Tax Havens

www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2016/04/13/david-cameron-proves-he-is-corruptions-friend-not-its-enemy/

This is about the anti-corruption conference next month.
Cameron said in PMQs that they were not going to ask the tax havens to open up their books so there is transparency. So what's the point of their being a conference led by him on the sibject?

I also watched some of the debate this afternoon on the subject of tax havens and transparency. All the Tory front bench left as McDonnell started speaking.
I think it is most disrespectful.

After reading the paper today, my grandson asked, "Why do politicians choose to behave the way they do?"
Exactly.

From the tax returns, I would like to know how Osborne manages his money so he gets only three pounds in bank interest. Very clever with the amount he must put in his bank account. I get more than him.

So how come there is so much hidden cash?

Have you finished your packing * non*? Have a good time wherever you are going. The temperatures are looking good around the Mediterranean.

Perhaps those who are having difficulty understanding should listen to this afternoon's phone-in on Radio 4 where they will probably learn quite a lot.

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b076mml7

Near the beginning one of the people who arranges offshore accounts explains how everything he does is controlled by the FCA.

Yes I think you are absolutely correct dev

I read a letter in the Guardian earlier this week about the tax haven situation where the writer quoted Simon Hoggard (2008 MPs Expenses Scandal) -“But as so often in public life, it’s not what’s illegal but what is permitted that is the real scandal.”
For me the real issue is not about DC's or JC's tax returns. They are a very small tip of a much bigger iceberg. I am absolutely convinced that there is a lot more to be discovered which would shock we, the 'little people', who actually have no choice but to pay, and to pay dearly. How many millions do you need stuffed away to wield real power - 1m, 10m, 100m? We may think we are 'free' but we are anything but, even in a democracy like ours. The very rich own vast tracks of land (a finite source), raw resources, businesses reliant on those and, by default, they control the jobs, the pay, the services etc the rest of us are permitted to enjoy. We are only as free as the rich and powerful permit us to be.

It can be cheaper to fly to many European cities from the UK than it is to travel by train within the UK. I think you're just showing off. ;-)

Bon voyage! Gute Reise!

Enjoy your trip,

This is so petty I'm going to go and pack for my trip to Europe. Yes, I am one of those people who can afford the air fare so must be right wing and wealthy. As if!

Nonnie, you said people I think you meant some people, wrong to assume everyone would avoid tax legally if they could because it applies to some people not all people

Duh! Tax avoidance means not paying taxes for something on which taxes are due. Taxes were never intended to be paid on ISAs.

No I wasn't talking about micro managing that is not the issue when we are talking about risk to the exchequer. As long as there are adequate systems in place to avoid employee fraud and the CEO knows about them, then day to day managing should be left to the employees. What I am talking about is the bigger picture, and whether the CEOs are involved in avoidance or suppression or indeed evasion. That is the problem we need to tackle. This may well be with or without the knowledge of the external auditors, but undoubtedly it is a major issue.

Annie 'with respect' (which usually means the opposite) you are the one making assumptions which are tiresome and repetitive, I have not and do not do such a thing. Yet again you take personally something which was not directed at you, a very narrow attitude.

White then we have different experiences, I worked in a very large organisation where the Directors delegated things they didn't need to be directly involved in. There were many such things they left to their trusted advisers. You may consider that to be a risk but I would consider a CEO who couldn't delegate to be a much bigger risk. Micro managing is not possible in a huge company.

ISAs are tax avoidance, they were always intended to be so. Tax avoidance, for those who don't understand, means not paying tax on something which otherwise would be taxable! Simple - other forms of saving are taxable. There are perfectly legal and honourable ways of avoiding tax e.g. buying tools of the trade is tax deductible and I doubt if anyone would object to that.

I meant occurred

Nonnie you said 'if people can avoid tax legally, they will ' all I did was say I would not avoid tax. So you were wrong , perhaps it hasn't a cured to you that I am a person , as for tiresome and repetitive , with respect - you too

People like Duncan matter very little in the scheme of things. He simply showed himself up as someone lacking judgement. Everyone will move on but he will always be judged from those comments, so he is his own worse enemy really.

Blimey * nonnie* didn't mean to rattle your cage. Like you I am speaking from experience and in my experience, company CEOs etc generally know exactly what is going on. If they don't I would consider them a risk.

Duncan's comments were truly shocking- and so so wrong. Many of us have been successful in life and very comfortably off- through our very own efforts and hard word, and perhaps fortitude to some extent- and are proud to pay fair taxes.

Shame on him, truly.

Nonnie, no they're not considered tax avoidance. They're tax minimisation, as is claiming legitimate business expenses on a tax return. ISAs were NEVER intended to be taxed, so there's no tax to avoid.

Were any of the following people participants in the phone-in?

www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/why-the-very-rich-arent-giving-much-of-their-fortunes-to-their-kids/2014/08/10/4a9551b4-1ccc-11e4-82f9-2cd6fa8da5c4_story.html

ISAs are tax avoidance, they are not tax evasion. They were set up to avoid tax, simple.

I do have experience of big companies bank accounts, enough said.

Holding ISAs isn't tax avoidance. ISAs were set up to be tax-free by the government to encourage people to save by giving a higher rate of interest. They were never intended to be subject to tax.

Nonnie, Investing in foreign companies, as most banks and pension schemes do, is not the same as having money in overseas accounts. I don't know the details of big companies' bank accounts, but I doubt very much whether (for example) Nissan pays its UK workers and suppliers from a Japanese bank. As far as I know, Nissan (and other big companies) pay their taxes in the relevant countries, although their accountants will work hard to pay the right amount (not too much and not too little). As we know, there are some big companies who seem to be pushing it to the limit, eg. Google. The point is that Nissan employees still have to pay tax, as do pension recipients.

Some people with money in so-called tax havens are British, make their money in the UK, but hold money in overseas accounts specifically to avoid UK tax. This isn't the same thing at all.

White I worked with them so I knew them and therefore think I am the best person to have an opinion on how 'clueless' they were. I agree they were responsible, never said they were not and never said they did anything illegal! Once again I have to correct other's assumptions. It is getting very repetitive.

Annie once again you are back to your personal circumstance and once again you imply that I have said something I haven't. I have not suggested you "avoided paying tax". Tiresome and repetetive.

I think I must resign as a Government Minister (other thread) as I once accidentally locked my DC in a car. I would hate that to get out, the press to have a field day and me to be judged as incompetent

nonnie With regard to your bosses, they are entirely responsible for their accounts and accounting practices. If they were clueless there is no excuse in law should their tax affairs be found wanting. I doubt they were as clueless as you thought they were.