[Finance] If you were given a totally legal way of paying less tax would you take it?

[Tyrone Biggums]

Built much major infrastructure recently?

Most Governments don't. They waste more than they put to good use.

The Private sector does more for people than Governments do in providing services.

This is how it works, Governments take tax for roads, then Governments tender out contracts for roads and put tolls on those roads to pay for those roads when a private company builds the roads.

Thus the poor old tax payer stumps up twice for a road through tax and toll so the Government can piss the money away that was supposed to be for this "infrastructure".

I'd happily pay a private toll if it meant I didn't have to pay the government one cent.

 

[boik]

Most Governments don't. They waste more than they put to good use.

The Private sector does more for people than Governments do in providing services.

This is how it works, Governments take tax for roads, then Governments tender out contracts for roads and put tolls on those roads to pay for those roads when a private company builds the roads.

Thus the poor old tax payer stumps up twice for a road through tax and toll so the Government can piss the money away that was supposed to be for this "infrastructure".

I'd happily pay a private toll if it meant I didn't have to pay the government one cent.

Nobody pays “road Tax”. Your whole description above is just warped to suit your argument. You just don’t want to pay tax full stop.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

Nobody pays “road Tax”. Your whole description above is just warped to suit your argument. You just don’t want to pay tax full stop.

Yes they do, every time they fill up at the bowser they pay a tax that makes fuel more expensive and that tax is supposed to go towards the damn roads.

I'm happy to pay tax for things I use, I have no desire to contribute to shit that that means nothing to me nor will I ever need.

Too many parasites in society, don't wish to contribute one cent towards them or their lives.

 

[Goldstone1976]

It’s perfectly legal to pay more tax than you’re required to - just pop a cheque in the post to HMRC with a letter explaining why; they’ll cash it. Anyone ever done so?

Disclosure: when asked, I describe my politics as “fiscally Conservative, welfare and socially Labour, attitudinally Liberal”, which is why I have such a hard time at GEs!

 

[boik]

Yes they do, every time they fill up at the bowser they pay a tax that makes fuel more expensive and that tax is supposed to go towards the damn roads.

I'm happy to pay tax for things I use, I have no desire to contribute to shit that that means nothing to me nor will I ever need.

Too many parasites in society, don't wish to contribute one cent towards them or their lives.

Happy to pay tax for things you use. How do you know now what you are going to use later in your life after you’ve stopped paying tax? Anyway, I thought “all tax is theft”?

 

[drew]

http://moneyquestioner.co.uk/music-and-money/taxman-50-years-beatles-revolver/

98% with the surcharge

Surely it should be made clear that the famous 98% rate applied to investment income, not your salary.

 

[CHAPPERS]

Is there enough oxygen and water on the planet you are currently visiting?

I really don't see the issue with what I have said.

If the tax system worked correctly and all tax was collected properly and fairly from top to bottom then yes, anyone working cash in hand would not only feel less inclined to cheat the system but would struggle to do so.

 

[CHAPPERS]

Some good stuff in here - https://www.facebook.com/LBC/videos...gGX4ihJ41Q6EucmRTH3jCLKT4_EvDglHJHVRDR86Upk1Q

 

[McTavish]

Tax is legalised theft.

Avoid tax wherever possible by any means.

I'm happy to pay tax for things I use

Errmmm...

 

[McTavish]

It’s perfectly legal to pay more tax than you’re required to - just pop a cheque in the post to HMRC with a letter explaining why; they’ll cash it. Anyone ever done so?

Disclosure: when asked, I describe my politics as “fiscally Conservative, welfare and socially Labour, attitudinally Liberal”, which is why I have such a hard time at GEs!

No-one is suggesting that they want to pay more tax as far as I can see - just that everyone pays a fair amount of tax. I don't want to pay more tax, I want to pay less and if the tax system worked properly and people paid what the tax laws intended them to then all the people who don't aggressively avoid and evade tax could indeed pay less.

 

[Baldseagull]

It is not a mistake that loopholes exist, companies like KPMG advise the government on tax policy, then advise wealthy clients on how to minimise their liability.
Governments, rightly or wrongly believe that in order to keep some of the mega rich from just domiciling themselves in Monaco and avoiding the lot, must have a way of being able to pay some tax, but not be taxed to the point where they just leave the country and pay nothing.
Many of these people also make large charitable donations to causes they approve of, there was at one time an idea to nominate the preferred areas of spending for a proportion of your tax, it might encourage some to pay full taxes if they were sure the NHS and not the Trident upgrade was getting their funds.

 

[beorhthelm]

It’s perfectly legal to pay more tax than you’re required to - just pop a cheque in the post to HMRC with a letter explaining why; they’ll cash it. Anyone ever done so?

apparently there were 14 such people last year. considerably more people leave money to cat homes every year.

 

[wellquickwoody]

I think the point was there was NO EVIDENCE of it being for work use, that it was purely a pleasure/leisure thing. Therefore the full amount of VAT is due.

My son-in-law is a Customs Officer, and used to have a speciality in VAT. It was fascinating once reading his VAT manual and talking to him about it. There was a whole section about VAT on Range Rovers and similar vehicles. They could only be VAT exempt if they had no windows in the back - not "blacked out" but filled in - and if there were no seats in the back. This was purely because so many people had tried to fiddle it, claiming a VAT exemption when the main purpose of the vehicle was personal use.

And how long ago was that?

 

[Bozza]

No-one is suggesting that they want to pay more tax as far as I can see - just that everyone pays a fair amount of tax.

"Fair" isn't easily measured though is it?

If someone was a very high earner and had an income tax bill of, say, £1m per year they may feel that they are paying a "fair" amount of tax in that they're paying considerably more than 99%+ of the population. They may then seek loopholes elsewhere to reduce other tax obligations they may face.

 

[Seasidesage]

Governments of all political colours have actively created these loopholes to allow the rich to pay little or no tax. Both companies and individuals pay large amounts of money to lobbyists and direct to political parties to ensure this continues. The whole system is corrupt and if the Paradise papers shed even a little light on the subject that is good. Will it change things probably not. We are one of the principal destinations for money from dubious sources already and will continue to be so while it suits the elite for this to continue.

 

[Normski1989]

If it was perfectly legal and ethical, then yes, I would. For example, utilising your annual ISA allowance and applying for the marriage tax allowance.

The problem is when people see anything that's legal as ethical. Things like living and working in mainland England, but using offshore accounts to avoid paying tax isn't ethical.

 

[beorhthelm]

I think the point was there was NO EVIDENCE of it being for work use, that it was purely a pleasure/leisure thing. Therefore the full amount of VAT is due.

you mean apart from the hundreds of hours booked for private hire by third parties, reported by the Guardian? thats the funny thing about the reporting on that issue, they report how he had private use and commercial use (about 33/66 split) but didn't follow through to the conclusion that £1m VAT is due. breaks with the headline.

 

[mikeyjh]

you mean apart from the hundreds of hours booked for private hire by third parties, reported by the Guardian? thats the funny thing about the reporting on that issue, they report how he had private use and commercial use (about 33/66 split) but didn't follow through to the conclusion that £1m VAT is due. breaks with the headline.

Are you sure? I read that that was the intended use of the jet, in order to justify the establishment of the IOM company as a legitimate business, but that in reality is has never happened.

"The data suggests the sole purpose of the leasing business was to allow Hamilton to rent his plane from himself. Invoices show the jet was not leased to anyone else, and there appears to have been no effort to market it to other customers"

 

[Triggaaar]

85% of NSC posters are honest. Not bad.

 

[beorhthelm]

Are you sure? I read that that was the intended use of the jet, in order to justify the establishment of the IOM company as a legitimate business, but that in reality is has never happened.

"The data suggests the sole purpose of the leasing business was to allow Hamilton to rent his plane from himself. Invoices show the jet was not leased to anyone else, and there appears to have been no effort to market it to other customers"

thats what i recall from one (early) Guardian article, had to read to the end and there was some details on the hours spent by him and the charter, and some blog or article elsewhere highlighted the liability is approx a third. compared to others, his is still enginneered tax avoidance/borderline evasion, he should have paid up the 1/3. i think he's been poorly advised as its the sort of thing any normal person could have done (acquiring through holding company, not a plane obvs), but done properly to avoid the gaze of the tax man.