Retrospective taxation campaign
Discussion
Elroy Blue said:
People who undertake serial tax avoidance are no better than the feral types who 'legally' receive benefits they have no right too. Both are bleeding the country dry.
What a load of tosh.Retrospective taxation is a vile precedence and one we should ALL be against.
State pensions are bleeding the country dry, not a few people doing what was perfectly legal and above board, looking after their tax affairs in the best way possible.
Before you start, I am one of those souls that has lost out due to the activities of these people [Small company tax rises in the last few years] so if anything I 'should' say damn their hides, but I don't because the law is morally wrong and I can't support that no matter how much these individuals has finally cost me.
Serial tax avoidance is a good thing, it always will be in my books.
Gene Vincent said:
Elroy Blue said:
People who undertake serial tax avoidance are no better than the feral types who 'legally' receive benefits they have no right too. Both are bleeding the country dry.
What a load of tosh.Retrospective taxation is a vile precedence and one we should ALL be against.
State pensions are bleeding the country dry, not a few people doing what was perfectly legal and above board, looking after their tax affairs in the best way possible.
Before you start, I am one of those souls that has lost out due to the activities of these people [Small company tax rises in the last few years] so if anything I 'should' say damn their hides, but I don't because the law is morally wrong and I can't support that no matter how much these individuals has finally cost me.
Serial tax avoidance is a good thing, it always will be in my books.
I've always paid my fair share, it makes money tighter than it would be other wise but everybody should be feeling the pinch at the moment.
State pensions are only going to get more expensive and we are going to have to fund them some how.
not260 said:
Gene Vincent said:
Elroy Blue said:
People who undertake serial tax avoidance are no better than the feral types who 'legally' receive benefits they have no right too. Both are bleeding the country dry.
What a load of tosh.Retrospective taxation is a vile precedence and one we should ALL be against.
State pensions are bleeding the country dry, not a few people doing what was perfectly legal and above board, looking after their tax affairs in the best way possible.
Before you start, I am one of those souls that has lost out due to the activities of these people [Small company tax rises in the last few years] so if anything I 'should' say damn their hides, but I don't because the law is morally wrong and I can't support that no matter how much these individuals has finally cost me.
Serial tax avoidance is a good thing, it always will be in my books.
I've always paid my fair share, it makes money tighter than it would be other wise but everybody should be feeling the pinch at the moment.
State pensions are only going to get more expensive and we are going to have to fund them some how.
Tesco or Sainsburys cannot retrospectively collect money from you if the sold something too cheap for the last 3 years can they.
If these two companies have a ticket price and then offer various ways to reduce the cost at the till they have a problem, this happened a few years ago with an Airline and they had to squeeze their belt to get through the mess.
The government shouldn't just milk the cash-cow [us] but should instead tighten the belt.
It is morally repugnant, it is equally morally repugnant [to me at least] that people actually think it is OK to allow this to happen.
It is wrong, and will remain wrong in any thinking persons mind, the supine will always accept state theft [and that is what we are talking about here] as they can't see the wood for the trees.
not260 said:
Somewhat ironic that you complain about people using and abusing the benefits system yet you feel it is justified and right to avoid taxes.
I've always paid my fair share, it makes money tighter than it would be other wise but everybody should be feeling the pinch at the moment.
State pensions are only going to get more expensive and we are going to have to fund them some how.
So another person against tax avoidance. Do you tell your employer or accountant to ignore your tax code? Do you pay tax on interest in ISAs? What about a pension? Do you make sure and pay tax on your pension contributions even though you don't need to?I've always paid my fair share, it makes money tighter than it would be other wise but everybody should be feeling the pinch at the moment.
State pensions are only going to get more expensive and we are going to have to fund them some how.
If you answered no to any of the above you are a filthy tax avoider...
SM
not260 said:
Somewhat ironic that you complain about people using and abusing the benefits system yet you feel it is justified and right to avoid taxes.
I've always paid my fair share, it makes money tighter than it would be other wise but everybody should be feeling the pinch at the moment.
State pensions are only going to get more expensive and we are going to have to fund them some how.
You avoid excess taxes to make sure you are only paying your fair share.I've always paid my fair share, it makes money tighter than it would be other wise but everybody should be feeling the pinch at the moment.
State pensions are only going to get more expensive and we are going to have to fund them some how.
10 Pence Short said:
A starter for 10...
A person paid £25,000 a year is required by their job to travel in order to visit clients. He is offered the choice of a fully expensed company car or £5000 additional salary to fund their own.
He works out that he will save £150 a month in income tax if he buys his own car, so takes that route.
Where does he stand morally with you? Is he a tax avoiding parasite, or just being tax efficient?
Not quite the same thing as people avoiding tens of thousands of pounds by claiming 'expenses' or mysteriously only earning ten grand a year on paper. I know someone who being self employed, takes it all to the max. He earns far more than I, but pays a miniscule amount of tax. Consequently he also 'legally' claims working family tax credit and such like. Legitimate?? It might well be, but it's pretty repugnant (especially when he's lambasting me about how all us public sector workers are the cause of every ill in the country)A person paid £25,000 a year is required by their job to travel in order to visit clients. He is offered the choice of a fully expensed company car or £5000 additional salary to fund their own.
He works out that he will save £150 a month in income tax if he buys his own car, so takes that route.
Where does he stand morally with you? Is he a tax avoiding parasite, or just being tax efficient?
Elroy Blue said:
10 Pence Short said:
A starter for 10...
A person paid £25,000 a year is required by their job to travel in order to visit clients. He is offered the choice of a fully expensed company car or £5000 additional salary to fund their own.
He works out that he will save £150 a month in income tax if he buys his own car, so takes that route.
Where does he stand morally with you? Is he a tax avoiding parasite, or just being tax efficient?
Not quite the same thing as people avoiding tens of thousands of pounds by claiming 'expenses' or mysteriously only earning ten grand a year on paper. I know someone who being self employed, takes it all to the max. He earns far more than I, but pays a miniscule amount of tax. Consequently he also 'legally' claims working family tax credit and such like. Legitimate?? It might well be, but it's pretty repugnant (especially when he's lambasting me about how all us public sector workers are the cause of every ill in the country)A person paid £25,000 a year is required by their job to travel in order to visit clients. He is offered the choice of a fully expensed company car or £5000 additional salary to fund their own.
He works out that he will save £150 a month in income tax if he buys his own car, so takes that route.
Where does he stand morally with you? Is he a tax avoiding parasite, or just being tax efficient?
Where do you draw the line in the sand?
Elroy Blue said:
Not quite the same thing as people avoiding tens of thousands of pounds by claiming 'expenses' or mysteriously only earning ten grand a year on paper. I know someone who being self employed, takes it all to the max. He earns far more than I, but pays a miniscule amount of tax. Consequently he also 'legally' claims working family tax credit and such like. Legitimate?? It might well be, but it's pretty repugnant (especially when he's lambasting me about how all us public sector workers are the cause of every ill in the country)
Public sector employee withgold standard pension, holiday pay, sick pay and training budget in "my self employed friend doesn't pay very much tax" shocker.
SM
I tink you know very well what I'm stating.
To deny that large scale tax avoidance takes place by constructive accounting is ridiculous. And my position remains that the people who carry this out are as morally repugnant as the bad back brigade who have never done a days work in their lives.
To deny that large scale tax avoidance takes place by constructive accounting is ridiculous. And my position remains that the people who carry this out are as morally repugnant as the bad back brigade who have never done a days work in their lives.
My understanding of this is that a "grey" loophole has been exploited. Not an established scheme such as isa allowances, tax codes or pension contributions.
We are all responsible for ensuring we pay our dues, for instance when I had my company car I chose a diesel fiesta to limit the influence it had on my tax code.
I can honestly say I have never avoided taxation, I have altered my tax code to reflect allowances that my employment entitles me to. These are negligible anyway.
We are all responsible for ensuring we pay our dues, for instance when I had my company car I chose a diesel fiesta to limit the influence it had on my tax code.
I can honestly say I have never avoided taxation, I have altered my tax code to reflect allowances that my employment entitles me to. These are negligible anyway.
Elroy Blue said:
I tink you know very well what I'm stating.
To deny that large scale tax avoidance takes place by constructive accounting is ridiculous. And my position remains that the people who carry this out are as morally repugnant as the bad back brigade who have never done a days work in their lives.
Well, no I don't know what you're stating.To deny that large scale tax avoidance takes place by constructive accounting is ridiculous. And my position remains that the people who carry this out are as morally repugnant as the bad back brigade who have never done a days work in their lives.
On one hand, people avoiding large sums are not ok, whereas those avoiding small sums are ok.
All I asked you was, where do you draw the line?
Are you able to answer a simple question?
Elroy Blue said:
I tink you know very well what I'm stating.
To deny that large scale tax avoidance takes place by constructive accounting is ridiculous. And my position remains that the people who carry this out are as morally repugnant as the bad back brigade who have never done a days work in their lives.
Let's hope that the state doesn't take some of your pension as a result of some retrospective taxation law reducing your contributions over the last few years eh!To deny that large scale tax avoidance takes place by constructive accounting is ridiculous. And my position remains that the people who carry this out are as morally repugnant as the bad back brigade who have never done a days work in their lives.
Once it starts, the precedent is created and we're all collectively f
ked.You support this bit of Taxation creep, so I'll look out for any squealing in the near future on that count.
It was not a legitimate tax avoidance scheme.
It was an attempt to evade tax by somewhat perverse interpretation of the tax laws that were never cleared with HMRC, what HMRC have done is to clarify the situation by bringing in rules that explicitly clarify the illegality of the situation these people were trying to exploit.
Sympathy level is low.
It was an attempt to evade tax by somewhat perverse interpretation of the tax laws that were never cleared with HMRC, what HMRC have done is to clarify the situation by bringing in rules that explicitly clarify the illegality of the situation these people were trying to exploit.
Sympathy level is low.
10 Pence Short said:
Well, no I don't know what you're stating.
On one hand, people avoiding large sums are not ok, whereas those avoiding small sums are ok.
All I asked you was, where do you draw the line?
Are you able to answer a simple question?
It's not a simple question and you know it. On one hand, people avoiding large sums are not ok, whereas those avoiding small sums are ok.
All I asked you was, where do you draw the line?
Are you able to answer a simple question?
I'm no tax guru but it's plain to see when an avoidance measure is taking the mick.
There isn't a line that can be drawn, the use of pensions, personal allowances and ISAs are a completely different kettle of fish to setting up complicated offshore companies.
The line is drawn where somebody uses schemes beyond the norm to gain an advantage to avoid making a "fair" contribution. I'm certainly no socialist but taxation has to be seen as equitable.
The line is drawn where somebody uses schemes beyond the norm to gain an advantage to avoid making a "fair" contribution. I'm certainly no socialist but taxation has to be seen as equitable.
Gene Vincent said:
Let's hope that the state doesn't take some of your pension as a result of some retrospective taxation law reducing your contributions over the last few years eh!
Except in this instance it isn't 'retrospective taxation law'.Some people interpreted an existing law in one way, the HMRC in another. They both disagreed, so the case went to court to be decided. In the end, it was decided the HMRC were right in their interpretation all along, and the money was owed.
During all of this, some people decided to continue with the interpretation that favoured them and their pockets. When it was later decided they were wrong in doing so, the HMRC quite rightly asked for their (overdue) tax.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff