DerekJ Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 Didn't we have this "not outside the rules but immoral" debate a few months ago with MPs expenses? They were slapped down by comedians for legal-but-excessive expense claims so now it's payback time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibby Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 99% of us would do the same. If an accountant said there is a legal way to not pay as much tax, we'd take it in the blink of an eye. If there is a legal loophole that the government don't like us using, why don't they close it down? Tax money earned in this country before it leaves? ... Maybe because it would upset too many of their own people and Carr has been made a scapegoat to divert our attention? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norman Verona Posted June 25, 2012 Author Share Posted June 25, 2012 Dibby's just scored a hole in one. Well said young man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Jones Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 I think that's a little too simple. Many of the so called "loopholes" are just abuses of legitimate tax handling needs. If you close them all down then people will just avoid via other means which will be worse than the original problem of a small number of people taking things to extreme. My take is that Cameron is trying to encourage a form of differential pricing so that those that don't mind paying more than the min will do because it's "morally right", while those that do mind can and will carry on as usual. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norman Verona Posted June 25, 2012 Author Share Posted June 25, 2012 I had a building labourer on a job I was managing. I suggested he come off the dole and I'd pay him the going rate, instead of £30 per day. He laughed. Being unemployed gave him "job seekers allowance" PLUS free rent, free rates, free telephone (he had a sick daughter who may need an ambulance at any moment - she had glue ear) plus a host of other benefits that gave him over £400 a week income (this was in the early 90s). Is he immoral or just claiming what he's allowed under government rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pistonbroke 2 Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 Any good accountant should be able to shave a pound or two of you liabilities,thats what we pay em for. My next cheque to HM Rev. will be made out to K2 instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibby Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 Is he immoral or just claiming what he's allowed under government rules. But, like, Jimmy Carr is all, like, rich, maaaan. Yeah, down with the rich, booooo! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreigM Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 99% of us would do the same. If an accountant said there is a legal way to not pay as much tax, we'd take it in the blink of an eye. If there is a legal loophole that the government don't like us using, why don't they close it down? Tax money earned in this country before it leaves? ... Maybe because it would upset too many of their own people and Carr has been made a scapegoat to divert our attention? I think there is a distinct difference between being "tax efficient" and blatantly taking the p***. For a multi-millionaire to reduce his tax liability to absolute zero is not the same as an average businessman having an accountant make better use of fully approved allowances - HMRC are happy with and approve of the latter, I don't think they are finished with the former and we may yet find the "legality" of the K2 scheme being challenged in court. I also think the term "loophole" is a bit incorrect. There isn't a loophole as such - having to shuttle money between two different companies with no empolyees, one in a different tax jurisdiction and then issuing a loan with no intention to ever repay it isn't a loophole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibby Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 So why is it perfectly legal for people to blatantly take the p***? Why don't they close it down if they are that bothered about the system? Relying on peoples' consciences to pay more tax? Wish the rest of us could decide out of the goodness of our hearts how much tax to 'donate' to the state. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreigM Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 Its not a simple loophole - thats the issue, if it was it would already be closed down. He's basically channelling all his money through corporations, and then issuing himself loans from these corporations. Individually each item can't be outlawed as these are perfectly legitimate actions. Too many people saying its the "governments fault" for not closing the loophole when the simple fact is that its not a simple task to close the loophole without making difficult changes to corporation tax or to normal lending which would be very expensive and would effectively punish the man on the street in order to catch a few immoral a**holes. As for perfectly legal - I'm not 100% sure thats the case - he could be exposed here if the HMRC could prove there was no intention of or evidence the loan being repaid, as then its straight income and he would have ventured into tax evasion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibby Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 Why not tax the money before it leaves the country? You earn X, you pay Y. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norman Verona Posted June 25, 2012 Author Share Posted June 25, 2012 Dibby, I said that on about page x. Do we really need such a complex tax system? Well, actually, yes we do. How else would MPs and others get round paying tax? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreigM Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 Why not tax the money before it leaves the country? You earn X, you pay Y. You can't simply tax money leaving the country - its not "personal" money, it belongs to a foreign company and if you tax that we would have no foreign trade and zero economy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreigM Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 Dibby, I said that on about page x. Do we really need such a complex tax system? Well, actually, yes we do. How else would MPs and others get round paying tax? The complexity of the system is irrelevant in this case - he is circumventing the system entirely and declaring that he has ZERO income. It bears no relation whatsoever to anything "MPs and other" do. MPs are under stricter rules than the rest of us, and while being an MP they will pay entirely their fair share based on income.....afterwards is a different story however, just look at Mr Blair... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibby Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 Dibby, I said that on about page x. Do we really need such a complex tax system? Well, actually, yes we do. How else would MPs and others get round paying tax? Exactly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.