Political donors identified as having Swiss HSBC accounts. Which party(s) though?

[Camicus]

Do most people not have ISAs?

And the award for the most middle class post of the year....

 

[beorhthelm]

And the award for the most middle class post of the year....

ah, dont address the point, play the man instead of the ball. 23million people have ISAs, then theres pensions, cash in hand jobs, booze cruises. every contractor i know uses an umbrella company paying them a dividend instead of full pay and a whole bunch of expenses goes through the books. fact is, everyone avoids tax if and when they can, no one maximises their tax payments.

 

[Camicus]

ah, dont address the point, play the man instead of the ball. 23million people have ISAs, then theres pensions, cash in hand jobs, booze cruises. every contractor i know uses an umbrella company paying them a dividend instead of full pay and a whole bunch of expenses goes through the books. fact is, everyone avoids tax if and when they can, no one maximises their tax payments.

That means 60 million of us don't

 

[Westdene Seagull]

That means 60 million of us don't

There's 'only' a 64m population in the UK currently. And even if you exclude the third of the population that have ISAs, everyone still gets tax relief on their payments into their private pensions - i.e. they evade paying tax. I take it you send a cheque each year to HMRC as a donation for the tax you evaded on your pension payments ?

 

[Kevlar]

Not a Labour Party supporter but impressed by milliband on this.
He also burnt the new labour bridges with the Murdoch empire.
Whether you are a labour supporter or like me not I do admire
these courageous acts.
Yes when it came to tax avoidance light touch regulation in general ,
corruption and governance on behalf of the rich New labour gave
the Tories a run for their money but fair play to Ed he seems a man
of more principal even if I do not think he has a program to deliver
real advantages for the majority of people.

 

[Machiavelli]

Not a Labour Party supporter but impressed by milliband on this.
He also burnt the new labour bridges with the Murdoch empire.
Whether you are a labour supporter or like me not I do admire
these courageous acts.
Yes when it came to tax avoidance light touch regulation in general ,
corruption and governance on behalf of the rich New labour gave
the Tories a run for their money but fair play to Ed he seems a man
of more principal even if I do not think he has a program to deliver
real advantages for the majority of people.

I'm not a Labour supporter either, but you're spot on with all of this. At times, he's been courageous as a leader, but this has been obscured by how he eats bacon sandwiches, etc. Still, the Tories and their cheerleaders don't like it when he's brave -- witness today's Daily Mail headline -- so keep it up Ed, and you might just reap the rewards.

 

[Camicus]

There's 'only' a 64m population in the UK currently. And even if you exclude the third of the population that have ISAs, everyone still gets tax relief on their payments into their private pensions - i.e. they evade paying tax. I take it you send a cheque each year to HMRC as a donation for the tax you evaded on your pension payments ?

I was a soldier I am now a prison officer. How dare you suggest I am as venal and corrupt as your tory heroes.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

There's 'only' a 64m population in the UK currently. And even if you exclude the third of the population that have ISAs, everyone still gets tax relief on their payments into their private pensions - i.e. they evade paying tax. I take it you send a cheque each year to HMRC as a donation for the tax you evaded on your pension payments ?

Tax avoidance not tax evasion. The former is legal, the latter illegal.
There's nothing corrupt about maximising interest in ISAs nor tax relief on pensions. Savings are to be encouraged.

 

[mikeyjh]

There's 'only' a 64m population in the UK currently. And even if you exclude the third of the population that have ISAs, everyone still gets tax relief on their payments into their private pensions - i.e. they evade paying tax. I take it you send a cheque each year to HMRC as a donation for the tax you evaded on your pension payments ?

This old chestnut - ISAs and pensions are neither tax evasion or avoidance, they are the use of mechanisms provided by the government to encourage those who are fortunate enough to be able to save for their futures to do so by providing tax incentives. Channeling your wealth offshore in order to take advantage of holes in legislation identified by accountants and lawyers that the vast majority of us cannot afford does not even remotely resemble the prudent use of savings incentives explicitly provided by the govt.

 

[beorhthelm]

That means 60 million of us don't

23million is about half the adult population. half of the adult population invest in something that has no purpose other than to avoid some tax.

This old chestnut - ISAs and pensions are neither tax evasion or avoidance, they are the use of mechanisms provided by the government to encourage those who are fortunate enough to be able to save for their futures to do so by providing tax incentives. Channeling your wealth offshore in order to take advantage of holes in legislation identified by accountants and lawyers that the vast majority of us cannot afford does not even remotely resemble the prudent use of savings incentives explicitly provided by the govt.

if you avoid a tax, that's tax avoidance, doesn't matter if the mechanism is provided by the government or not. do so illegally and that's evasion. there is a difference also between avoidance and aggressive avoidance, where arrangements are deliberately and carefully constructed to exploit an allowance or relief, which is only the legal side of evasion. however there is so many reliefs, allowances and exemption that the tax system has created a culture of avoidance, and you dont need expensive accountants to find these mechanisms. then for some reason we scream blue murder because someone uses them, usually because they are richer than yauw.

the issue here is really that we should stop complaining about those using the system, but get on at the politicians who use the tax system to bribe one group over another, we need to get a simplified tax system in place not get distracted by media storms over individuals.

 

[mikeyjh]

23million is about half the adult population. half of the adult population invest in something that has no purpose other than to avoid some tax.



if you avoid a tax, that's tax avoidance, doesn't matter if the mechanism is provided by the government or not. do so illegally and that's evasion. there is a difference also between avoidance and aggressive avoidance, where arrangements are deliberately and carefully constructed to exploit an allowance or relief, which is only the legal side of evasion. however there is so many reliefs, allowances and exemption that the tax system has created a culture of avoidance, and you dont need expensive accountants to find these mechanisms. then for some reason we scream blue murder because someone uses them, usually because they are richer than yauw.

the issue here is really that we should stop complaining about those using the system, but get on at the politicians who use the tax system to bribe one group over another, we need to get a simplified tax system in place not get distracted by media storms over individuals.

Like many things, it's not binary though is it, you could argue that one avoids tax by claiming your tax free PAYE allowance but you would be wrong, likewise you would be wrong if you catagorise investment in ISAs as what we consider tax avoidance. But on the spectrum of managing one's taxes, actively searching for avenues to bypass parliament's intention is what I consider aggresive tax avoidance.

Your point about politicians tells me everything that is wrong with how people think about this subject - No moral compass, if it's not legislated against then it's okay. It's not illegal to be an absolute c**t, doesn't make it okay though.

Finally, I don't buy the envy argument you use - There are many people that will not use these schemes despite having the wealth or nous to do so, perhaps because they are able to use moral judgement.

 

[mikeyjh]

the issue here is really that we should stop complaining about those using the system, but get on at the politicians who use the tax system to bribe one group over another, we need to get a simplified tax system in place not get distracted by media storms over individuals.

One other things - This is another mistaken comment I often here about 'using the system'. There is no system that legislates how to avoid tax using offshore companies, banks etc etc, there are simply gaps in legislation. No parliament would ever be able to entirely eradicate these, so again it's up to us to use our own values about what we would and would not do to 'avoid' tax.

 

[Machiavelli]

Like many things, it's not binary though is it, you could argue that one avoids tax by claiming your tax free PAYE allowance but you would be wrong, likewise you would be wrong if you catagorise investment in ISAs as what we consider tax avoidance. But on the spectrum of managing one's taxes, actively searching for avenues to bypass parliament's intention is what I consider aggresive tax avoidance.

Your point about politicians tells me everything that is wrong with how people think about this subject - No moral compass, if it's not legislated against then it's okay. It's not illegal to be an absolute c**t, doesn't make it okay though.

Finally, I don't buy the envy argument you use - There are many people that will not use these schemes despite having the wealth or nous to do so, perhaps because they are able to use moral judgement.

You've put this perfectly here. And as to the 'politics of envy' argument, that's a joke. Are beorthelm, etc telling me that I'm envious of Cameron, Osborne, Fink et al? The last thing I am is envious of them, as they're despicable. I'd just rather we don't have to put up with them, and the twaddle that they utter.

 

[beorhthelm]

There is no system that legislates how to avoid tax using offshore companies, banks etc etc,

there is. if you have paid tax in one domicile the agreed rules are that you dont pay again if you repatriate the money. as long as its legitimate in how the money was booked in the off shore in the first place (which is where a good deal of the ambiguity comes from). this is common for contractors, paying corporation taxes instead of 40% income tax (and a whole bunch of expenses discounted too).

I agree its not binary, that rather my point. there is a range of tax avoidance, all legal (by definition) and many in use by common people. i would agree as you say that actively searching for gaps and mechanisms and trying to use them outside the intended scope is aggressive avoidance. at the other end, i'll classify ISAs as avoidance as that is their sole purpose, to avoid tax (one is free to use any other savings account). i wouldn't actually count typical pensions as avoidance as most people do so for the future saving and company contribution elements, the tax relief is a bonus. however a substantial number of people, particularly self employed, business owners etc will maximise how much they put in to their pensions to get the relief. point is you can easily use pensions to avoid tax without much effort.

as far as morals go, i dont know anyone who pays more tax than they need to, and would take any easy, legal option presented to reduce their tax. we pay too much, generally, in part to makeup the short fall of those employing aggressive avoidance and outright evasions, and it would be more sensible to address the root problems of overcomplicated, manipulated tax system.

 

[beorhthelm]

You've put this perfectly here. And as to the 'politics of envy' argument, that's a joke. Are beorthelm, etc telling me that I'm envious of Cameron, Osborne, Fink et al? The last thing I am is envious of them, as they're despicable. I'd just rather we don't have to put up with them, and the twaddle that they utter.

im saying we focus on individual held up as examples, rather than tens or hundreds of thousands (millions in the case of ISAs) who are doing the same quietly, within the system. there are whole industries that avoid taxes but we dont criticise them at all. just wealthy individuals. i don't call it envy, that's your term, but i cant understand why else we are so selective on the matter. unless its simply naivety that we don't realise, which is what i'm trying to raise : do we understand what we are critising, do we see where the problem is?

 

[Machiavelli]

im saying we focus on individual held up as examples, rather than tens or hundreds of thousands (millions in the case of ISAs) who are doing the same quietly, within the system. there are whole industries that avoid taxes but we dont criticise them at all. just wealthy individuals. i don't call it envy, that's your term, but i cant understand why else we are so selective on the matter. unless its simply naivety that we don't realise, which is what i'm trying to raise : do we understand what we are critising, do we see where the problem is?

If your point is that there's not only a difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion, but also a difference between normal or 'vanilla' tax avoidance and aggressive tax avoidance, then I'd agree, although you don't really seem to be focusing on the latter, merely trying to undermine whoever seeks to criticise it.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

Most of the people I know with an Isa have two or three grand stashed away as either their life savings , for a "rainy day" or to pay towards their funeral.

 

[wakeytom]

If your point is that there's not only a difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion, but also a difference between normal or 'vanilla' tax avoidance and aggressive tax avoidance, then I'd agree, although you don't really seem to be focusing on the latter, merely trying to undermine whoever seeks to criticise it.

One thing that many people in the UK will do as the owner of a limited company is to draw out the maximum under the free allowance in wages and then top up income by dividends - this is used far and wide and is I would say a big way to avoid tax but for most people it is seen as legitimate, then add in a partner who in reality has nothing to do with the business but they can then draw double the salary and double the dividends you can take out even more in a tax efficient way, again I am sure this happens alot. At what point does it become aggressive tax avoidance and one that morally you don't agree with - one of the reason I believe it is set in that way is to encourage people to start there own business and generate additional revenues for UK PLC.

If you morally don't agree with the way that someone is avoiding tax but is working for the greater good for UK PLC because the tax system allows it and promotes self employment then really the only way forward is communism in some form