10 GMT 1
If big businesses and multi millionaires had denied £70 billion by tax evasion there would have been loads of court cases. What they have done is tax avoidance which is legal. Many ways of "Tax avoidance" are not "legal" in an ethical sense, they are just not yet "unlawful" because it takes a while to find out how the exchequer is being cheated and then laws can be passed. Doing something which patently damages others but benefits you with the excuse "it is not illegal" is hardly the basis of their "big society" is it? Good point.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2010 9:43:48 GMT 1
[ Proves my point once again Matron, Labour supporters making claims which when you question it they don't know. This is what annoys me. From your previosu statement it should be clear who I voted for. On the subject of the current Government spin as you call it. I will do the same as I did when Labour came to power and give them two years to see what happens rather than jumping to stereotypical claims as you like to do. With Labour they started off well but then tried to treat us all like idiots e.g. Conservative MP has affair it is sleeze, Labour MP has affair it is private and nobody elses business. Or announcing the same spending three times without anything happening. I see the current Government position is a bit me trying to lose some weight which I know I need to do. I have cut out all the things I see as treats (spending cuts) and increased my exercise levels (tax increases). My wife thinks I am doing too much of both, but I think it is the only way to get where I need to be. Time will tell who is right, but I could not carry on with my previous eating and exercise levels which we both agreed on it is all about timing. The one thing I don't like at the moment with the current Government actions is before the elections it was said that quangos would be slashed. We seem to have gained some more organisations like this rather than losing them. you have a point but to be fair, you dont know which way i voted either, because i believe the only comment i made on it was a rather sarcastic "im undecided". however, its fair to say from the evidence over the past lord knows how many years, that i have a Labour tendancy. i dont think i have ever tried to hide from it, or felt embarressed about it. are you prepared to even things up and share with us all who you voted for? or should i just continue to assume your a tory bigot? kind of makes it a fairer debate if i know your political alegiances rather than having to make what im sure are unfair assumptions. how come its ok for you to point out that the government are creating as many quangos as they are getting ride of (oh, and abolishing organisations and replacing them with the same ones but with different names ) but when i do it im jumping to stereotypical claims. if what im claiming is right, then its right. if its wrong then fair enough. never been shy of putting my hands up.
|
|
|
Post by shrewsace on Aug 16, 2010 13:22:29 GMT 1
If big businesses and multi millionaires had denied £70 billion by tax evasion there would have been loads of court cases. What they have done is tax avoidance which is legal. Many ways of "Tax avoidance" are not "legal" in an ethical sense, they are just not yet "unlawful" because it takes a while to find out how the exchequer is being cheated and then laws can be passed. Doing something which patently damages others but benefits you with the excuse "it is not illegal" is hardly the basis of their "big society" is it? Exactly. And how do Con Dem supporters like Martin B, reconcile the 'we're all in this together' rhetoric with the appointment of a billionaire, who paid a 1.2bn dividend to his Monaco based wife, to oversee cuts that will hit vital public services? Couldn't be spin, could it?
|
|
|
Post by Old Bucks Head on Aug 16, 2010 15:01:59 GMT 1
One of the contributing factors to tax avoidance and benefit abuse is the ridiculous complexity of the tax system, with its multitude of bands, reliefs, credits, etc.
The whole system needs a complete overhaul and simplification. Trouble is, when Gordon Brown tried to remove the 10p tax rate there were howls from the opposition benches and his own backbenches.
|
|
|
Post by MarkRowley on Aug 16, 2010 20:51:59 GMT 1
Do you think it acceptable that in excess of £70 Billion is denied the exchequer annually by big business and multi millionaires, most of whom are tory party members and contributors. It certainly is not acceptable Jamo. Could you clarify though as to whether this is an annualised sum based on the first 3 months of the current coalition's term in charge or whether any elements of this denial of tax into the coffers of the Exchequer occurred during the previous 13 years of a Labour administration, when one would assume they would have been actively targeted if they were evil Tory supporters? Difficult now though for the new guys to do too much on tax loopholes and the many avoidance schemes that clever Accountants put together. We as a nation are trying to slowly claw our way out of a recession and need big business to be at the forefront of this recovery by being able to generate profits and re-invest those profits to fund future growth. If the last Government did not grasp the nettle in closing all of the hundreds of clever tax avoidance/mitigation loopholes it has allowed to flourish in what were up until 2008 good economic conditions, it would be churlish to now expect to force business to pay billions extra in tax whilst at the same time asking them to lead the economic recovery and job creation.
|
|
|
Post by MarkRowley on Aug 16, 2010 21:07:29 GMT 1
On the subject of the current Government spin as you call it. I will do the same as I did when Labour came to power and give them two years to see what happens rather than jumping to stereotypical claims as you like to do. I think that's a fair shout Martin. The coalition have inherited a country in a financial mess for a variety of reasons, some of which are denied by some and argued by others. Philip Green is clearly a highly capable entrepreneur, was knighted by the Blair Government in 2006 and advised Labour in the recent past. It will be interesting to see what ideas he comes up with, as it will be from Alan Millburn's views on social mobility, Frank Field's anti-poverty ideas and John Hutton's review of public sector pensions. It's good to see that the coalition is willing to listen to ideas from people outside of their political sphere and parties, a lesson perhaps to some on here who seem to be stuck in 1984
|
|
|
Post by shrewsace on Aug 16, 2010 21:28:37 GMT 1
Do you think it acceptable that in excess of £70 Billion is denied the exchequer annually by big business and multi millionaires, most of whom are tory party members and contributors. It certainly is not acceptable Jamo. Could you clarify though as to whether this is an annualised sum based on the first 3 months of the current coalition's term in charge or whether any elements of this denial of tax into the coffers of the Exchequer occurred during the previous 13 years of a Labour administration, when one would assume they would have been actively targeted if they were evil Tory supporters? Difficult now though for the new guys to do too much on tax loopholes and the many avoidance schemes that clever Accountants put together. We as a nation are trying to slowly claw our way out of a recession and need big business to be at the forefront of this recovery by being able to generate profits and re-invest those profits to fund future growth. If the last Government did not grasp the nettle in closing all of the hundreds of clever tax avoidance/mitigation loopholes it has allowed to flourish in what were up until 2008 good economic conditions, it would be churlish to now expect to force business to pay billions extra in tax whilst at the same time asking them to lead the economic recovery and job creation. Becaue the Tories spent their time in opposition demanding that tax loop holes were closed, didn't they? The Labour / Tory thing is irrelevant. They were basically offering the same package of cuts and privatisation at the election. The Tories were just offering a nastier, more virulent strain. After Labour shifted to the right they were terrified of doing anything that could be decried as 'Old Labour' or 'anti-business' by the Tories. Is the Con Dem programme going to deliver social justice and a fairer society? The answer to that question is 'no', so they should be opposed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2010 22:58:37 GMT 1
This thread started out on the appointment of one P.Green to an non elected Government position. Green, in my opinion, is a chancer. He is not particularly liked, even by his own kind, but at making money and running a business he is very very good. He is the ultimate poacher turned gamekeeper and has probably pulled more strokes than you would believe, and that is why he is a very rich man. The argument as to whether he has avoided tax or evaded tax is irrelevant, what he has or has not done is not illegal. Morally wrong, maybe, but when does morality ever show itself in Government. The expenses scandal, right or wrong? Every politician caught with their snout in the trough blamed the system. "We must change the system" was their mantra, " to prevent this ever happening again" NO, the system was fine , transparent and workable,it was the morals of those who worked the system, who looked for and found loopholes which they knew they could work to their benefit, that was lacking. And even now, by agreement of the appointed Government Department, those who baulked at paying back money falsely claimed under this system, are receiving refunds on appeal. Read the Red Tops and page after page is full of news on "Mother of 10 receives £100,000 a year in Government handouts" , " Man on disablement benefit found playing semi-pro football." So you read this diatribe, rant, rave and buy into the broken Britain train of thought, and guess what. You've taken your eye off the ball, because while you are complaining about piddling amounts which, when added together amount to virtually nothing, the big players, those in Government with their hands on the "proper" money, are fleecing you and this country for billions. We are,nt fiscally bankrupt, we're morally bankrupt. A man called Reid died not long ago, pity, with more of his kind we may just have stood a chance.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Aug 17, 2010 10:47:33 GMT 1
|
|