Panama Papers

[steakbake]

Looks like this will be a huge story. 11.5m confidential documents alleging tax dodging on a global scale, by leaders and captains of industry from across the planet.

At the moment, a lot of coverage in the UK press focussing on Putin and Iceland, but very little about the apparent 9000 individuals and businesses who have allegedly made use of offshoring.

A real developing story!

[snooky]

Squeaky bum time for the spivs ..... although it is stated that a lot of the stuff is legit.

[CropleyWasGod]

Looks like this will be a huge story. 11.5m confidential documents alleging tax dodging on a global scale, by leaders and captains of industry from across the planet.

At the moment, a lot of coverage in the UK press focussing on Putin and Iceland, but very little about the apparent 9000 individuals and businesses who have allegedly made use of offshoring.

A real developing story!

Yep, it's going to run and run.

Because so many documents are involved, it will take a while for the media to sort through everything.... and then the debate about legality vs morality will start.:cb

[Geo_1875]

Seems the BBC are not naming British nationals yet

[cabbageandribs1875]

6 house of lords shysters and 3 present tory MP's, so far

[RyeSloan]

Well everyone knew that offshore tax havens were used for all sorts of money laundering and wealth transfers...hopefully this will lead to the global powers finally agreeing to end this nonsense. Of course most have paid lip service to doing so while happily letting it continue as there are so many with great influence that gain from the current set up.

That said even when you knew it was going on its depressing to see just how easy it has been for a select few to help themselves to millions (if not billions) as long as they had the right connections .

I hope this story runs and runs and we see plenty of those that have had their snouts in the trough exposed and made to pay for their theft, deceit and down right greed.

[CropleyWasGod]

Well everyone knew that offshore tax havens were used for all sorts of money laundering and wealth transfers...hopefully this will lead to the global powers finally agreeing to end this nonsense. Of course most have paid lip service to doing so while happily letting it continue as there are so many with great influence that gain from the current set up.

That said even when you knew it was going on its depressing to see just how easy it has been for a select few to help themselves to millions (if not billions) as long as they had the right connections .

I hope this story runs and runs and we see plenty of those that have had their snouts in the trough exposed and made to pay for their theft, deceit and down right greed.

... and then there are those who use offshore tax havens for legitimate and legal reasons.

I'm not saying that they are morally right, but if the law permits their use, why wouldn't you do it? Then the spotlight, IMO, turns on the Government (and that includes all Governments going back to whenever), who set the laws in the first place.

[RyeSloan]

... and then there are those who use offshore tax havens for legitimate and legal reasons. I'm not saying that they are morally right, but if the law permits their use, why wouldn't you do it? Then the spotlight, IMO, turns on the Government (and that includes all Governments going back to whenever), who set the laws in the first place.

Which was my (poorly made) point...successive governments of colours and many countries have banged on about tax evasion and money laundering, heaping regulation upon regulation but have left the barn door wide open with the offshore stuff.

Sure there is legal and legitimate uses for offshore but these leaks show just how easy their use has been for actions that are (allegedly) anything but.

[CropleyWasGod]

Which was my (poorly made) point...successive governments of colours and many countries have banged on about tax evasion and money laundering, heaping regulation upon regulation but have left the barn door wide open with the offshore stuff.

Sure there is legal and legitimate uses for offshore but these leaks show just how easy their use has been for actions that are (allegedly) anything but.

Yep, with you on that.

I just wonder if the media focus is going to be on the individuals, who use the system legitimately, rather than the system itself. That would be a shame, IMO.

[Geo_1875]

Yep, with you on that.

I just wonder if the media focus is going to be on the individuals, who use the system legitimately, rather than the system itself. That would be a shame, IMO.

The rules have always been too vague and open to interpretation. This allows very clever people to weave their way through the system and "sell" schemes to greedy people who will spend £1 to save £1.01. Of course these numbers mount up to huge sums being paid to accountants/tax lawyers and cost governments fortunes in avoided tax. Unfortunately, the people who could close the loopholes are beholden to the people who benefit the most from these schemes so it will never happen.

[johnbc70]

Yep, with you on that.

I just wonder if the media focus is going to be on the individuals, who use the system legitimately, rather than the system itself. That would be a shame, IMO.

I felt when there was all the press around the likes of Amazon and Google not paying UK taxes the focus was on how 'bad' and morally corrup they were, when in fact they broke no laws and were operating within the tax system perfectly legally. (As far as I know)

I think this story will of course focus on the individuals as that is what sells papers and what people want to see, but your quite right the focus should be on changing the systems so it can't happen.

[snooky]

Seems the BBC are not naming British nationals yet

Aye, hard to believe, eh? :rolleyes:

[Godsahibby]

Reporting the PMs late father was involved in some shenanigans

[johnbc70]

Aye, hard to believe, eh? :rolleyes:

Except they have, see post above. Maybe saving the other names for panorama later tonight. Don't see what the BBC have to gain by not naming them.

[MartinfaePorty]

Just posted on the PM board that David Rowland's name mentioned in this. Be a shame if anything should happen to this fine upstanding figure!

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

[Hibernia&Alba]

We're all in it together, guys* :rolleyes:



*Unless you're wealthy enough to be a tax exile, then those with the broadest shoulders can expect money to be taken from working families and the disabled instead.

[GreenLake]

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/04/corporate-media-gatekeepers-protect-western-1-from-panama-leak/

[snooky]

Bet lots of people who've had their benefits cut in the UK recently are shaking in their boots in case their stash in the Bank of Panama is disclosed. :coffee:

[lapsedhibee]

greedy people who will spend £1 to save £1.01
Is that really greed, or just good housekeeping? :dunno:

[Geo_1875]

Is that really greed, or just good housekeeping? :dunno:

If you're worth millions is it really worth the time and effort to avoid paying tax on thousands which may only amount to hundreds?

There is also the moral argument.

What is annoying me about the story and the media coverage, apart from them almost ignoring the British names, is that they keep going on about Panama and it's secret companies and the friends and relatives of international statesmen. The actual illegal acts are taking place in Britain and the rest of Europe where the money is undeclared and untaxed. They are trying to deflect from the high profile, establishment figures who are neck deep in this trough.

[CropleyWasGod]

If you're worth millions is it really worth the time and effort to avoid paying tax on thousands which may only amount to hundreds?

There is also the moral argument.

What is annoying me about the story and the media coverage, apart from them almost ignoring the British names, is that they keep going on about Panama and it's secret companies and the friends and relatives of international statesmen. The actual illegal acts are taking place in Britain and the rest of Europe where the money is undeclared and untaxed. They are trying to deflect from the high profile, establishment figures who are neck deep in this trough.

Illegal?

That's still to be established, no? As i said on the other thread, I wouldn't be surprised if most of these schemes are actually legal.

[snooky]

If you're worth millions is it really worth the time and effort to avoid paying tax on thousands which may only amount to hundreds?

There is also the moral argument.

What is annoying me about the story and the media coverage, apart from them almost ignoring the British names, is that they keep going on about Panama and it's secret companies and the friends and relatives of international statesmen. The actual illegal acts are taking place in Britain and the rest of Europe where the money is undeclared and untaxed. They are trying to deflect from the high profile, establishment figures who are neck deep in this trough.

One rag today had a headline about a Rangers mug (the tea kind) being pixelled out on Goggle Box. I kid you not.
A good day to slip in the Panama scandal so that it gets buried under a really big scoop.

[cabbageandribs1875]

i see the icelandic PM has quit, quite rightly


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35966412



The prime minister of Iceland has resigned - the first major casualty of the Panama Papers leaks which have shed an embarrassing spotlight on the world of offshore finance.

[PeeJay]

They are trying to deflect from the high profile, establishment figures who are neck deep in this trough.

The Prime Minister of the UK is not "high profile enough for you? :greengrin

[Future17]

The Prime Minister of the UK is not "high profile enough for you? :greengrin

Day 1: "I don't have any offshore funds..."

Day 2: "I will not benefit from any offshore funds in the future..."

Day 3: "Oh actually..."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35992167

[ronaldo7]

It seems the British Prime Minister's first 4 statements on the subject were the cover up I expected from him.

http://fb.me/1aJol6X5t

[CropleyWasGod]

Day 1: "I don't have any offshore funds..."

Day 2: "I will not benefit from any offshore funds in the future..."

Day 3: "Oh actually..."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35992167
Those three aren't incompatible. He doesn't have any, and won't benefit on the future because he sold what he did have...6 years ago, having paid the appropriate tax it seems.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

Worth a try Dave! :rolleyes:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35983222

[GlesgaeHibby]

Icelandic PM resigned, so should Dave.

[steakbake]

Icelandic PM resigned, so should Dave.

Shameless Dave will hang on in there, trying to slip his way out with his meaningless words.

We simply don't have a decent media in this country. Certainly all but no serious investigative journalists or those who ask the tough questions. of the establishment. The BBC had first dibs on this information - which is odd for an organisation with over 300 journalists but not a single investigative reporter amongst them. Cameron should've been the story since day 1 of the leak. Instead, we've heard about Russian and Chinese corruption and little about our own establishment elite.

I rather suspect that this info tonight has emerged somewhere else. The independent broke the story... not the BBC - again, odd for the organisation who has received the information from the start.

[snooky]

Is this the Chinese year of the Weasel?

[marinello59]

Shameless Dave will hang on in there, trying to slip his way out with his meaningless words.

We simply don't have a decent media in this country. Certainly all but no serious investigative journalists or those who ask the tough questions. of the establishment. The BBC had first dibs on this information - which is odd for an organisation with over 300 journalists but not a single investigative reporter amongst them. Cameron should've been the story since day 1 of the leak. Instead, we've heard about Russian and Chinese corruption and little about our own establishment elite.

I rather suspect that this info tonight has emerged somewhere else. The independent broke the story... not the BBC - again, odd for the organisation who has received the information from the start.

To be fair the Panama papers are only the starting point for these stories and after a few days of probing they have exposed Cameron's hypocrisy which they did by repeatedly chipping away at him. If someone is being evasive then it does take time for the truth to emerge unless you wanted the BBC and others to waterboard Cameron to get to the facts. (That would have been kind of pleasing. :greengrin)
Putting aside the fact he is a Tory, Cameron is incompetent and weak. Now that he has been exposed as the hypocrite many of us thought he was he should go.

[Colr]

Shameless Dave will hang on in there, trying to slip his way out with his meaningless words.

We simply don't have a decent media in this country. Certainly all but no serious investigative journalists or those who ask the tough questions. of the establishment. The BBC had first dibs on this information - which is odd for an organisation with over 300 journalists but not a single investigative reporter amongst them. Cameron should've been the story since day 1 of the leak. Instead, we've heard about Russian and Chinese corruption and little about our own establishment elite.

I rather suspect that this info tonight has emerged somewhere else. The independent broke the story... not the BBC - again, odd for the organisation who has received the information from the start.

And because Labour have become a middle class lefty intellectual pressure group, they can do what they want. Pity the SNP don't stand in London!!

[marinello59]

And because Labour have become a middle class lefty intellectual pressure group, they can do what they want. Pity the SNP don't stand in London!!

The SNP would have taken a different stance on this from Corbyn and Labour then?

[Beefster]

Cameron is a right slippery *******. He should have just owned up on day 1 but the hypocrisy of criticising others is way more damning in any case. He should probably just go but the prospect of ending up with The Buffoon or Osbourne as PM is terrifying.

[Hibs Class]

Those three aren't incompatible. He doesn't have any, and won't benefit on the future because he sold what he did have...6 years ago, having paid the appropriate tax it seems.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Not incompatible but quite clearly evasive. The essence of the questions put to him was obvious and he gave up as little information as possible. Reminiscent of Clinton wanting to be asked specifically worded questions on Lewinsky, with pre-agreed definitions of what words/terms meant, so that he could then answer in the way he wanted. And, like Clinton, this has damaged rather than cleared Cameron.

[CropleyWasGod]

Not incompatible but quite clearly evasive. The essence of the questions put to him was obvious and he gave up as little information as possible. Reminiscent of Clinton wanting to be asked specifically worded questions on Lewinsky, with pre-agreed definitions of what words/terms meant, so that he could then answer in the way he wanted. And, like Clinton, this has damaged rather than cleared Cameron.

Agreed on that.

However, I can't help thinking that the bullets are being fired in the wrong direction at the moment. It's been made a party political issue, when it's much more fundamental than that. Sure, there may be some political casualties, but will that get to the heart of the matter? The cynic in me thinks not.

[hibsbollah]

Complete dishonesty from Cameron from day one. I genuinely think this could be the end for him, either by dint of public opinion or disloyal backbenchers turning on him. As no actual laws have been broken (yet), his best hope is a compliant media finding other headlines and the public losing interest in the story.

[steakbake]

Complete dishonesty from Cameron from day one. I genuinely think this could be the end for him, either by dint of public opinion or disloyal backbenchers turning on him. As no actual laws have been broken (yet), his best hope is a compliant media finding other headlines and the public losing interest in the story.

I can't imagine that happening... :rolleyes:

[hibsbollah]

I can't imagine that happening... :rolleyes:

If the Tory press find another tax avoiding target (a left wing politician, preferably), the public might just assume everyones at it and damn all politicians. Or it may be that the public make that assumption anyway and the Cameron revelations dont surprise them. I'd like to see some polling on how this has affected voting intention/individual ratings.

[Hibrandenburg]

I'd love to get upset about the corruption and hypocrisy of our government but there's something good on the telly and my microwave dinner just went ping.

[snooky]

Complete dishonesty from Cameron from day one. I genuinely think this could be the end for him, either by dint of public opinion or disloyal backbenchers turning on him. As no actual laws have been broken (yet), his best hope is a compliant media finding other headlines and the public losing interest in the story.

In recent times, the UK public's apathy towards many controversial issues has been unbelievable - much to the relief of the Government I'm sure.

[Betty Boop]

Surprise surprise, apparently evidence of alleged money laundering through Ukio Bankas.

[hibsbollah]

In recent times, the UK public's apathy towards many controversial issues has been unbelievable - much to the relief of the Government I'm sure.

:agree: Its astonishing. Watergate wouldn't have brought down Nixon if it happened in 2016. The public has an alltime low expectation of authority but instead of revolting they just shrug. Post WMD, Ecclestone, Abu Ghraib, Putin's shenanigans in Russia, Hillsborough, The Sun bugging Milly Dowlers phone, BBC and Jimmy Saville, all these stories and many more are all very different in scale but they all have the effect of numbing our sense of what is outrageous.

[Haymaker]

:agree: Its astonishing. Watergate wouldn't have brought down Nixon if it happened in 2016. The public has an alltime low expectation of authority but instead of revolting they just shrug. Post WMD, Ecclestone, Abu Ghraib, Putin's shenanigans in Russia, Hillsborough, The Sun bugging Milly Dowlers phone, BBC and Jimmy Saville, all these stories and many more are all very different in scale but they all have the effect of numbing our sense of what is outrageous.

In my younger years I would probably have gotten angry and shouted a lot but as you say, the years of scandal after scandal have numbed me to just saying "Well i'm not surprised. When will the next one be?" :dunno:

[steakbake]

:agree: Its astonishing. Watergate wouldn't have brought down Nixon if it happened in 2016. The public has an alltime low expectation of authority but instead of revolting they just shrug. Post WMD, Ecclestone, Abu Ghraib, Putin's shenanigans in Russia, Hillsborough, The Sun bugging Milly Dowlers phone, BBC and Jimmy Saville, all these stories and many more are all very different in scale but they all have the effect of numbing our sense of what is outrageous.

Great point. Numbed to the point of impotence... and obedience. While all the mulch going on in the background is designed to distract, the drawn out "war on terror" is designed to prick our peace, divide people and create a climate of compliance to authority and indifference to the details.

[johnbc70]

Surprise surprise, apparently evidence of alleged money laundering through Ukio Bankas.

Surely not, I find that almost impossible to believe. I mean it's not like everyone knew what was really going on and it was completely ignored by the media at the time is it.....?

[cabbageandribs1875]

Ken Livingstone wants cameron jailed

[AndyM_1875]

Ken Livingstone wants cameron jailed

Ken is obviously an idiot as well as being a dinosaur.

Cameron isn't guilty of any crime, ham faced clown that he is.
His moral judgement is what is in question and the question is surely whether his family financial decisions make him fit to be Prime Minister.

[Colr]

The SNP would have taken a different stance on this from Corbyn and Labour then?

My point was that Labour are not a credable alternative to the Tories.

[Colr]

Cameron is a right slippery *******. He should have just owned up on day 1 but the hypocrisy of criticising others is way more damning in any case. He should probably just go but the prospect of ending up with The Buffoon or Osbourne as PM is terrifying.

Like the but Boris and his family are even more dodgy?

[Colr]

Complete dishonesty from Cameron from day one. I genuinely think this could be the end for him, either by dint of public opinion or disloyal backbenchers turning on him. As no actual laws have been broken (yet), his best hope is a compliant media finding other headlines and the public losing interest in the story.

He was going after the referendum but not that looks definite.

[Colr]

Ken is obviously an idiot as well as being a dinosaur.

Cameron isn't guilty of any crime, ham faced clown that he is.
His moral judgement is what is in question and the question is surely whether his family financial decisions make him fit to be Prime Minister.

Can you imagine the kind of state Ken would run?

Jail for thoughtcrimes would feature, I'm sure!

[hibsbollah]

If the Tory press find another tax avoiding target (a left wing politician, preferably), the public might just assume everyones at it and damn all politicians. Or it may be that the public make that assumption anyway and the Cameron revelations dont surprise them. I'd like to see some polling on how this has affected voting intention/individual ratings.


And as as if by magic...a yougov poll 2 hours ago! Camerons approval ratings taking a hammering, Corbyn now ahead of him in the polls, despite months of Murdochs ever desperate pummelling.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2016/apr/08/cameron-offshore-tax-panama-resign-hypocrisy-labour-accuses-cameron-of-hypocrisy-after-he-admits-profiting-from-offshore-trust-politics-live

i see a leadership challenge, possibly from the Eurosceptic right. Great news for those of us sick of his nauseating arrogance, whoevers waiting in the wings:aok:

[steakbake]

Great news for those of us who can't stand the Tories and love seeing them tearing themselves apart.

Bad news for those who see our future in the European Union.

This could decide the referendum. Possibly also the future of the UK... would be ironic if shenanigans in Panama, which created the Union, also saw it finished.

[snooky]

The Financial Times has apparently unearthed an interesting letter from David Cameron to the president of the European Council in 2013.

[AndyM_1875]

Can you imagine the kind of state Ken would run?

Jail for thoughtcrimes would feature, I'm sure!

For the Labour Party he is absolute cancer.
Sooner this stupid Corbyn experiment is binned the better.

[CropleyWasGod]

The Financial Times has apparently unearthed an interesting letter from David Cameron to the president of the European Council in 2013.

I actually think he has a good case to make in that letter.

However, we're now in the court of public opinion, which won't be bothered with such stuff.

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

The Financial Times has apparently unearthed an interesting letter from David Cameron to the president of the European Council in 2013.

See Post 28 :wink:

[steakbake]

For the Labour Party he is absolute cancer.
Sooner this stupid Corbyn experiment is binned the better.

Labour and Tories are two cheeks of the same arse. There is a consensus at Westminster between the two of them that maintains the status quo and prevents any real and meaningful change. They are vehicles of the political ambitions and pretensions of the established order.

I like Corbyn for the different views he represents which put the ****s up the others because they're dangerous ideas and threaten what they feel, is their rightful power and place in society.

[ronaldo7]

For the Labour Party he is absolute cancer.
Sooner this stupid Corbyn experiment is binned the better.

All that democracy stuff is just mince eh.:rolleyes:

[ronaldo7]

http://youtu.be/AM0EsnJ3LKw

Channel 4 get on the case.

[AndyM_1875]

Labour and Tories are two cheeks of the same arse. There is a consensus at Westminster between the two of them that maintains the status quo and prevents any real and meaningful change. They are vehicles of the political ambitions and pretensions of the established order.

I like Corbyn for the different views he represents which put the ****s up the others because they're dangerous ideas and threaten what they feel, is their rightful power and place in society.

You'll not get much different with any other party. The wishy washy supposed social democracy of the SNP is hardly the great anti establishment position.

My issue with Corbyn is not his position on the left axis. It's his bloody awful displays at PMQs, his inability to hammer an abysmal Tory government and the fact that he is not engaging with the public. The polls are terrible & my opinion is he's an activist, not a leader & in short he's too old .

[stoneyburn hibs]

Cameron has been heavy challenged on it, then nothing. He'd have been emptied by now in other European countries. It's like the Tories are a one party nation.

[hibsbollah]

You'll not get much different with any other party. The wishy washy supposed social democracy of the SNP is hardly the great anti establishment position.

My issue with Corbyn is not his position on the left axis. It's his bloody awful displays at PMQs, his inability to hammer an abysmal Tory government and the fact that he is not engaging with the public. The polls are terrible & my opinion is he's an activist, not a leader & in short he's too old .

Have you looked at the polls since he became leader? He's holding up well.

[steakbake]

Have you looked at the polls since he became leader? He's holding up well.

Ahead even, tonight in one of them. It's the blairites who are out of touch not Corbyn's lot.

[AndyM_1875]

Have you looked at the polls since he became leader? He's holding up well.

Yes, several have been sub 30%. But he'll be judged on results in 2016 & 2017. If the results are decent he'll stay, if not, he'll get the visit from the men in Gray suits.

[Colr]

For the Labour Party he is absolute cancer.
Sooner this stupid Corbyn experiment is binned the better.

Yes, but clearly the left are driven by their strong sense of ethics and the common good......or so you might think.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/london-mayor-election/mayor-of-london/9136015/How-Ken-Livingstone-funnelled-238000-through-tax-avoidance-scheme.html

[hibsbollah]

Yes, but clearly the left are driven by their strong sense of ethics and the common good......or so you might think.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/london-mayor-election/mayor-of-london/9136015/How-Ken-Livingstone-funnelled-238000-through-tax-avoidance-scheme.html

With perfect timing, the Tory press divert attention away from the man in trouble. I just wasn't expecting my prediction to be fulfilled in under 24 hours.

[Colr]

With perfect timing, the Tory press divert attention away from the man in trouble. I just wasn't expecting my prediction to be fulfilled in under 24 hours.

That reminds me of the courtroom scene in Liar! Liar! When Jim Carey leaps to his feet at hearing a point of evidence!

"I object!" He shouts.
"Why?" Asks the judge.
" Because its devistating to my case!!" He admits.

[grunt]

With perfect timing, the Tory press divert attention away from the man in trouble. I just wasn't expecting my prediction to be fulfilled in under 24 hours.That article is 4 years old. But still relevant. Livingstone was engaged in tax avoidance, same as Cameron. Nothing illegal about it.

[hibsbollah]

Its not true then?

That he put some of his earnings into his company and paid some of it as a wage? Probably.

There's no offshore element and the sums are infinitesimal compared to the Panama Papers revelations, but that's not the point of course.

By contrast, The Telegraph's Saturday take on the much bigger Cameron story? 'Cameron To Publish Last Six Years Tax Returns'. :faf: :faf:

[hibsbollah]

That article is 4 years old. But still relevant. Livingstone was engaged in tax avoidance, same as Cameron. Nothing illegal about it.

The legality or otherwise of tax avoidance isn't really the story.

[grunt]

There's no offshore element and the sums are infinitesimal compared to the Panama Papers revelations, but that's not the point of course.I don't understand why the fact that the money is kept offshore is an issue.

On the question of relative size of the amounts, Livingstone put £750k through his company to enjoy paying tax at Corporation Tax rates rather than the higher rate Income tax he would otherwise have paid. Cameron's shares were worth £30k?

[AndyM_1875]

Yes, but clearly the left are driven by their strong sense of ethics and the common good......or so you might think.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/london-mayor-election/mayor-of-london/9136015/How-Ken-Livingstone-funnelled-238000-through-tax-avoidance-scheme.html

The choice for labour isn't between the Corbyn and Blairites, both are a dead end electorally.
The party needs to present itself as a modern pro european democratic socialist/social Democratic Party in touch with the electorate. Corbyn and Blair are yesterday's men.

[hibsbollah]

I don't understand why the fact that the money is kept offshore is an issue.

On the question of relative size of the amounts, Livingstone put £750k through his company to enjoy paying tax at Corporation Tax rates rather than the higher rate Income tax he would otherwise have paid. Cameron's shares were worth £30k?

To be clear, I'm not a Ken Livingston fan. I'm not in a rush to defend him against something that you've just pointed out was reported to have happened four years ago. If he did it then he's just as culpable.

The most important difference between the two is of course, Ken Livingston isn't the Prime Minister.

[hibsbollah]

The choice for labour isn't between the Corbyn and Blairites, both are a dead end electorally.
The party needs to present itself as a modern pro european democratic socialist/social Democratic Party in touch with the electorate. Corbyn and Blair are yesterday's men.

You might well be right about some of that, but it's a bit off topic unless Blair's been named in the Panama Papers? (Which wouldn't surprise me)

[hibsbollah]

I don't understand why the fact that the money is kept offshore is an issue.

On the question of relative size of the amounts, Livingstone put £750k through his company to enjoy paying tax at Corporation Tax rates rather than the higher rate Income tax he would otherwise have paid. Cameron's shares were worth £30k?

It's 'an issue' because that's what the Panama Papers story is about. Not Livingston or double standards or why some people dont think Labour are electable under Corbyn.

[Colr]

It's 'an issue' because that's what the Panama Papers story is about. Not Livingston or double standards or why some people dont think Labour are electable under Corbyn.

Double standards is EXACTLY the issue.

[cabbageandribs1875]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-36002759


Authorities in El Salvador have raided the offices of the Panama law firm at the centre of a massive data leak, the attorney general's office says.


oh dear :greengrin

[hibsbollah]

Double standards is EXACTLY the issue.

Only if you're gaslighting.

[CropleyWasGod]

Heard an interesting opinion this morning on Cameron 's tax affairs.

Given that the Panamanian company paid little or no tax, it could afford to pay higher dividends. Accordingly, Cameron paid more tax at a Higher Rate (32.5%) than he would have had the company paid UK tax at 23% or so.

So the man is actually a patriot 😈

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

[Colr]

Only if you're gaslighting.

??????????

Cameron's double standards are not the issue? Someone bring Jimmy Carr up to speed as well!

[hibsbollah]

Channel 4 News reporting they asked 21 cabinet members of they had offshore interests. 3 said no, 18 refused to answer.

[snooky]

Heard an interesting opinion this morning on Cameron 's tax affairs.

Given that the Panamanian company paid little or no tax, it could afford to pay higher dividends. Accordingly, Cameron paid more tax at a Higher Rate (32.5%) than he would have had the company paid UK tax at 23% or so.

So the man is actually a patriot 😈

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

So are smokers and boozers cos they pay higher taxes.
Rich folk just hire taxis ;-)

[ronaldo7]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-36002759


Authorities in El Salvador have raided the offices of the Panama law firm at the centre of a massive data leak, the attorney general's office says.


oh dear :greengrin





Lovin yer avatar:aok:

[Colr]

Corbyn's perspective is revealing. Inheritance tax rules should be reviewed as each pound not paid is a pound he can't spend on public services.

I would says voidable by the rich which is not available to the rest of u us means the burden of public services is not being borne across all groups and is allowing the rich to widen the gap as well as diminishing social mobility

[Colr]

Actually. To be fair, to the end of the interview he made my point.

[CropleyWasGod]

Corbyn's perspective is revealing. Inheritance tax rules should be reviewed as each pound not paid is a pound he can't spend on public services.

I would says voidable by the rich which is not available to the rest of u us means the burden of public services is not being borne across all groups and is allowing the rich to widen the gap as well as diminishing social mobility
IHT contributes relatively little to the Treasury.

Rather than the political point - scoring, why should review of the tax legislation be limited to just that tax? As I've said before, the real issues are being lost here.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

[Colr]

IHT contributes relatively little to the Treasury.

Rather than the political point - scoring, why should review of the tax legislation be limited to just that tax? As I've said before, the real issues are being lost here.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

All taxes are reviewed in the budget each year. It takes political tides for some ideas to gain traction

[CropleyWasGod]

All taxes are reviewed in the budget each year. It takes political tides for some ideas to gain traction
I'm talking about wider issues, which have less to do with politics and a lot more to do with legislation.

The tinkering with taxes that happens each year does very little to address the questions of tax avoidance.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

[Colr]

I'm talking about wider issues, which have less to do with politics and a lot more to do with legislation.

The tinkering with taxes that happens each year does very little to address the questions of tax avoidance.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Politicians enact legislation.

It can't anything but political as it requires coalescing varied views into policy, law and administration

[CropleyWasGod]

Politicians enact legislation.

It can't anything but political as it requires coalescing varied views into policy, law and administration
So we have a few political casualties, and then nothing happens....until the next so-called scandal. Meanwhile, successive Chancellors trumpet "anti-avoidance legislation ", whilst accountants and tax professionals roll their eyes and mutter "here we go again. .....".



Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

The First Minister has published her tax return.

https://t.co/qj7iEyx0WW

Nicola pays tax on her full salary entitlement but only draws her salary at its 2008/09 level. The balance is automatically paid to the Scottish Government for use in general public spending. In 2014/15 Nicola paid around £3,000 into the Scottish Government consolidated fund.

[Colr]

The First Minister has published her tax return.

https://t.co/qj7iEyx0WW

Nicola pays tax on her full salary entitlement but only draws her salary at its 2008/09 level. The balance is automatically paid to the Scottish Government for use in general public spending. In 2014/15 Nicola paid around £3,000 into the Scottish Government consolidated fund.

So she is paying extra tax?

[CropleyWasGod]

So she is paying extra tax?
She's paying the correct amount of tax on her official salary. The contribution that goes to the Government comes out of her net salary.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

[Colr]

She's paying the correct amount of tax on her official salary. The contribution that goes to the Government comes out of her net salary.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

But she's paying tax on tax she doesn't receive no?

Or is she effectively taking the salary then giving it back ( although it doesn't pass through her account).

[CropleyWasGod]

But she's paying tax on tax she doesn't receive no?

Or is she effectively taking the salary then giving it back ( although it doesn't pass through her account).
Both, actually.



Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

[Colr]

Both, actually.



Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

She could gift aid the I draw element instead of paying tax to the UK exchequer making sure it stays in Scotland.

[CropleyWasGod]

She could gift aid the I draw element instead of paying tax to the UK exchequer making sure it stays in Scotland.
The SG isn't a charity AFAIK :)

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

[Colr]

The SG isn't a charity AFAIK :)

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Daily Mail would disagree!! Gift aid to Scottish charities, then.

[CropleyWasGod]

Daily Mail would disagree!! Gift aid to Scottish charities, then.
Then the SG isn't getting the money.
The way NS is doing it, the SG gets all of it.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

[Colr]

Then the SG isn't getting the money. It's only getting 25% of the donation.
The way NS is doing it, the SG gets all of it. It also gets the IT, under the new regime.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

But the tax she pays goes to the UK treasury doesn't it (until now that is)? Or am I misunderstanding the arrangement.

[CropleyWasGod]

But the tax she pays goes to the UK treasury doesn't it (until now that is)? Or am I misunderstanding the arrangement.
As things stand, she pays her "excess salary " to the SG. Let's say it's 10k.

If she were to Gift Aid that 10k to a Scottish charity, the SG would get nothing. In fact, they would possibly have to pay the charity 2.5k. (I say possibly, as I'm not sure if the Gift Aid system has been devolved).

Under both arrangements, the tax deducted from her salary would be the same.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

[lapsedhibee]

So we have a few political casualties, and then nothing happens....until the next so-called scandal. Meanwhile, successive Chancellors trumpet "anti-avoidance legislation ", whilst accountants and tax professionals roll their eyes and mutter "here we go again. .....".


Why would they be rolling their eyes, when they have so much to gain by the system and particularly exemptions/reliefs on capital taxes remaining so complicated (or indeed becoming more complicated, as the infernal tinkering seems to increase every year)? :confused:

[CropleyWasGod]

Why would they be rolling their eyes, when they have so much to gain by the system and particularly exemptions/reliefs on capital taxes remaining so complicated (or indeed becoming more complicated, as the infernal tinkering seems to increase every year)? :confused:

Because each raft of A-A legislation is trumpeted as being "the answer", when all it does it put a challenge out to those who specialise in aggressive avoidance schemes. It's they who gain, and not accountants in general, who have to deal with the fallout of clients moaning "if Amazon can do it, why can't I?".

[lapsedhibee]

Because each raft of A-A legislation is trumpeted as being "the answer", when all it does it put a challenge out to those who specialise in aggressive avoidance schemes. It's they who gain, and not accountants in general, who have to deal with the fallout of clients moaning "if Amazon can do it, why can't I?".

Ah, I get you now. Rolling their eyes at the futility of the tinkering. Quite agree. But do you not agree that if it wasn't for the continuing complexity of the tax system in general, there would be less work for (especially) 'tax professionals' and (more generally) accountants? Even quite numerate laypeople struggle with self-assessment forms, for example, driving some into the hands of professionals.

[CropleyWasGod]

Ah, I get you now. Rolling their eyes at the futility of the tinkering. Quite agree. But do you not agree that if it wasn't for the continuing complexity of the tax system in general, there would be less work for (especially) 'tax professionals' and (more generally) accountants? Even quite numerate laypeople struggle with self-assessment forms, for example, driving some into the hands of professionals.

There's probably 2 distinct points here.

There's the anti-avoidance tinkering, which was the original point.

And then there's "simplification", which is another word that has accountants running for cover. You're correct that, in its current form, the self-assessment system is not as user-friendly as it could be.