Tax havens exposed in huge law firm leak

[adzii_nufc]

I'm not bothered about it tbf. I'm more bothered about the way he called out the likes of Jimmy Carr for stuff like this.

As far as I'm aware, it was legal and paid UK taxes upon being withdrawn back to a UK account as well as occurring before he was even PM

[Stop It]

Originally Posted by Damien

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.

Starting with Cameron, he's in the clear legally, but boy has he made a hash of getting there. Going from "Nope, it's private" to "What tax haven funds, never seen them" to "Well I may have had shares but I put it through HMRC" was pretty dumb.

I don't think he's done anything wrong, but his "crime" is truth evasion, rather than tax evasion. No, he doesn't need to resign, and I'm sure he took his approach out of dis-respect to the press rather than the taxpayer, but it doesn't set a good example for honesty in politics.

Anyway, yes we are nowhere near the full facts of this whole leak due to the sheer magnitude of it. I want there to be a proper analysis of the "big" cases here categorised (By impartial economic experts, not journalists):

1: Tax Avoidance, those people who used Panama as a source of privacy, not to break the law
2: Tax Evaders, the people who used Panama as a way to lie to tax authorities and hide wealth from proper taxation.
3: Dodgy dealings, money laundering, sanctions evasion etc.

At the moment, we keep on getting spoonfed information that journalists are crowing about looking dodgy, but using ambiguous language as THEY likely don't know if it is category 1 or 2 either. Things like Cameron's family affairs are being presented as category 1 by some parts of the media when there is little actual evidence to suggest it when you properly look at it.

I see Tom Watson is accusing the PM of hypocrisy by gaining money from an offshore company.

Is this the same Tom Watson, who accepted a donation from Sir Trevor Chinn, Senior Advisor to CVC Capital Partners, which is based in the Cayman Islands?

http://search.electoralcommission.or...tions/C0238610

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trevor_Chinn

http://powerbase.info/index.php/CVC_Capital_Partners

[Stop It]

Originally Posted by Hugh

I see Tom Watson is accusing the PM of hypocrisy by gaining money from an offshore company.

Is this the same Tom Watson, who accepted a donation from Sir Trevor Chinn, Senior Advisor to CVC Capital Partners, which is based in the Cayman Islands?

http://search.electoralcommission.or...tions/C0238610

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trevor_Chinn

http://powerbase.info/index.php/CVC_Capital_Partners

Heh, not shocked one bit.

The joy of political muck slinging, everyone ends up covered in it.

[denphone]

Nothing surprises me from whatever party it is as most of them seem to have their noses in the trough.

[downquark1]

Originally Posted by Damien

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.

Assuming everything Cameron says is true, the remaining implication Tom Watson seems to be running with, is that he profited from an overseers company helping people avoid tax.

I saw this guy on the BBC news this morning.

BBC

But James Quarmby, a specialist in tax planning and wealth structuring at law firm Stephenson Harwood, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme there was a "massive misunderstanding" about what Mr Cameron had invested in.

He said it was a hedge fund that was "about as boring as it gets for investments", adding that it would not be used for avoiding tax.

"It's no different from Mr Cameron investing in a UK stock," he said.

And Mr Boles told BBC Breakfast that tax evasion was a "terrible thing" but no-one was suggesting the prime minister had not made all of the payments "he was required to make under UK law or that he has in any way used any of this to try to avoid tax".

"People have to pay tax," he said. "They have to pay tax on all income, from their work or from investments and I don't care where that investment is... that is what matters, that people pay the tax that is due. The prime minister has done so."

[Stop It]

Originally Posted by Hugh

I saw this guy on the BBC news this morning.

BBC

That gentleman clearly knows his onions.

I'll repeat what I said before, that we need to find the truly dodgy stuff and hit those guys hard. People in the media have seen "Cameron" and have gone nuts without actually understanding what they're going nuts about. If the financial and legal industry are looking at this and saying a collective "meh" then it's nothing to really care about.

Of course, that's not going to happen. When have the media ever taken a pragmatic view on anything?

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by downquark1

Assuming everything Cameron says is true, the remaining implication Tom Watson seems to be running with, is that he profited from an overseers company helping people avoid tax.

As long as income was declared on the money people paid in and any money paid out to them, then all is above board. It could be one person is liable for tax in the UK, another in Germany, and another in Monaco. The tax would be paid in the appropriate countries.

But if somebody receives a payment from a tax haven, and doesn't declare it as income and uses it to pay off a loan that was contrived to sidestep money laundering checks, then that is corrupt and criminal. But not apparently if a Labour Minister is involved, ie Tessa Jowell.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Hugh

I see Tom Watson is accusing the PM of hypocrisy by gaining money from an offshore company.

Is this the same Tom Watson, who accepted a donation from Sir Trevor Chinn, Senior Advisor to CVC Capital Partners, which is based in the Cayman Islands?

http://search.electoralcommission.or...tions/C0238610

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trevor_Chinn

http://powerbase.info/index.php/CVC_Capital_Partners

Maybe it's another Tom Watson and someone who isn't a hypocrite.

[Mr K]

I see the 'usual suspects' are trying to deflect any criticism from St. Dave

He's been caught with his pants down as can be seen seen from his bright red complexion in interviews he gave yesterday. He had the opportunity to be clear earlier in the week, but the truth has had to be slowly wrung out of him. The plonker wrote a letter to other EU leaders on 2013 advising against offshore trusts being opened to scrutiny, wonder why? Saying one thing and doing another, silly boy. He may not have done anything illegal, but he's certainly been hypocritical. He's doomed, just a question of when and which inbred public schoolboy is next.

Could you point out what illegal act he has committed, or which taxes he hasn't paid, or is that irrelevant?

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Could you point out what illegal act he has committed, or which taxes he hasn't paid, or is that irrelevant?

Don't think you've read my post Hugh.

[heero_yuy]

Originally Posted by Mr K

He's doomed, just a question of when and which inbred public schoolboy is next.

Not Gideon:

GEORGE Osborne’s hopes of succeeding David Cameron as Tory leader were dealt a blow today as party members ranked him last in a league table of Cabinet performance.

It is a dramatic tumble for the Chancellor, who led the grassroots Conservative Home survey for six months in a row before his approvals ratings started plummeting over the tax credits fiasco last October.

Since then Mr Osborne has suffered a series of self-inflicted blows, including branding the controversial Google tax deal a “major success” and being forced into a £4.4billion Budget U-turn over disability benefit cuts.

Linky

Originally Posted by Mr K

Don't think you've read my post Hugh.

So he should have said earlier in the week that he had paid all his tax and not committed any illegal acts?

So he's been hypocritical by selling his shares before he became PM, three years before he sent the letter to the EU.

The thing is, people like Tom Watson are comparing apples and anchovies, and deliberately conflating two different things to create a cloud of confusion and smear.

Labour's deputy leader Tom Watson said Mr Cameron could not be blamed for his father's actions but had not been "entirely straight with the British people about what his own financial arrangements were".

"That wouldn't be so bad if he hadn't also been lecturing very prominent people about their own tax arrangements, some he called morally wrong for being invested in similar schemes," he said.

Jimmy Carr's (and others) schemes were to avoid paying tax on dividends and earnings, whilst it has been shown that any dividends and earnings from Blairmore shares were taxed in the country of the share-owners' residence, in Mr. Cameron's case, the UK. But let's not let facts get in the way of a witch-hunt.

Regarding the letter to the EU, here is the actual information, rather than Tom Watson's twisted version of it - context is all.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0e7c0a20-f...#axzz45EpVDNix

In the letter, seen by the Financial Times, Mr Cameron said: “It is clearly important we recognise the important differences between companies and trusts. This means that the solution for addressing the potential misuse of companies, such as central public registries, may well not be appropriate generally.”

Britain has emerged as the strongest European rival to Switzerland for private banking and wealth management, administering £1.2tn of assets, according to Deloitte. The sector contributed £3.2bn to the economy, according to 2014 estimates from the British Bankers’ Association.

A senior government source said that Mr Cameron’s letter reflected official advice that creating a central registry for trusts would have been complex and would have distracted from the main objective of shining a light on the ownership of shell companies.

“It would have slowed down the process because of the different types of trust involved,” the official said. “They are sometimes used to protect vulnerable people, so that would have been an extra complication.

“As the directive went through we reached a position where trusts which generate tax consequences had to demonstrate their ownership to HM Revenue & Customs.”

btw, your inverted snobbery is showing with phrases like 'inbred public schoolboy' - I am sure you would be the first up in arms if someone called you a common inbred working-class oik, but it's OK to do the reverse.