Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
An ISA is not an 'aggressive tax avoidance scheme'. And 'aggressive tax avoidance scheme' is not a phrase used in the graphic posted above.
The word used in the graphic is 'avoidance'. 'Avoidance' is a very broad spectrum which, at one end, has common practice such as ISA use.
So, I pose the questions again: do you think the person that compiled the graphic has been in any way discerning about what figures to include? Are all avoidance measures included? If not, where was the line drawn? What criteria did the person compiling the graphic use to determine which (legal) tax avoidance measures to include alongside (illegal) tax evasion and which to leave out?
|
Pose the question again to whom? The post I replied to was one where you attempted to say that avoidance was legal when often it isn't and how I think measures should be in place that require them to prove dubious practise legal before it's used rather than wait sometimes years for judgement to be reached and negotiate their bill down.
---------- Post added at 19:56 ---------- Previous post was at 19:51 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramrod
Guilty till proven innocent? Best lock me up then  |
What for, how many times have your accounting practices been found to be illegal and besides when has any of these shysters ever been locked up, perhaps if we started that it might put paid to some of the worst practices