Tax Loopholes - why get annoyed?
Discussion
What I don't get is why people get so angry at people using them. So long as they obey the law then whats the problem?
If you had a company earning millions, so long as it is legal why wouldn't you have a Swiss bank account or use an alternative country to increase your income? Why do people get angry at this? Surely it is common sense and your best interests to maximise take home?
What I'm trying to get at is why aren't people more annoyed at the law itself allowing such loopholes to exist rather than the person exploiting the gap in the rules? Why does the media always make out that an individual or company is in the wrong when infact (the way I see it) the rules are wrong and not the person?
You could argue that other countries offer such low rates the UK can't match them so it is unfair and average Joe always pays their fair share. However on the other side to this, surely the UK government should be looking at itself asking why do companies prefer other international laws?
The UK itself is like a company is it not? If your rates and prices are too high then surely you've got to reduce them to get "customers" back, therefor creating more income for all...
If you had a company earning millions, so long as it is legal why wouldn't you have a Swiss bank account or use an alternative country to increase your income? Why do people get angry at this? Surely it is common sense and your best interests to maximise take home?
What I'm trying to get at is why aren't people more annoyed at the law itself allowing such loopholes to exist rather than the person exploiting the gap in the rules? Why does the media always make out that an individual or company is in the wrong when infact (the way I see it) the rules are wrong and not the person?
You could argue that other countries offer such low rates the UK can't match them so it is unfair and average Joe always pays their fair share. However on the other side to this, surely the UK government should be looking at itself asking why do companies prefer other international laws?
The UK itself is like a company is it not? If your rates and prices are too high then surely you've got to reduce them to get "customers" back, therefor creating more income for all...
Ozzie Osmond said:
* Tax avoidance - arranging your affairs to minimise tax liability - absolutely fine.
Possibly down to the media (I'm looking at you BBC) saying that Avoidance = Evasion.- Tax evasion - telling lies or hiding things - very bad; go to jail.
tomw2000 said:
Ozzie Osmond said:
* Tax avoidance - arranging your affairs to minimise tax liability - absolutely fine.
Possibly down to the media (I'm looking at you BBC) saying that Avoidance = Evasion.- Tax evasion - telling lies or hiding things - very bad; go to jail.
Even then people will still accuse people of evasion
I actually think it is fair, and anyone has the choice of starting their own company, along with the hassle and risks that go with it.
It's back to the population believing they are owed something. They want an easy, not stressful existance and yet still have the same measures open to them. Otherwise know as 'sour grapes syndrome'
It's back to the population believing they are owed something. They want an easy, not stressful existance and yet still have the same measures open to them. Otherwise know as 'sour grapes syndrome'
Can someone correct me if I am wrong, but if a company makes a profit they can dispose of it by either paying bonuses to their staff, paying a dividend to their shareholders or re-investing the money back in the company.
While I apprecate that re-investing could be done outside of the UK, I would assume all three of those options are better than paying tax to the government to waste it away.
While I apprecate that re-investing could be done outside of the UK, I would assume all three of those options are better than paying tax to the government to waste it away.
tomw2000 said:
maix27 said:
I think it's the point of availability.
They should either be available to everyone, or no one.
Simple really.
Avoidance measures are available to everyone. But if an individual wants to pay advisors to do it (or more of it) for them, that's up to them.They should either be available to everyone, or no one.
Simple really.
CzechItOut said:
Can someone correct me if I am wrong, but if a company makes a profit they can dispose of it by either paying bonuses to their staff, paying a dividend to their shareholders or re-investing the money back in the company.
While I apprecate that re-investing could be done outside of the UK, I would assume all three of those options are better than paying tax to the government to waste it away.
Bonus to staff = employee taxes + co. ni + net payWhile I apprecate that re-investing could be done outside of the UK, I would assume all three of those options are better than paying tax to the government to waste it away.
Dividend to shareholders = corporation tax on profits + dividend tax on dividends
Re-investment = profit after corporation tax being capitalised. (normally in the case of capital investments)
all 3 options give rise to tax liability.
The best option is to book most of your profits in a low tax market to avoid uk taxes and give dividends so the tax liability for dividends is on shareholders. And instead of giving bonuses to staff in uk and paying high employment taxes...hire more abroad in low tax markets to boost the work force.
See how high tax burden means moving money and spending plans abroad to generate profits for share holders? Which results in lower spending in UK economy by large cash rich companies.
maix27 said:
Really? I'll get my boss to transfer all my PAYE earnings to a Swiss account then shall I?
The Boss pays a foreign company to depute you to do a job here. The foreign company pays you a small amount for the services which is taxable in UK. The left over profits in the foreign company is taxable under foreign tax law. All legal.So would it not benefit UK to reduce UK taxes to compete with other countries so you earn 100% income in uk and pay taxes on all of it here?
Maybe sorting out tax collection is a little more pressing than welfare:
"The amount of tax that went uncollected in 2009-10 was estimated to be £35bn, HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) has said.
This was £4bn less than the previous year and the lowest since 2004-05, the figures show.
The tax authority said the key reason for the drop was the reduction in VAT from 17.5% to 15% from December 2008 to the end of 2009.
In total, 7.9% of all tax went uncollected in 2009-10, compared with 8.1% the previous year.
VAT remained the tax recording the biggest shortfall, with £11.4bn uncollected. That meant 13.8% of the total amount of VAT due was not collected in 2009-10.
The next largest loss was £5.8bn of income tax due to inaccurate self-assessment returns."
"The amount of tax that went uncollected in 2009-10 was estimated to be £35bn, HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) has said.
This was £4bn less than the previous year and the lowest since 2004-05, the figures show.
The tax authority said the key reason for the drop was the reduction in VAT from 17.5% to 15% from December 2008 to the end of 2009.
In total, 7.9% of all tax went uncollected in 2009-10, compared with 8.1% the previous year.
VAT remained the tax recording the biggest shortfall, with £11.4bn uncollected. That meant 13.8% of the total amount of VAT due was not collected in 2009-10.
The next largest loss was £5.8bn of income tax due to inaccurate self-assessment returns."
"The “big four” UK banks - HSBC, Lloyds, RBS and Barclays - made heavy use of tax havens. The banks registered a total of 1,649 tax haven companies, while Barclays has 174 firms registered in the Cayman Islands alone, according to the research."
Why would taxpayer owned banks use tax havens?
Why would taxpayer owned banks use tax havens?
maix27 said:
tomw2000 said:
maix27 said:
I think it's the point of availability.
They should either be available to everyone, or no one.
Simple really.
Avoidance measures are available to everyone. But if an individual wants to pay advisors to do it (or more of it) for them, that's up to them.They should either be available to everyone, or no one.
Simple really.
The tax code isn't written "X% must be paid by maix27 and Y% must be paid by walm".
It IS the same for everyone.
Also +1,000 to whoever pointed out that ISAs/Pensions are tax avoidance.
Ill thought-out pinko commies in total hypocrites shocker...
Fittster said:
"The “big four” UK banks - HSBC, Lloyds, RBS and Barclays - made heavy use of tax havens. The banks registered a total of 1,649 tax haven companies, while Barclays has 174 firms registered in the Cayman Islands alone, according to the research."
Why would taxpayer owned banks use tax havens?
When was this?Why would taxpayer owned banks use tax havens?
Year?
Probably the same reason this happened:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-153...
And its not the poor ass excuse they gave
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff