Geoffrey Cox

M0nica

Evasion, WWM2 or avoidance? If it was evasion the HMRC would be onto him by now.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/nov/12/boris-johnson-holiday-villa-linked-to-zac-goldsmith-firms-accused-of-tax-evasion

'Accused' is not evasion. if convicted, it is evasion. Until then it is avoidance on the basis of innocent until proved guilty.

From the article in my link:

"Court papers obtained by the Guardian show tax inspectors ordered two property companies owned by the Goldsmith family to pay €24m (£20m) in unpaid taxes and fines after investigating what they said was a suspicious property deal.

The tax authority’s findings have been upheld by one of Spain’s highest courts, with judges agreeing the companies effectively engaged in a deliberate effort to evade tax and committed “serious” violations of the law."

That's more than an accusation. The Spanish court has ruled he owes the money, but he's appealing.

M0nica

Evasion, WWM2 or avoidance? If it was evasion the HMRC would be onto him by now.

The fact that the company has evaded €millions suggests rather that the crime was committed in Europe.

Don’t you agree?

M0nica

'Accused' is not evasion. if convicted, it is evasion. Until then it is avoidance on the basis of innocent until proved guilty.

No it isn’t avoidance. They are quite distinct things, and should never be conflated.

If I do something I believe is tax avoidance and legal, and someone says it is evasion. It only crosses the line of legal avoidance to illegal evasion, when the claim is legally proven.

M0nica

If I do something I believe is tax avoidance and legal, and someone says it is evasion. It only crosses the line of legal avoidance to illegal evasion, when the claim is legally proven.

Tax evasion is a deliberate act of avoiding tax by illegal means.

Companies such as the one we are talking about will be absolutely clear of the difference between avoidance and evasion.

They constantly take advise over tax matters.

The really sad thing is that HMRC worked closely with European countries over tax evasion during our membership through a particular scheme know as Fiscalis, which allowed officers to engage, travel to other European countries and share information. This proved both informative and preventative of evasion. It was an excellent scheme, and proved extremely lucrative for tax revenue.

I know very well the difference between tax evasion and tax avoidance.

But there have been many cases over the years where people placed their money into investments that they honestly believed were legal tax avoidance investments, only to have the HMRC, usually years later, decide that these schemes are evasion.

Deliberate tax evasion is evasion, but there is a clear rule of law, that people are innocent of any crime until proved guilty. That includes murderers, rapists and tax evaders.

Ignorance of the law is no excuse I’m afraid.

If you are planning to use a know tax avoidance scheme, you should take advise before you do. Accountants should if they are any good know if the scheme has HMRC approval.

Accountancy firms make huge amounts of money helping companies to plan their tax, and in particular devising tax avoidance schemes. These schemes should always be submitted to HMRC for approval, if not they run the risk of being found not complying with tax rules. That is a risk some tax avoiders appear to be willing to undertake. It is their decision. But it is a risk and it is no good moaning if the avoidance is later found to be breaking the law.

Germanshepherdsmum

I understand the point you are making about QCs commanding high fees, so there is no logical reason why Cox should not expect to be rewarded accordingly for his services.

But if, as alleged, he used his Parliamentary office and, presumably, Parliamentary time, then that is an issue.

I once worked as a 'temp' for a company in London and was caught filling out my agency time-sheet 10 minutes before the official lunch-break - I was reprimanded by the supervisor and told "you do not do your private work in the company's time". I was told to deduct 15 minutes from my hours worked. A bit petty, but the principle is sound - I was being paid to do a job, as is Cox... and we the taxpayers are paying him.

My (then) lowly status as a shorthand-typist / translator, compared to Cox's esteemed role as a QC should make no difference to the principle.

Dickens

What a miserable supervisor you had. I doubt that was a happy office.

As regards Cox, if he had a video conference scheduled he had the option of going to his chambers for it (much nicer than his parliamentary office I’m sure) and taking time away from the House, or doing the conference between parliamentary duties and therefore being present in the House for much longer. He chose the latter, thereby prioritising his public duties over his private work. I fully support that choice.

Germanshepherdsmum If you think Dickens had a miserable supervisor, I'm afraid you don't seem to realise that that kind of attitude isn't unusual.

I’m sure it isn’t growstuff, indeed I know it isn’t. I was trying to sympathise, ok?

Any thoughts about Douglas Ross, who despite being an MP, is also an MSP and somehow forgot that he also has a third job as a football referee? Happily he managed to remember just as the sleaze row was starting to be reported. That was lucky.

Alegrias1

Any thoughts about Douglas Ross, who despite being an MP, is also an MSP and somehow forgot that he also has a third job as a football referee? Happily he managed to remember just as the sleaze row was starting to be reported. That was lucky.

Phew.!

Is he related to Meghan, she of the poor memory?

I have thoughts about all MP’s ( including MSP’s) who feather their nests.At the moment it’s focussed on the Conservatives but we all know that it certainly isn’t a one Party problem.
I am amazed sometimes at how little care is taken by all politicians to get the political aspect of their words and actions right.And it’s their jobs! They aren’t plumbers or bakers.
They all know the British public will not tolerate greed from them ( it’s what provokes the most ire) and yet they still continue to do it.

It is clear currently that it is very much a one Party problem.

Oh it won’t be!
Just that the conservatives are the ones in government at the moment, with all eyes on them.

I have no problem with MPs having second jobs, as long as they are within the rules and the income is declared.

There's always exceptions to my rule, of course

www.holyrood.com/news/view,renewed-calls-for-ban-on-second-jobs-for-msps-after-ruth-davidson-takes-50000-pr-role_14610.htm

lemongrove

Oh it won’t be!
Just that the conservatives are the ones in government at the moment, with all eyes on them.

But it is - no denying this.

lemongrove

I have thoughts about all MP’s ( including MSP’s) who feather their nests.At the moment it’s focussed on the Conservatives but we all know that it certainly isn’t a one Party problem.
I am amazed sometimes at how little care is taken by all politicians to get the political aspect of their words and actions right.And it’s their jobs! They aren’t plumbers or bakers.
They all know the British public will not tolerate greed from them ( it’s what provokes the most ire) and yet they still continue to do it.

Well, it's not an LP problem. They only have three MPs who have a second job. As opposed to 90 tory MPs.

I posted a link about this for you on another thread earlier this week, lemon. Also a link to Parliament's Register of MPs interests so you and others could check the truth of this. I could do it again?

I am suggesting that implying it's equally a problem for other parties is stretching the truth somewhat...

Corruption and cronyism would be hard to prove amongst Labour MPs, whereas the whole of the U.K. could name a Tory.