Tax havens exposed in huge law firm leak

[heero_yuy]

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

It would not surprise me if The Sun, demands his resignation

Don't think so:

DAVID Cameron should be congratulated for doing the right thing.

The publication of his personal tax return came late but better than never.

And yet key questions remain for the Prime Minister.

Why did he take part in what amounted to an inheritance tax avoidance scheme?

It is only natural for a family to want to pass wealth down to their children while minimising tax. But it will stick in the craw of small businesses hounded by HMRC for the tiniest of errors.

Sun Says

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

So we're relying on the honesty system then?

.. and the ability to block EU attempts to make offshore trusts more transparent:

Panama Papers: Cameron faces questions over trust letter

David Cameron 'argued to water down transparency rules over trusts'

Thinking that maybe the topic should be amended to PM's tax affairs...

[Osem]

Given the shenanigans many of our MPs got up to when fiddling their expenses and housing costs not that long ago I don't think many of them can be said to be beyond reproach when it comes to matters financial.

On a separate note, how many of us suspend our moralising briefly whilst we choose to buy stuff from hugely profitable companies knowing full well they've done as much as they possibly can to avoid the very same taxes Cameron's resignation is being demanded for yet on a massively larger scale?

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Thinking that maybe the topic should be amended to PM's tax affairs...

I think those that wish to see tax evasion clamped down on have done themselves a real disservice here.

They have gone after Cameron, whose tax affairs don't even come close to the dodgy dealings of some of those exposed in the Panama Papers, and have now made the story about inheritance tax, which according to a recent poll, 59% of voters think is an unfair tax (regardless of whether it affects them personally).

Meanwhile a lot of very rich, genuinely corrupt individuals are laughing it up.

Originally Posted by ianch99

.. and the ability to block EU attempts to make offshore trusts more transparent:

Panama Papers: Cameron faces questions over trust letter

David Cameron 'argued to water down transparency rules over trusts'

From over 2 years ago...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/p...-property.html

Trusts, although widely used in the UK, are little understood both here and abroad. This partly explains why the matter has been overlooked outside legal and tax circles. If a strict regime of disclosure were introduced, what would be the implications on our personal finances? A number of experts unravelled the issue for The Telegraph.

Joint property owners
Where property is owned by more than one person, as is the case with millions of married and unmarried couples, the ownership is formed as a trust. Mr Frimston said: “When you buy in joint names, at the end of the Land Registry transfer document there is an express trust, where the buyers declare the basis of their ownership.”
For Mr Frimston this neatly illustrates the extent to which trusts underpin UK, but not European, financial arrangements. “In the UK being a trustee means you remain liable to HMRC and other authorities,” he said.

“But in German, France, Italy and Spain the idea is that trusts are about avoiding liability, and that they are somehow dodgy.”

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.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Chris

I think those that wish to see tax evasion clamped down on have done themselves a real disservice here.

They have gone after Cameron, whose tax affairs don't even come close to the dodgy dealings of some of those exposed in the Panama Papers, and have now made the story about inheritance tax, which according to a recent poll, 59% of voters think is an unfair tax (regardless of whether it affects them personally).

Meanwhile a lot of very rich, genuinely corrupt individuals are laughing it up.

I think you are spot on here. When it comes down to it, Cameron has broke no laws and let's face it, who wouldn't expect a Conservative PM to have a bit of money stashed away.

The real issues are:

- how interested are the Tories in closing down the legal but unpopular* offshore tax saving vehicles that the 1% benefit from
- how much does the PM and his Chancellor really think they are "all in it together"
- (and this is the clincher) why the Tory press are hounding the PM over what is, when you stand back, a non-story in terms of wrong doing

I am thinking the Tory press are using this Panana leak to wound the PM and spin out this issue for as longer as possible to try and weaken the Remain position. Damage Cameron and you potentially damage Remain ..

* unpopular in the sense that the vast majority of tax payers have no choice in paying their taxes where the 1% have "options"

[denphone]

Some MP's of the other parties are quite well off as well you know so its not just the Tories who are quite wealthy..

[heero_yuy]

Originally Posted by ianch99

I am thinking the Tory press are using this Panana leak to wound the PM and spin out this issue for as longer as possible to try and weaken the Remain position. Damage Cameron and you potentially damage Remain ..

I suspect that is true, probably trying to redress the blatent pro-EU £9m spend. The remain faction may come to rue that decision in the days to come.

Originally Posted by ianch99

I think you are spot on here. When it comes down to it, Cameron has broke no laws and let's face it, who wouldn't expect a Conservative PM to have a bit of money stashed away.

The real issues are:

- how interested are the Tories in closing down the legal but unpopular* offshore tax saving vehicles that the 1% benefit from
- how much does the PM and his Chancellor really think they are "all in it together"
- (and this is the clincher) why the Tory press are hounding the PM over what is, when you stand back, a non-story in terms of wrong doing

I am thinking the Tory press are using this Panana leak to wound the PM and spin out this issue for as longer as possible to try and weaken the Remain position. Damage Cameron and you potentially damage Remain ..

* unpopular in the sense that the vast majority of tax payers have no choice in paying their taxes where the 1% have "options"

I tend to agree ... It's all about Brexit.

People keep saying "the 1%", when they mean "the 0.1%*".

To be in the 1%, you need to earn just under £77k per year -which isn't bad, but not in the "super-rich" arena.

http://indy100.independent.co.uk/art...d--byxi1mzI0xg

People who make around £77,000 after tax include pilots, and directors in sectors like marketing and IT. They're not necessarily the CEOs and bankers on Wall Street the Occupy movement sprang up to challenge.

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/n...l-average.html

*about 30,000 people with a minimum declared income of £670,000 a year

[techguyone]

I wouldn't know why anyone would support an inheritance tax. It's a cruel tax, considering that its a tax upon tax. Tax has already been paid on any inheritance.

Just to inject a note of humour into this rather dry, if impassioned, subject...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36010902

Mr Corbyn committed last week to publishing his own tax return but he has been unable to find it and has requested a copy from HMRC, BBC assistant political editor Norman Smith said.

And of course, no politics thread is complete without a quote from Nigel..

And UKIP leader Nigel Farage said he wouldn't be divulging any details since most people regarded tax as a private matter.

Here is Jeremy's latest suggestion on the matter

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk...-return-big-no

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, who has said his return will be released shortly, has also suggested political journalists should do the same.

Originally Posted by techguyone

I wouldn't know why anyone would support an inheritance tax. It's a cruel tax, considering that its a tax upon tax. Tax has already been paid on any inheritance.

Its original purpose was honourable enough. It brought an end to most of the privately owned country estates that had concentrated land, wealth and power into very few hands over centuries.

Unfortunately it has long since changed from a means of redistributing unearned wealth and privilege to just another means of raising revenue on as many people as the chancellor can get away with.

[nomadking]

IMO Inheritance tax should be replaced by one based on Capital Gains. IE if you inherit a painting, property, business etc and sell it, tax is paid. But if your keep them, no tax is due. That way a business could be inherited without being forced to sell it, just to pay tax.