The Biggest Hypocrite Ever?

[DavidinSouthampton]

Claiming capital allowances is not tax avoidance. It's just a way of spreading the cost of an asset over its useful life and only accounting for the portion that relates to that year. It's a fundamental principle in accounting of matching costs with revenues. If you want to say that claiming capital allowances is some sort of 'tax avoidance scheme' then you clearly don't understand even some of the basic principles involved (and I mean that with no malice or sneer - I repeat, claiming capital allowances is NOT a tax avoidance scheme).

I'd also add that I'm sure they employ accountants to keep their tax bills down. All chartered accountants in practice have a duty to minimise their clients' tax bills and once again it seems you are holding the Osborne family and their company to some higher and more restrictive standard than that the rest of the UK companies and that which people with accountants enjoy.

Finally, I reckon as a qualified accountant that paying yourself through PAYE (normal salaries) is just about the most tax-inefficient way of paying yourself. There's very little room for offsetting losses or extra allowances and also it's a tax that has to be paid up by the following month. It's the reason why the taxman spends so much time and money trying to restrict what is self-employment. IR35 is a classic case in point.

Anyone who tries to use this as a weapon to beat Osborne with is doing the whole issue of tax avoidance/evasion a grave misjustice. What Gary Barlow and Jimmy Carr did was creative tax avoidance. As far as I can tell, the Osbornes' corporate tax affairs are about as vanilla as could possibly be.

Fair enough. I'm not an accountant.

 

[Hampster Gull]

I wouldnt say he was a hypocrite let alone the biggest

 

[GT49er]

Finally, I reckon as a qualified accountant that paying yourself through PAYE (normal salaries) is just about the most tax-inefficient way of paying yourself. There's very little room for offsetting losses or extra allowances and also it's a tax that has to be paid up by the following month. It's the reason why the taxman spends so much time and money trying to restrict what is self-employment. IR35 is a classic case in point.

Without getting involved in the general argument, I must point out that this is.....well....bollox.

HMRC actively encourage people to falsely declare themselves as self employed. I know this from first hand experience. When employers try to employ people 'on a self-employed basis' it is to avoid all the normal responsibilities of an employer.
Acting on behalf of an employee, I contacted HMRC. 'Take it up with the employer' was their first response. When they were told that had been done, they then asked if it really was the case that it wasn't self employment. It was pointed out to them that their own on-line test showed conclusively it wasn't self employement - that clearly upset them, and they insisted on going through the whole thing on the phone before reluctantly admitting that the test result was, in fact, correct.

The subsequent conversation was beyond belief.
"What are you going to do about it?" "I can't tell you that."
"Well, do you have teams of inspectors who look into this sort of thing?" "I can't tell you that."
"So do you ever find cases of false self-employment?" "We might find it on a routine inspection."
"So now you've been told about a specific example (name and address of company), will you be making an inspection?" "I can't tell you that."
(Almost 8 months later, they haven't)
"So what do you suggest the employee does now, then?" "Fill in the form and declare herself self-employed."

As I said, I'm not getting involved in the whole macro argument, but on the small points you need to get your facts right. As they say in matters of crime detection, it's the little lies that catch you out.............

 

[beorhthelm]

HMRC actively encourage people to falsely declare themselves as self employed. I know this from first hand experience.

so despite rafts of rules to stop employees being wrongly reported as self-employed/contractors, and the considerable NI implications, you are saying HMRC really want to be be self-employed based on a sample of 1, then talk about facts?

 

[GT49er]

so despite rafts of rules to stop employees being wrongly reported as self-employed/contractors, and the considerable NI implications, you are saying HMRC really want to be be self-employed based on a sample of 1, then talk about facts?

Yes, it is a fact. It is one of which I am a first hand witness. So does your opinion of how you think things should be outweigh the actual fact which I have stated? Perhaps because the facts I have presented go against your views on how things should be, you think I'm a liar? Well, that might be convenient for you.

In fact I did follow this up (informally of course) with an HMRC employee who I know. He confirmed this was the case - statutory routine checks are carried out, but extra checks take resources that aren't available, so stringent are the cuts that have been made. Furthermore, enforcement and taking legal action also takes up too many resources. In order to meet targets, it is more cost effective to go after the easy targets, like the little bloke who has made mess of his tax return, but no way can afford a barrister.

Sorry to shatter your illusions.

 

[Buzzer]

I think we will have to agree to disagree on this. In all my years of dealing with HMRC I've never heard similar. PAYE is the easiest tax to collect, the easiest to administer, the fastest paying, it's the most difficult to find any room for creative avoidance and as someone else said the NI implications alone means that employed people pay far more tax than self-employed.

 

[Tom Bombadil]

FFS people get a grip. Corbynn is obviously the victim of a quite revolting campaign by the right wing press. Stop believing everything that fleet streets grubby little extremists make up. And secondly there are lots of things you can be critical of Osborne but his dads companies tax affairs aren't one of them. All you're doing is showing your ignorance.

 

[The Antikythera Mechanism]

Corbyn is completely out of his depth. A pub politician, at best.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

FFS people get a grip. Corbynn is obviously the victim of a quite revolting campaign by the right wing press. Stop believing everything that fleet streets grubby little extremists make up. And secondly there are lots of things you can be critical of Osborne but his dads companies tax affairs aren't one of them. All you're doing is showing your ignorance.

So Corbyn's utter goonery about national defence is all made up ?

Good to know.

 

[vegster]

So Corbyn's utter goonery about national defence is all made up ?

Good to know.

The good news is that you will have an opportunity to have a free vote on his views and policies, until then you have no reason to start frothing at the mouth, or are you scared that people might just think he's on to something ?

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

The good news is that you will have an opportunity to have a free vote on his views and policies, until then you have no reason to start frothing at the mouth, or are you scared that people might just think he's on to something ?

I can assure you I am not 'frothing at the mouth'. That's quite an insulting thing to say to be honest.

 

[Tooting Gull]

The coverage of Corbyn from certain newspapers - notably the Sun, the Mail and the Telegraph, but all have got sucked in plus radio and TV on the ludicrous agenda - has been the real national disgrace. One of the most disgusting and embarrassing smear campaigns I can remember.

 

[vegster]

I can assure you I am not 'frothing at the mouth'. That's quite an insulting thing to say to be honest.

I'm sorry you feel insulted by my phrase but people really need to get a grip here.

 

[El Presidente]

What Gary Barlow OBE and Jimmy Carr's chartered accountant tax advisors did was creative tax avoidance.

Corrected for you!

 

[Seagull on the wing]

The coverage of Corbyn from certain newspapers - notably the Sun, the Mail and the Telegraph, but all have got sucked in plus radio and TV on the ludicrous agenda - has been the real national disgrace. One of the most disgusting and embarrassing smear campaigns I can remember.

You don't have to listen to the media anyway to make your own mind up...the fact that Corbyn has stated He would never " press the button" has all but handed the enemies of this country a coup,he has made our nuclear weapons useless,the whole idea of nuclear arms is not to use them but keep your enemies wondering if you might therefore reducing the risk of attack.
As for his cosying up to terrorist and lack of financial knowledge less said the better.

 

[Biscuit]

What newspaper fed you that opinion [MENTION=21308]burnee54[/MENTION] ?

 

[Biscuit]

You don't have to listen to the media anyway to make your own mind up...the fact that Corbyn has stated He would never " press the button" has all but handed the enemies of this country a coup,he has made our nuclear weapons useless,the whole idea of nuclear arms is not to use them but keep your enemies wondering if you might therefore reducing the risk of attack.
As for his cosying up to terrorist and lack of financial knowledge less said the better.

Couldn't you just hand the use of the nuclear weapons to the military leaders? Make it their job to determine when its use is justified?

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

You don't have to listen to the media anyway to make your own mind up...the fact that Corbyn has stated He would never " press the button" has all but handed the enemies of this country a coup,he has made our nuclear weapons useless,the whole idea of nuclear arms is not to use them but keep your enemies wondering if you might therefore reducing the risk of attack.
As for his cosying up to terrorist and lack of financial knowledge less said the better.

We never know whether a leader would use the weapons. We never know whether a leader who has not said anything would use them. And we don't know whether when it comes to it whether Corbyn would or wouldn't. So the Russians are going to think - "well he says he is not going to use them so clearly he is not going to use them". Unlikely.

It is just another stick to beat him with,

On a personal level I don't want a PM who would use them. And if they say they are not going to use them up front - that is fine by me.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

Couldn't you just hand the use of the nuclear weapons to the military leaders? Make it their job to determine when its use is justified?

Really ?

People who are used to handling big hammers tend to reach for solutions that involve big hammers.

No thank-you.

 

[beorhthelm]

Sorry to shatter your illusions.

no need to apologise, this is great news. i'm of to tell HR that the revenue would rather i were a contractor. we'll both save thousands in NI and tax, doubles all round.