Jeremy Paxman vs Russell Brand
Discussion
turbobloke said:
Rovinghawk said:
FredClogs said:
Inheritance tax is just a tax on good fortune
There are some who might question the idea of "good fortune" in these circumstances.FredClogs said:
SDLT and VAT are taxes on money transfers, Inheritance tax is just a tax on good fortune and CGT tax is a tax on gain of capital (obviously enough) which is generally but not always largely down to the growth of the economy as a whole and not particularly dependent on an individuals actions or skill in accumulating wealth.
Would you be happy to see 100% of your earnings going to the government if they gave you food and shelter as anything else is just capitalismFredClogs said:
turbobloke said:
Rovinghawk said:
FredClogs said:
Inheritance tax is just a tax on good fortune
There are some who might question the idea of "good fortune" in these circumstances.In the context of inheritance tax, surely those not inheriting a mansion and the rest should be in for a tax handout, if indeed IHT is paid on good fortune in the form of inheriting a mansion and a loaded bank account. Which is as daft as claiming IHT is a tax on good fortune.
IHT is overdue for abolition, the archaic left need to wake up...hardly anyone pays much anyway.
http://thebackbencher.co.uk/inheritance-tax-an-unn...
Link said:
There’s a myriad of reasons to oppose inheritance tax, this is just a taster of a few: that it was part of the Conservative manifesto, that it is born out of a negative, jealous emotion not a desire to do good, that this would be the third, sometimes fourth form of taxation on the same money, that it’s natural for an individual to want to give to their loved ones upon death and so the Government are contravening on a natural human instinct by their very own admission, and that the Government have no place in a private transaction. Inheritance tax is an awful tax. It’s not the first that needs to go, but that doesn’t make it any less terrible, destructive, and invasive.
When none other than Tony Benn avoids IHT you know it's time is up as well as his.turbobloke said:
FredClogs said:
turbobloke said:
Rovinghawk said:
FredClogs said:
Inheritance tax is just a tax on good fortune
There are some who might question the idea of "good fortune" in these circumstances.In the context of inheritance tax, surely those not inheriting a mansion and the rest should be in for a tax handout, if indeed IHT is paid on good fortune in the form of inheriting a mansion and a loaded bank account. Which is as daft as claiming IHT is a tax on good fortune.
IHT is overdue for abolition, the archaic left need to wake up...hardly anyone pays much anyway.
http://thebackbencher.co.uk/inheritance-tax-an-unn...
Link said:
There’s a myriad of reasons to oppose inheritance tax, this is just a taster of a few: that it was part of the Conservative manifesto, that it is born out of a negative, jealous emotion not a desire to do good, that this would be the third, sometimes fourth form of taxation on the same money, that it’s natural for an individual to want to give to their loved ones upon death and so the Government are contravening on a natural human instinct by their very own admission, and that the Government have no place in a private transaction. Inheritance tax is an awful tax. It’s not the first that needs to go, but that doesn’t make it any less terrible, destructive, and invasive.
When none other than Tony Benn avoids IHT you know it's time is up as well as his.mybrainhurts said:
e21Mark said:
steveatesh said:
e21Mark said:
Was that not one of the points though? That the current establishment allow these companies to avoid paying by removing their obligation?
At the moment they don't have an obligation to remove, they operate entirely within the financial framework of the EU. So just for clarity, are you saying they should do away with one of the four pillars of the EU, freedom to move capital?
Rather than stimulating investment, aggressive tax avoidance is a manifestation of systemic failures of global tax policies, leading to market distortions, economic free-riding, slower rates of global growth and widening wealth disparities within and between nation states. My emotions don't come into it.
e21Mark said:
mybrainhurts said:
e21Mark said:
steveatesh said:
e21Mark said:
Was that not one of the points though? That the current establishment allow these companies to avoid paying by removing their obligation?
At the moment they don't have an obligation to remove, they operate entirely within the financial framework of the EU. So just for clarity, are you saying they should do away with one of the four pillars of the EU, freedom to move capital?
Rather than stimulating investment, aggressive tax avoidance is a manifestation of systemic failures of global tax policies, leading to market distortions, economic free-riding, slower rates of global growth and widening wealth disparities within and between nation states. My emotions don't come into it.
e21Mark said:
Is this what you believe happened with Google, Amazon et al, where the chair of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC), accused Google of "devious, calculating, and unethical" behaviour.?
Rather than stimulating investment, aggressive tax avoidance is a manifestation of systemic failures of global tax policies, leading to market distortions, economic free-riding, slower rates of global growth and widening wealth disparities within and between nation states. My emotions don't come into it.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of global tax policies, the fact remains that google, Amazon et al acted entirely within the current EU financial framework. They did nothing wrong and the PAC chair should have been more clued up. However, Even if she knew I presume she did not make a statement to that fact because the government never disclose involvement of the EU and it is very easy to demonise big business rather than look at their own political short comings. Rather than stimulating investment, aggressive tax avoidance is a manifestation of systemic failures of global tax policies, leading to market distortions, economic free-riding, slower rates of global growth and widening wealth disparities within and between nation states. My emotions don't come into it.
The mainstream press didn't disclose this either because even if they bothered to do any actual research, why let the facts get in the way of a good sensationalist story? It was widely covered however in specialist blogs such as EU Referendum.
I'm curious as to what is the difference between aggressive tax avoidance and ordinary tax avoidance?
mybrainhurts said:
steveatesh said:
I'm curious as to what is the difference between aggressive tax avoidance and ordinary tax avoidance?
That tickled me, too. I believe you have to growl when you submit your tax return....
turbobloke said:
mybrainhurts said:
steveatesh said:
I'm curious as to what is the difference between aggressive tax avoidance and ordinary tax avoidance?
That tickled me, too. I believe you have to growl when you submit your tax return....Zod said:
turbobloke said:
mybrainhurts said:
steveatesh said:
I'm curious as to what is the difference between aggressive tax avoidance and ordinary tax avoidance?
That tickled me, too. I believe you have to growl when you submit your tax return....FFS, he can't even afford to shave.
LucreLout said:
He's just another champagne socialist milking the right on crowd for all they're worth. Idiots, the lot of them.
Is the "right on crowd" really worth that much though?As long as he is raising issues that people might care about that go against the moral grain of society, you can't knock him too much.
Unless you're inferring that all the issues he's raised are actually irrelevant?
Dave
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff