Tory Peer Bamford under HMRC investigation for £500m

[Digga]

I know nothing of the specific tax issues. As others says, they are being investigate by HMRC but that, in and of itself, is not a measure of culpability. It remains to be seen, although JCB himself (Joeseph Cyril Bamford) was very creative with tax affairs and moved to Switzerland.

Digga snr was UK sales manager at HQ in mid 80's. The founder, JCB was a bit of a genius and definitely a grafter. Even back then, he'd walk through the factory and knew a lot of the guys on first name terms.

Sir Anthony, his son, came from a different mould. He was not the man Joe was but that is not to disparage hi, because his very different skills and approach saw the firm grow enourmously.

For those who say much of the firm's and owner's successes came from their workers, yes this is true, but IME they do pay pretty well for many roles. Not to defend them - there are plenty of angles I can see, including using temporary workers, the way some sub-contractors are treated etc. but to dismiss the entire setup as 'bad' is naive.

[Skeptisk]

simon_harris said:

sugerbear said:

av185 said:

sugerbear said:

Lord Bamford and his father are only rich because of the poeple they employ, so they should quite rightly be very thankful there is a workforce that is prepared to work for them.

Without those people Lord Bamford would be Mr Bamford and Mr Bamford making excavators in their shed (very slowly). They should be eternally gratful to the hard work and dedication of their employees for making them as rich as they are.

Yep their enormous wealth is nothing to do with their business skills and entirely because of their dedicated workforce.

Ah yes, the idea that those two alone managed to manage an entire workforce of mindless drones to do their bidding. No salespeople were ever involved, no mechanics, no engineers, no workers, cleaners etc etc no one ever came up with their own ideas, it was of course entrely down to the Bamford and son.

How many of those workers took the original risk with the capital to set up the company in the first place?
How many of those workers currently share the risk of the business failing and any financial requirements that might entail?
How many of those workers worry about developing markets and how to best utilise them?
How many of those workers are forced to continue working for the company against their will?

Yours is a stupid facile argument, without the original and ongoing investment and acceptance and management of risk none of those workers would be taking home a salary. It is a symbiotic relationship between business owner and employee one cannot exist without the other but it needs someone to take the initial risk.

yes the current workforce enable the Bamfords to become rich, but the bamfords enable the workforce to pay for housing, food, clothes, holidays and ultimately if they choose to do so save enough money to start their own enterprise and become rich for themselves.

Most however are happy with the business owner/employee arrangement and to carry on with their lives.

If however you were stating that the bamfords were underpaying and exploiting their workforce with an unfair and unbalanced arrangement you might have a more solid footing, but you are and you don't.

JCB is a global success story and everyone involved should rightly be recognised for that.

Of course we need people to take the initial risk but success in business is as much luck (if not more) than design. There are endless examples of good businesses sunk by external factors beyond their control and others that have been lucky to provide the market with the right products at the right time.

Just because the Bamfords started the business it is not really fair to say that they are the major factor behind its continuing success. They rely on management and outside advisers as well as employees as a whole to come up with the ideas and provide all the work to evaluate them.

All that is irrelevant. The question is really two fold. Have they paid all the taxes legally due? And have they paid all the taxes intended by legislation (but which might have been avoided by complex and dubious tax planning).

[nikaiyo2]

sugerbear said:

Lord Bamford and his father are only rich because of the poeple they employ, so they should quite rightly be very thankful there is a workforce that is prepared to work for them.

Without those people Lord Bamford would be Mr Bamford and Mr Bamford making excavators in their shed (very slowly). They should be eternally gratful to the hard work and dedication of their employees for making them as rich as they are.

I think perhaps one could and would not exist without the other, fostering this idiotic "them and us" attitude has done more damage to British industry than anything else, unsure how it relates to the matter being discussed?

It makes me laugh that some people on here seem to think JCB minimizing tax is unusual, literally every business tries to reduce tax, from your window cleaner, milkman. I know even my little company we do what we can to reduce tax liability, our accountants say do this do that etc.

[119]

nikaiyo2 said:

sugerbear said:

Lord Bamford and his father are only rich because of the poeple they employ, so they should quite rightly be very thankful there is a workforce that is prepared to work for them.

Without those people Lord Bamford would be Mr Bamford and Mr Bamford making excavators in their shed (very slowly). They should be eternally gratful to the hard work and dedication of their employees for making them as rich as they are.

I think perhaps one could and would not exist without the other, fostering this idiotic "them and us" attitude has done more damage to British industry than anything else, unsure how it relates to the matter being discussed?

It makes me laugh that some people on here seem to think JCB minimizing tax is unusual, literally every business tries to reduce tax, from your window cleaner, milkman. I know even my little company we do what we can to reduce tax liability, our accountants say do this do that etc.

You have indeed highlighted the problem.

However I think this thread is more to do with ‘because Tory’.

[uk66fastback]

sugerbear said:

Lord Bamford and his father are only rich because of the poeple they employ, so they should quite rightly be very thankful there is a workforce that is prepared to work for them.

Without those people Lord Bamford would be Mr Bamford and Mr Bamford making excavators in their shed (very slowly). They should be eternally gratful to the hard work and dedication of their employees for making them as rich as they are.

Yes, comrade … ffs!

[av185]

Simple making ££squillions I'll just put out an ad for some halfwits to come and work for me sit back do nothing and the dough will immediately come rolling in. Bahamas here I come.

Obviously.

[simon_harris]

Skeptisk said:

simon_harris said:

sugerbear said:

av185 said:

sugerbear said:

Lord Bamford and his father are only rich because of the poeple they employ, so they should quite rightly be very thankful there is a workforce that is prepared to work for them.

Without those people Lord Bamford would be Mr Bamford and Mr Bamford making excavators in their shed (very slowly). They should be eternally gratful to the hard work and dedication of their employees for making them as rich as they are.

Yep their enormous wealth is nothing to do with their business skills and entirely because of their dedicated workforce.

Ah yes, the idea that those two alone managed to manage an entire workforce of mindless drones to do their bidding. No salespeople were ever involved, no mechanics, no engineers, no workers, cleaners etc etc no one ever came up with their own ideas, it was of course entrely down to the Bamford and son.

How many of those workers took the original risk with the capital to set up the company in the first place?
How many of those workers currently share the risk of the business failing and any financial requirements that might entail?
How many of those workers worry about developing markets and how to best utilise them?
How many of those workers are forced to continue working for the company against their will?

Yours is a stupid facile argument, without the original and ongoing investment and acceptance and management of risk none of those workers would be taking home a salary. It is a symbiotic relationship between business owner and employee one cannot exist without the other but it needs someone to take the initial risk.

yes the current workforce enable the Bamfords to become rich, but the bamfords enable the workforce to pay for housing, food, clothes, holidays and ultimately if they choose to do so save enough money to start their own enterprise and become rich for themselves.

Most however are happy with the business owner/employee arrangement and to carry on with their lives.

If however you were stating that the bamfords were underpaying and exploiting their workforce with an unfair and unbalanced arrangement you might have a more solid footing, but you are and you don't.

JCB is a global success story and everyone involved should rightly be recognised for that.

Just because the Bamfords started the business it is not really fair to say that they are the major factor behind its continuing success. They rely on management and outside advisers as well as employees as a whole to come up with the ideas and provide all the work to evaluate them.

All that is irrelevant. The question is really two fold. Have they paid all the taxes legally due? And have they paid all the taxes intended by legislation (but which might have been avoided by complex and dubious tax planning).

I didn't say that, but your second point is correct.

[sugerbear]

uk66fastback said:

sugerbear said:

Lord Bamford and his father are only rich because of the poeple they employ, so they should quite rightly be very thankful there is a workforce that is prepared to work for them.

Without those people Lord Bamford would be Mr Bamford and Mr Bamford making excavators in their shed (very slowly). They should be eternally gratful to the hard work and dedication of their employees for making them as rich as they are.

Yes, comrade … ffs!

I am full commi for suggesting that it was through the work of everyone at JCB that it became what it is. fgs.

[williamp]

Its amazing how many socialists are coming iut of the woodwork at thr moment.

Dont worry: its just a tractor factory. There will be plenty of others once its nationalised and the unions run it..

[TriumphStag3.0V8]

valiant said:

TriumphStag3.0V8 said:

valiant said:

119 said:

valiant said:

119 said:

I bet he/his company have paid more than all of us put together.

And?

Does that give him a green card to play fast and loose with the tax system then? (Allegedly of course)

Nope.

So why the earlier comment?

He earns a lot and his company makes a lot so shouldn't they pay what's owed just like the rest of us?

How do you know they haven't?

Innocent until proven guilty and all that. You seem to have already made up your mind. Why is that?

Have I?

I said in an earlier comment that the accusations are only alleged at the moment.

My point was in rebuttal to another poster who implied that just because they may already pay a stload of tax and more than you and me doesn’t mean they should get off scot free in paying all their taxes due if indeed they are due.

Maybe you’re reading too much into it perhaps?

No, you said :

valiant said:

Does that give him a green card to play fast and loose with the tax system then?

Then you used some Weasel words :

valliant said:

(Allegedly of course)

In an attempt to cover your arse.

Looks very much like you had made your mind up.

Now if you had said something like your more recent post then I might believe you were offering a rebuttal. But you didn't. You made a thinly veiled judgement.

Now, I agree that anyone who hasn't paid their due tax should not get off scott free and if the investigation shows this to be the case then I will go and sharpen my pitchfork as well.
To date though, I don't believe anyone has suggested he should get off Scott free if he has done something wrong?

[Skeptisk]

119 said:

nikaiyo2 said:

sugerbear said:

Lord Bamford and his father are only rich because of the poeple they employ, so they should quite rightly be very thankful there is a workforce that is prepared to work for them.

Without those people Lord Bamford would be Mr Bamford and Mr Bamford making excavators in their shed (very slowly). They should be eternally gratful to the hard work and dedication of their employees for making them as rich as they are.

I think perhaps one could and would not exist without the other, fostering this idiotic "them and us" attitude has done more damage to British industry than anything else, unsure how it relates to the matter being discussed?

It makes me laugh that some people on here seem to think JCB minimizing tax is unusual, literally every business tries to reduce tax, from your window cleaner, milkman. I know even my little company we do what we can to reduce tax liability, our accountants say do this do that etc.

You have indeed highlighted the problem.

However I think this thread is more to do with ‘because Tory’.

There is a massive gulf between legally minimising your taxes using reliefs available and tax avoidance using schemes created by accountants and lawyers (I should know as I’ve been involved with concocting, selling, implementing, managing and defending such schemes).

[Baroque attacks]

It’s the closed door golf course I don’t like.

[Sway]

williamp said:

Its amazing how many socialists are coming iut of the woodwork at thr moment.

Dont worry: its just a tractor factory. There will be plenty of others once its nationalised and the unions run it..

[J4CKO]

Digga said:

I know nothing of the specific tax issues. As others says, they are being investigate by HMRC but that, in and of itself, is not a measure of culpability. It remains to be seen, although JCB himself (Joeseph Cyril Bamford) was very creative with tax affairs and moved to Switzerland.

Digga snr was UK sales manager at HQ in mid 80's. The founder, JCB was a bit of a genius and definitely a grafter. Even back then, he'd walk through the factory and knew a lot of the guys on first name terms.

Sir Anthony, his son, came from a different mould. He was not the man Joe was but that is not to disparage hi, because his very different skills and approach saw the firm grow enourmously.

For those who say much of the firm's and owner's successes came from their workers, yes this is true, but IME they do pay pretty well for many roles. Not to defend them - there are plenty of angles I can see, including using temporary workers, the way some sub-contractors are treated etc. but to dismiss the entire setup as 'bad' is naive.

Good on them, they built a company and made money, all power to them.

What I dont get with the very rich, not specifically these guys as I dont know much about the specifics.



They make money, but to make more they move all production abroad, abandoning their own country, like Dyson.

They have tons of money yet use tax havens and whatever else they can dream up to avoid paying tax, to the country that they have grown and thrived in .
They become tax exiles despite being massively wealthy already, I would have expected that if I have multi millions that would give me flexibility and choices to live where I want and do what I want, when I want. Where a lot seem to end up in Monaco, Dubai or whatever which are fine to visit but not sure I would want that enforced and the UK is no longer my home and I can only visit 183 days a year, suppose thats probably enough for most.

I guess its easy to criticise and being in that position would perhaps enlighten me to the realities of it but does seem strange.

Does it get past amassing wealth, is it no longer about buying stuff, more about winning, having more than Larry or Warren ?

I dont get the impression this is as cynical as it may seem to keep the 500 million, but if you are worth several billion anyway what difference does it make, why not just pay it and avoid the stress ? Knocking 80, I suspect you arent going to short of cash in the next few years, or is it the principle ?

[uk66fastback]

sugerbear said:

uk66fastback said:

sugerbear said:

Lord Bamford and his father are only rich because of the poeple they employ, so they should quite rightly be very thankful there is a workforce that is prepared to work for them.

Yes, comrade … ffs!

I am full commi for suggesting that it was through the work of everyone at JCB that it became what it is. fgs.

It was nothing to do with Bamford himself and his father, who ran the business? Next time I go to work, I’ll expect the company owner to greet me on bended knee and thank me eternally for working there. Strange that, companies have staff!

[Sway]

J4CKO said:

Good on them, they built a company and made money, all power to them.

What I dont get with the very rich, not specifically these guys as I dont know much about the specifics.



They make money, but to make more they move all production abroad, abandoning their own country, like Dyson.

They have tons of money yet use tax havens and whatever else they can dream up to avoid paying tax, to the country that they have grown and thrived in .
They become tax exiles despite being massively wealthy already, I would have expected that if I have multi millions that would give me flexibility and choices to live where I want and do what I want, when I want. Where a lot seem to end up in Monaco, Dubai or whatever which are fine to visit but not sure I would want that enforced and the UK is no longer my home and I can only visit 183 days a year, suppose thats probably enough for most.

I guess its easy to criticise and being in that position would perhaps enlighten me to the realities of it but does seem strange.

Does it get past amassing wealth, is it no longer about buying stuff, more about winning, having more than Larry or Warren ?

I dont get the impression this is as cynical as it may seem to keep the 500 million, but if you are worth several billion anyway what difference does it make, why not just pay it and avoid the stress ? Knocking 80, I suspect you arent going to short of cash in the next few years, or is it the principle ?

Half of JCB's factories are in the UK (11/22), with 75% of their output being exported (great for UK plc).

He'll be paying a vast amount of tax already - and lives in the UK, as is his family.

This claim from HMRC would appear to be about 7% of his total wealth - would you be happy to 'just pay it' if HMRC came knocking for the same for you, just to avoid stress?

[Killboy]

Love it. Rayner is all froth at £1500, and Bamford has all the rich person excuses made for him.

Yeah, I know who I'd like them to spend loads of time chasing

[Digga]

There's often a need to large MNC's to have factories within certain territories. Sometimes it is cost and logistics, other times it is regulatory or, in the case of USA and India, different cost/build standards. Japanase firms like Toyota and Komastu (excavator manufacturer in County Durham) have factories in the UK. JCB have plants in Savannah, USA and also India, to help with regional markets.

IMHO, aside from the above considerations, with a long term view, when JCB made theese decisions, there was also the (not so distant) British industrial relations problems. Spreading wealth and manufacturing over continents is a sensible hedge to wealth and security.

[Sway]

Killboy said:

Love it. Rayner is all froth at £1500, and Bamford has all the rich person excuses made for him.

Yeah, I know who I'd like them to spend loads of time chasing

Nope. No one here has said if he is shown to owe it, he shouldn't pay.

Big difference here is he's had the decency to step down from the Lords whilst being investigated...

[Killboy]

Sway said:

Nope. No one here has said if he is shown to owe it, he shouldn't pay.

Big difference here is he's had the decency to step down from the Lords whilst being investigated...

Good on him then. Poor bugger is probably spending a lot of time looking at his past self assessments and catching up on tax law.