Farage tax avoidance

Primrose53

Some people are desperate to get Farage into trouble and AFAIK have been disappointed. Remember all that banking business and the Bank had to apologise to him?

You’re right Primrose53, there are a lot of vested interests at stake. All I see is the amount of digging that is going on. He had to come clean today about misleading people about the purchase of his house in his constituency, pre-empting the adverse headlines of tomorrow. Ultimately if his enemies can find something on him it will be published, and the same is true of other eminent people.

Donald Trump has been convicted of, is it 34, felonies. He was still voted in as US President.

I think you’re being overly optimistic, Casdon

Casdon

Primrose53

Some people are desperate to get Farage into trouble and AFAIK have been disappointed. Remember all that banking business and the Bank had to apologise to him?

You’re right Primrose53, there are a lot of vested interests at stake. All I see is the amount of digging that is going on. He had to come clean today about misleading people about the purchase of his house in his constituency, pre-empting the adverse headlines of tomorrow. Ultimately if his enemies can find something on him it will be published, and the same is true of other eminent people.

👏👏👏

MaizieD

Donald Trump has been convicted of, is it 34, felonies. He was still voted in as US President.

I think you’re being overly optimistic, Casdon

Yes, but judges and juries are politically biased in the US, these convictions were by Democrat judges in Democrat states. Trump is certainly a crook and a womaniser but a great many politicians are just as bad.

Law in the US is blatantly political, the Republicans are just as bad thank goodness we don’t have that in the UK

Yet

David49

MaizieD

Donald Trump has been convicted of, is it 34, felonies. He was still voted in as US President.

I think you’re being overly optimistic, Casdon

Yes, but judges and juries are politically biased in the US, these convictions were by Democrat judges in Democrat states. Trump is certainly a crook and a womaniser but a great many politicians are just as bad.

Law in the US is blatantly political, the Republicans are just as bad thank goodness we don’t have that in the UK

Yes David, but he is POTUS so it matters a great deal more.
"But others do it too" is no excuse and sounds rather like one actually.

We are not America. Yet. But wait till, heaven help us, we get a Reform government. It’s in the name. And it people think they’re going to reform this country for the better they’re deluding themselves.

Farage "took back our sovereignty" from Europe but is openly offering it to America. Reform voters surely don't agree with that and I hope that they are getting ready to declare their opposition to asking the USA to get involved in our affairs.

I suspect that Reform voters have left the room as far as this thread is concerned.🤔

MayBee70

We are not America. Yet. But wait till, heaven help us, we get a Reform government. It’s in the name. And it people think they’re going to reform this country for the better they’re deluding themselves.

Absolutely!
Once in power, if that ever happens, they’d be faced with the same problems every government has.

They’d blame their inability to fulfil their pre-election promises.
The media including GN would publish all the dirt they could find re freebies, errors, etc.
Then there’d be the well they did it first defences.

Worst of all, we would see Farage even more often.

They’d blame their inability to fulfil their pre-election promises on the previous government(s).

David49 I find legal tax avoidance, in many cases, to be fairly tacky and unpalatable (and is especially so when a person presents himself as a patriotic and principled man of the people). I do have a little experience of legal tax loopholes, having worked for a very successful central London firm of tax lawyers, where I was pretty shocked to see the sorts of shenanigans that were recommended by lawyers to their wealthy clients seeking to legally sidestep paying taxes.

However, I think there are no excuses to be made for deliberate tax evasion and, in theory, such actions should be litigated.

My quote was that HMRC has not charged a single company under landmark legislation passed six years ago to crack down on corporate tax evasion.

Rich people and corporations can afford to employ the most skilled tax lawyers to run rings round understaffed and possibly less able government employees. I have read that the tax authorities try to assess which cases they are likely to win, and therefore litigated, and which cases should be settled in a civil setting through "compromise". It would appear that either no proper investigations have been made or that the imbalance in resources has meant that reduced payments are accepted rather than suspected wrongdoing being litigated.

The government gives tax concessions for many different reasons, for businesses and private citizens. One of those is £1m IHT relief for couples, you don’t pay VAT on Housing or rent, no CGT on your house. They are tax concessions just like any other allowance a business might take.

I do agree the celebrities should not be able to claim company status

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce845w70g0yo
On it trundles. BBC today raising major questions about Farage’s Clacton House purchase.

Casdon

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce845w70g0yo
On it trundles. BBC today raising major questions about Farage’s Clacton House purchase.

There is no doubt Farage is as slippery as an eel and a hypocrite too and financing the Clacton house probably was contrived.
However, the dispute will be between him or his partner and the revenue, as he has had an opinion at KC level I doubt the revenue will pursue any action.

We will watch this space David49, I’m sure there are journalists in pursuit.

According to the BBC story there is nothing illegal in giving money to another person to buy a house with. If it were then I suspect that many if us on here could be accused of illegality for financially helping children or grandchildren with a house purchase.

The charge is hypocrisy, not illegality.

I’m not sure that Farage supporters will be particularly bothered by that.

Correct, MaizieD

Yes, we can read MaizieD. I’m sure that as we speak they are onto all possible illegalities though, which is the point I’ve been making. If there is anything to disgrace or embarrass, it will be found.

Financing the house probably was done through her partners parents, as it is registered in her name, it’s what parents do all the time. Just because they live in a modest flat in Strasbourg does not mean they havn’t got considerable investments elsewhere.
Like Farage, Johnson was a liar and crook but that didn’t stop him getting elected.

According to the BBC story the parent’s company never seemed to make sufficient money for vast amounts of profit to be invested elsewhere, David.
Of course, there’s always the black economy to be considered 😆

Her parents do not apparently have that sort of money, neither does her registered gin company.

However no doubt people are out there trying to find out more now about her parents means, they stoop at nothing.

The irony is that Farage claimed the house was bought in his partner’s name to protect his security, the same excuse he gives for not running constituency surgeries.

News outlets are now publishing details which make it easy to identify the address - just as it did in Rayner’s case, resulting in vandalism of her property and potentially putting her personal safety at risk.

Farage made the announcement about buying the house to detract from allegations that he spends little time in his constituency. The one doesn’t follow the other. Is there any evidence he has spent more time there since the house purchase? Probably not.

It’s no secret that Farage invests in property. I suspect this is a house that neither he nor his partner have any intention of spending much time in but if they don’t, he can then claim it was because media intrusion has made it unsafe for them to do so. And he would be right.