Are you like a 'benefit cheat'...

Osem · 21-09-2010, 09:36

... as defined by Danny Alexander?...

Quote:

"Just as it is right to ensure that every benefit is fully justified, so we must ensure that every tax bill is paid in full. There are some people who believe that not paying their fair share of tax is a lifestyle choice that is socially acceptable. Just like the benefit cheats, they take the resources from those who need them most. Tax avoidance and evasion are unacceptable in the best of times but in today's times it is morally indefensible."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereport...x_immoral.html

Mr Alexander seems to feel that anyone who legally mitigates their tax liability via the rules set out by government is on the same level as those who evade tax by, for example, illegally not declaring income or claiming benefits to which they're not entitled. Is he right?

I wonder what his views on his own actions with respect to Capital Gains Tax liability are:

Quote:

......Mr Alexander admitted that he took advantage of a loophole to legally avoid paying CGT on the sale of the south London property for Â£300,000 in June 2007....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...-on-house.html

**Maggy** · 21-09-2010, 09:38

Not another glass houser.

You would think they would make sure all their ducks were in a row first..

Pierre · 21-09-2010, 09:39

Tax avoidance is perfectly legal.

Mr Alexander, I believe, did his own fair share of tax avoidance during the MP expenses carry on.

Osem · 21-09-2010, 09:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pierre

Tax avoidance is perfectly legal.

Well if it isn't a hell of a lot of accountants have been breaking the law for a very long time...

---------- Post added at 09:48 ---------- Previous post was at 09:42 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Not another glass houser.

You would think they would make sure all their ducks were in a row first..

If they applied that logic there'd be nobody left in Westminster to make such announcements....

21-09-2010, 11:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Not another glass houser.

You would think they would make sure all their ducks were in a row first..

Ahh but all the ducks are in the moat, or was it the club house, I'm not sure...

**Maggy** · 21-09-2010, 11:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tuftus

Ahh but all the ducks are in the moat, or was it the club house, I'm not sure...

That was Peter Viggers with the Duck house and he was my MP for over 30 years..

Ramrod · 21-09-2010, 13:11

My accountant uses every legal loophole he can to minimise my tax bill. I feel no guilt over that as I feel I pay too much tax already and get far too little in return.......apart from a warm fuzzy feeling that I'm helping people like this

**Hugh** · 21-09-2010, 14:35

And the important differentiator, as Rammy states, is "legal" - Mr Alexander is out of order, imho, conflating avoidance and evasion; that is like conflating receipt of benefits and fiddling benefits - totally inappropriate.

Ignitionnet · 21-09-2010, 14:38

I sense some preaching to the converted going on here. Trying to soothe the souls of those on the left of the Lib Dems concerned about cuts and some tax rises with this rhetoric. Rhetoric is the only word I can think of to describe it too sadly.

Angua · 21-09-2010, 14:52

Until they close the loopholes this is somewhat of an own goal. However as costs go, the non payment of taxes by whatever means actually loses the government far far more than ever the cost of payments to benefit cheats. Yet not paying taxes if you are wealthy is seen as morally superior to a few falsely claiming benefits.

Osem · 21-09-2010, 14:54

Coincidentally, a day or two ago, I heard Simon Hughes being interviewed about these apparent double standards on the part of Danny Alexander and all he could do was to suggest that 'with the benefit of hindsight' his colleague probably wouldn't have done it....

Ramrod · 21-09-2010, 15:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angua

not paying taxes if you are wealthy is seen as morally superior to a few falsely claiming benefits.

Thats because tax avoidance is legal (utilising the framework the govt has itself put in place)whereas claiming benifits you aren't entitled to is not

TheNorm · 21-09-2010, 15:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Osem

... .Mr Alexander seems to feel that anyone who legally mitigates their tax liability via the rules set out by government is on the same level as those who evade tax by, for example, illegally not declaring income or claiming benefits to which they're not entitled. Is he right?..

No. He should ensure the laws are written to stop this sort of thing from being legal.

Lord Nikon · 21-09-2010, 16:00

first time I have heard of someone being called a cheat for following the rules...

**Chris** · 21-09-2010, 16:06

Laws have a spirit as well as a letter. Hence the phrase 'that's just not cricket'.

The tax system is used in the UK to raise revenue but also to encourage or discourage certain patterns of behaviour. All of that unfortunately means it can be very complex. There are therefore certain ways to avoid tax, legally, that were not intended to exist. It may be legal to take advantage of them, but it IMO it is morally questionable, especially when those who are able to exploit such unintended loopholes tend to be those who can afford to pay an accountant to find them and arrange their affairs accordingly.

In medieval times, the nobility used their power and influence to avoid paying taxes. Things in this regard have not changed as much as they perhaps should have.