Tax havens exposed in huge law firm leak

[Stop It]

Originally Posted by martyh

Tax schemes usually operate within the letter of the law and are legal ,the only reason they fail is because a tribunal rules that more tax is due because certain criteria have not been met negating the benefits of the scheme .Tax evasion is the deliberate attempt to not pay tax through misrepresentation of facts.You simply cannot say that all schemes are evasion because they are not and 20% of people using such schemes face no penalties at all and even more have the liability reduced on appeal .Tax evasion makes you a criminal ,tax avoidance does not even if more tax is due after the tribunal.



Only in the court of public opinion .

Here's an example of deliberate avoidance .I had a choice a month ago to either buy a new van for work outright or lease one for 3 yrs , I chose leasing because the cost is 100% allowable against tax thus reducing my tax burden ,do you think that is acceptable or do you think i should be forced to take the less tax efficient option of purchasing a van because the country is getting less tax ?

Not only in the court of public opinion, but the opinion of HMRC and thus the Government of this country. As stated above, they now have the right to review any tax schemes before they are enacted and can rule them illegal. Before they had to discover them and then rule upon them.

Again, I am not saying that all schemes are illegal. If they are cleared by HMRC, then by all means, go ahead. However, the cycle of schemes that were re-written purely to get around rulings against them was dubious at best.

And no, your example is a case of intention of tax laws. Leasing is tax efficient for a reason. If you however said you were leasing for tax purposes but in fact bought it using a shell company (That you owned and controlled, but did not declare to HMRC) and "leased it" from there (i.e. from yourself) in order to claim the tax relief, that would be evasion*.

* Probably, this isn't legal advice.

[Ramrod]

Interesting article from the Spectator

Couldn’t the International Consortium of International Journalists, which grabbed this alleged super-scoop, have saved itself and us an awful lot of bother and just run the headline: “Official: Bears **** In Woods. Now we LIST the species that do so”?
Here’s the thing that should most disgust us about this overblown story: it is just another power grab by the global governing elite.

Yeah, sure it’s disgusting that kleptocrat dictators and other low lives are leeching their people’s resources and stashing their cash in secret vaults, and if we help their people get the money back and then send the dictators back home to be lynched, then sure, that would be poetic.

But this stuff is a distraction. A side show. It’s going to do nothing to make our own lives better or solve the world’s most serious problems.

And the world’s most serious problem – one of the the most serious, at any rate – is this: governments are trying each year to take more and more of our money and spend it either on ever more pointless crap – like David Cameron’s ring-fenced foreign aid budget – or on expanding the role of government generally.
...........when the leaders of all the world’s countries start making noises about ensuring that no one, ever again, can hide their money from the grasping claws of the state, well that’s when you really need to start worrying because it brings the One World Government so dearly beloved by the Communitarian left one step closer.

There’s a basic truth about tax which our global elite seems determined to ignore. If you keep it low enough and fair enough, nobody tries to avoid it.

How many magnates from Hong Kong are on the Panama naughty list? None, I’d guess. When the tax rate is as low as 10 per cent, it’s just not worth the hassle of not paying it.

[downquark1]

Well Saudi-Arabia doesn't have tax, but their names are on it, likely for .... other reasons.

I think the greater fall out from all this will be about the outright criminal money laundering rather than the simple tax evasion.

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by downquark1

Well Saudi-Arabia doesn't have tax, but their names are on it, likely for .... other reasons.

Yeah. BBc R4 ran an interesting programme on Tuesday night about how these companies are used by people who shouldn't have access to international financial institutions because they are subject to sanctions or are funding terrorists.

---------- Post added at 21:30 ---------- Previous post was at 21:11 ----------

Will the Guardian now investigate its own tax arrangements?
Amazing, gobsmacking hypocrisy. You couldn't make it up!

[Gary L]

Dave's going to resign!

can you believe that the hypocrite with the slap head who thinks he's God is going to resign?!

Originally Posted by Gary L

Dave's going to resign!

can you believe that the hypocrite with the slap head who thinks he's God is going to resign?!

Bless...

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Bless...

You sound like my gran again.

can you go and find my post where I said ages ago about Dave, money and running abroad with it?

good boy

Your understanding of finance is only exceeded by your wit.

[Arthurgray50@blu]

DC has lied to the Country, so he should resign. Osborne, walked out of an interview as he was asked about the Haven.

Why do you think all these millionaires, have so much money. Because they put there accounts oversea's.

If it was Joe Bloggs, we would get nicked. The same applies to DC. He should resign

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

DC has lied to the Country, so he should resign. Osborne, walked out of an interview as he was asked about the Haven.

Why do you think all these millionaires, have so much money. Because they put there accounts oversea's.

If it was Joe Bloggs, we would get nicked. The same applies to DC. He should resign

http://www.itv.com/news/2016-04-07/d...ffshore-trust/

Today the prime minister told ITV News: "We owned 5,000 units in Blairmore Investment Trust, which we sold in January 2010. That was worth something like £30,000.

"I paid income tax on the dividends. There was a profit on it but it was less than the capital gains tax allowance so I didn't pay capital gains tax. But it was subject to all the UK taxes in all the normal way.

Which taxes did he avoid, Arthur?

Does anyone actually understand what Cameron is alleged to have done or not? Everyone is angry, it's all over the papers and I don't understand it and suspect most people reading it don't understand either. We need to know more than 'tax haven' because if, as the interview said, he said tax on it then what taxes did he dodge?

God I wish some papers would just print a unbiased fact-check of why/how etc of these kinds of stories.

It's impossible to form a fair judgement of this if you don't understand what 'it' is.

[nomadking]

Strange that Tessa Jowell got away with being involved with dodging paying tax and laundering money and Geoffrey Robinson got away being involved with a multimillion pound trust.

In a statement in 2009 after her husband was found guilty of accepting the bribe, Dame Tessa said: ‘This is a terrible blow to David and, although we are separated, I have never doubted his innocence.’

She was dragged into her husband’s controversial financial affairs in 2006 when it emerged that she had signed papers for a loan secured on their London home – which was subsequently paid off with the help of the alleged bribe.

Mr Robinson - a former chief executive of Jaguar Cars - is reported in the Independent on Sunday to be the beneficiary of an offshore trust with assets of more than £12m.

[Arthurgray50@blu]

I think the main reason why people are calling on DC to resign, is that after three or four dismissals, he has admitted that he DID have dealings in the Tax Haven, and sold them the shares in 2010 (according to Sky News).

Therefore he lied, and was PM at the time. He criticised lots of people, plus he said that he would BLOCK the tax haven scandal.

BUT, he was involved in the scandal HIMSELF. Therefore, he should do the honourable thing and resign.

This is what l think they are demanding.

He, l believe has breached the 'integrity and honesty code of MPs. and as he is the MAIN MAN, he should quit.

[GrimUpNorth]

People are smelling a rat with David Cameron at the moment. It's his own fault (or the fault of his advisors). When he's changed the story is it four or five times now it makes him look like he's squirming and has got more to tell. On the news tonight he looked very uncomfortable and the bead of sweat on his chin just made him look more shifty.

He's not done himself any favours these last few days and I reckon it'll be sometime until we hear him or George Osborne tell us we're all in it together because if nothing else he's shown that some of us are more in it than others.

Cheers

Grim

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

I think the main reason why people are calling on DC to resign, is that after three or four dismissals, he has admitted that he DID have dealings in the Tax Haven, and sold them the shares in 2010 (according to Sky News).

Therefore he lied, and was PM at the time. He criticised lots of people, plus he said that he would BLOCK the tax haven scandal.

BUT, he was involved in the scandal HIMSELF. Therefore, he should do the honourable thing and resign.

This is what l think they are demanding.

He, l believe has breached the 'integrity and honesty code of MPs. and as he is the MAIN MAN, he should quit.

It was legal at the time. As long as tax is paid on any money coming out, that is all that matters. The company could have been based anywhere but the UK, and still not paid UK tax. Eg I could buy shares in a US company and that company not be liable for UK tax.