Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 21

Thread: The tax dodgers charter "Only little people pay taxes"

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,389
    Thanks
    605
    Thanked 192 Times in 162 Posts
    Blog Entries
    31

    The tax dodgers charter "Only little people pay taxes"

    This article may interest all "tax avoiding" members of the forum who think they make a justifiable case for tax avoidance. It's written by Nick Cohen who can articulate far better than myself the ridiculous claims that they are morally right to squirrel away their wealth in a tax haven and live on the untaxed proceeds,"legally" fiddling the nation out millions of sorely needed income, hypocritically at the same time supporting at the same time punitive action against the millions of pensioners and self employed who would dare and try to "cheat" the system.

    Cameron is even employing tax "avoider" a euphemism for greedy b****** Phil green to advise the coalition, giving the seal of acceptability and approval for the wealthy to follow suit. This is confirmation that two classes still exist in Britain.

    A very interesting read:

    How Vodafone made tax dodging respectable | Nick Cohen | Comment is free | The Observer
    Advocates of capitalism believe : "The fortunate must not be restrained in the exercise of tyranny over the unfortunate"

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Devon
    Posts
    5,935
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: The tax dodgers charter "Only little people pay taxes"

    Tax avoidance in the UK is a long overdue scandal that needs to be adressed.
    I find it interesting that you posted this just after miday today, and not a single response from the resident tories. Had it been a thread about someone fiddling a few quid in benefits, it would be awash with replies of condemnation.
    "I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours ." Steven Roberts

    The likelyhood of you being observed is directly proportionate to the stupidity of your actions.

    Barack Hussein Obama, the president that got Bin Laden!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    520
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: The tax dodgers charter "Only little people pay taxes"

    Im not clear on this one, I earned my income all my life and paid tax on all of it through payroll. Some of this post tax income was put into savings legally in Jersey where it is not subject to tax, I have been accused of some underhand dealings because of this in the past. Does this meen I am a wealth tax dodger?
    I would love to think I was wealthy, the Ex wife would love to hear that one also. I had my offshore accounts to save, it is not illegal to save is it? Offshore also offered some protection against the rulings of Divorce courts(designed apperently to force divorced men into prison or into homelesness).Lower Taxes means increased income for the individual which offers greater spending power which is good for the economy. Of course I am no economist its just nice to know that if I earn it, I can Keep it!!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    414
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: The tax dodgers charter "Only little people pay taxes"

    Quote Originally Posted by Expounder View Post
    This article may interest all "tax avoiding" members of the forum who think they make a justifiable case for tax avoidance.
    I simply can't imagine to whom you could be referring!
    "Government by the people for the people becomes meaningless unless it includes major economic decision-making by the people for the people." - Jimmy Reid

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Devon
    Posts
    5,935
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: The tax dodgers charter "Only little people pay taxes"

    Quote Originally Posted by Scooter View Post
    Im not clear on this one, I earned my income all my life and paid tax on all of it through payroll. Some of this post tax income was put into savings legally in Jersey where it is not subject to tax, I have been accused of some underhand dealings because of this in the past. Does this meen I am a wealth tax dodger?
    I would love to think I was wealthy, the Ex wife would love to hear that one also. I had my offshore accounts to save, it is not illegal to save is it? Offshore also offered some protection against the rulings of Divorce courts(designed apperently to force divorced men into prison or into homelesness).Lower Taxes means increased income for the individual which offers greater spending power which is good for the economy. Of course I am no economist its just nice to know that if I earn it, I can Keep it!!

    Depends how much you have saved. If you have modest savings, chances are the tax you would be charged in the UK would not be much, and if you're on a low income you could be eligable to claim it back.
    I don't think the problem is private savers, it's the huge corperations that avoid billions in tax.
    Having said that, I think tax avoidance, although technically legal, is as morally reprihensable as benefit scrounging.
    "I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours ." Steven Roberts

    The likelyhood of you being observed is directly proportionate to the stupidity of your actions.

    Barack Hussein Obama, the president that got Bin Laden!

  6. #6
    Major Sinic Guest

    Re: The tax dodgers charter "Only little people pay taxes"

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveUK View Post
    Tax avoidance in the UK is a long overdue scandal that needs to be adressed.
    I find it interesting that you posted this just after miday today, and not a single response from the resident tories. Had it been a thread about someone fiddling a few quid in benefits, it would be awash with replies of condemnation.
    Everyone should pay the tax that the law demands. This term 'tax avoidance' is bandied about as though it is some sort of crime. At what point do we draw the line? For instance I transferred a proportion of my wealth to my wife, as a result of which she pays less tax than I would on this portion of our wealth. I pay an amount every year into a stakeholder pension for my son, and receive tax relief on it. I have invested in VCTs and EISs, not to mention my and my wife's annual ISAs. I even paid for my wife's ISA thereby doubling our allowance. I sell various investments each year in order to benefit from the CGT allowance on the profit that everyone has, if they are able to use it. These results of these decisions represent tax avoidance. They are in my opinion totally honest and morally acceptable actions. They are not tax evasion which is both a criminal and morally reprehensible act.

    If as a society the majority wish to repeal the laws which grant us tax relief on ISAs, on pension contributions, on modest capital gains then vote for it at the ballot box. Don't pillory those who are able and wish to take advantage of the law as it stands. Change the law and I can make decision whether I wish to continue to live under this regime or move to a different one, taking my wealth and investments with me.

    Regarding Dave's assertion regarding 'fiddling a few quid in benefits' this is theft and a criminal act and of course it should be punished. Tax avoidance is not a criminal act and there is nothing to be punished for.

    Now if you socialists in all your economic wisdom started to talk about the tax concessions for instance, which Labour granted to private equity companies and their friends in the City, whereby income is taxed as a capital gain then I would agree that there is a moral question to be asked, but still not a legal one. So if we are to have a serious debate about tax reforms please get your 'definitions' in order.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    520
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: The tax dodgers charter "Only little people pay taxes"

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveUK View Post
    Depends how much you have saved. If you have modest savings, chances are the tax you would be charged in the UK would not be much, and if you're on a low income you could be eligable to claim it back.
    I don't think the problem is private savers, it's the huge corperations that avoid billions in tax.
    Having said that, I think tax avoidance, although technically legal, is as morally reprihensable as benefit scrounging.
    Over a 20 year period I saved just short of a hundred thousand pounds, I had paid tax on every penny of it(otherwise I would have saved three hundred grand) I worked in a very low paid government job(until I was fired for getting Divorced). If I had kept the same amount in an onshore account I would have had 2 hundred grand saved yet it would have been given to my ex wife as a part of the divorce settlement. I pay my way in society based upon my earnings, why should I pay twice on the same money?
    Benefit scrounging is morally reprehensible in the eyes of a socialist? I thought that in the eyes of a socialist that a Benefit Scrounger was the most important member of society?
    The other question from a moral standpoint is why should a person who works his fingers to the bone be expected to lose half of his income in order to support those who refuse to work? Or even military action with which he disagrees or so on and so forth. To avoid Taxation by legal means is not immoral or illegal, it is simply a neccesary matter for those who earn little but also live inside their means, we who do this are subjected to punitive measures by the government. If we lived beyond out means and had no savings and a mountain of debt we would be rewarded. Hence I kept my savings offshore. Today I dont keep a single solitary penny in any bank.
    If I had kept an onshore account prior to my Divorce my ex wife would have been awarded my savings also, which would have made my a penniless homeless bum sponging off my fellow man ( or perhaps in the eyes of a socialist that would have made me a moral cause)? No I prefer to do my own thing, live my own life and let others do the same, Pity the same respect is not allowed Me or people like Me.
    I have no guilt about hiding my small savings from a society that has robbed in many ways since I was a small child, Today I keep my savings in my residence and even if I am robbed by some individual at least I have some chance of defending my property(small chance admittedly) if the courts or the government decide to rob me I have no choice than to hand it over or get bummed. Is their a difference between me not wanting to get bummed by the government and another trying to avoid the same? Have you ever been bummed by the government? I dont recomend it, I have experienced many aspects of government bumming ever since I was about 7 years old, now explain to me why I owe more to the government again?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Devon
    Posts
    1,013
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: The tax dodgers charter "Only little people pay taxes"

    Quote Originally Posted by Expounder View Post
    This article may interest all "tax avoiding" members of the forum who think they make a justifiable case for tax avoidance. It's written by Nick Cohen who can articulate far better than myself the ridiculous claims that they are morally right to squirrel away their wealth in a tax haven and live on the untaxed proceeds,"legally" fiddling the nation out millions of sorely needed income, hypocritically at the same time supporting at the same time punitive action against the millions of pensioners and self employed who would dare and try to "cheat" the system.

    Cameron is even employing tax "avoider" a euphemism for greedy b****** Phil green to advise the coalition, giving the seal of acceptability and approval for the wealthy to follow suit. This is confirmation that two classes still exist in Britain.

    A very interesting read:

    How Vodafone made tax dodging respectable | Nick Cohen | Comment is free | The Observer
    I see Private Eye magazine doesn't like what is going on either!

    Private Eye | Official Site

    But couldn't we use this site more productively by explaining where and how I can invest my 3s and 6p each week so it achieves a good rate of interest and doesn't get taxed to death?

    Ever since 1997 - coincides withe arrival of B Liar and Gordon Brown it is no longer worth saving anything. They encouraged the spend regardless mentality both in their political ways as well as individuals. Our country has almost been bankrupted by Labour, and I understand from the media we individuals are still spending too freely.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    U.K.
    Posts
    4,806
    Thanks
    261
    Thanked 373 Times in 283 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: The tax dodgers charter "Only little people pay taxes"

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveUK View Post
    Tax avoidance in the UK is a long overdue scandal that needs to be adressed.
    I find it interesting that you posted this just after miday today, and not a single response from the resident tories. Had it been a thread about someone fiddling a few quid in benefits, it would be awash with replies of condemnation.
    and...
    Quote Originally Posted by soloman View Post
    But couldn't we use this site more productively by explaining where and how I can invest my 3s and 6p each week so it achieves a good rate of interest and doesn't get taxed to death?
    Well seeing as Midas isn't here to defend himself I guess as a friend I'll try (otherwise his fondness for a good barny with Exp. would most definitely have meant he'd have been the first to reply), then because I'm me I'll add what I actually think at the end (can't help you with the investment stuff though Sol)! It is human nature when it comes to wealth to live within the letter of the law with regard to making it work for you and your family, a persons primary responsibility is to provide for themselves and their family to the best of their ability and using legal means to protect that is not immoral, far from it it can be argued it is the moral thing to do. Whilst accumulating their personal wealth the person has most likely contributed much to society in terms of job creation and taxes. Many of those using the law to protect their considerable assets do so partly for ideological reasons as to where the tax money is spent and will donate a considerable amount to charities they think better use the money. A high tax rate on the wealthy will ultimately lead to a brain drain.
    I think that's a summary of the argument pretty much, maybe the Major will add anything I've glossed over and/or forgotten.

    My own thoughts on the subject - I'm very much a "render unto Caesar" girl myself. It seems to me that anybody working should, in a just society, be able to more than adequately provide shelter, clothes, food and the odd luxury etc. for themselves and a small family. Anyone lucky enough, and I do consider it in a large part luck that someone is living in a time when what they supply happens to be in demand, has a responsibility through reasonable tax, to help those less fortunate who work just as hard (if not more so in some cases) at a job which is more menial (hate that word but can't think of anything more appropriate). I do think the wealthy have had far too easy a ride in the last twenty years or so, as evidenced by the rich/poor divide in this country and it is the main reason why NuLab cannot be considered part of the Labour movement. So yes I think the rich should be made to pay higher taxes, I can't help but spit when Gideon comes out and says "we're all in this together", are we hell as like, alright for him a man who hasn't had to work a day in his life, had his education for free and has that nice nest egg in the Cayman Islands!
    Whether it's immoral to use the law to avoid tax goes back to a post the Major made in another thread where he used the analogy of a "fictional" scenario :
    Quote Originally Posted by Major Sinic View Post
    He pays the tax that the law demands - no more, no less and retires to live off the income which the capital he has obtained from selling his company provides, and pays the tax on this income which the law demands - no more , no less.
    Personally I will judge the integrity of a wealthy man on how he treats the most menial of his employees and those around him who have been less fortunate.
    Here's what I don't get though, and we're at two years of trying and failing I think, what does it matter how much money is taken in tax as long as the wealthy can enjoy the fruits of their labour with the luxuries etc that it brings?
    Last edited by Opinionated; 15-11-2010 at 01:11 PM.
    "The people who have sacrificed their view in order to get to the top have very often left no footprints in the sands of time." Tony Benn

  10. #10
    Major Sinic Guest

    Re: The tax dodgers charter "Only little people pay taxes"

    Quote Originally Posted by Opinionated View Post
    and... Well seeing as Midas isn't here to defend himself I guess as a friend I'll try (otherwise his fondness for a good barny with Exp. would most definitely have meant he'd have been the first to reply), then because I'm me I'll add what I actually think at the end (can't help you with the investment stuff though Sol)! It is human nature when it comes to wealth to live within the letter of the law with regard to making it work for you and your family, a persons primary responsibility is to provide for themselves and their family to the best of their ability and using legal means to protect that is not immoral, far from it it can be argued it is the moral thing to do. Whilst accumulating their personal wealth the person has most likely contributed much to society in terms of job creation and taxes. Many of those using the law to protect their considerable assets do so partly for ideological reasons as to where the tax money is spent and will donate a considerable amount to charities they think better use the money. A high tax rate on the wealthy will ultimately lead to a brain drain.
    I think that's a summary of the argument pretty much, maybe the Major will add anything I've glossed over and/or forgotten.

    My own thoughts on the subject - I'm very much a "render unto Caesar" girl myself. It seems to me that anybody working should, in a just society, be able to more than adequately provide shelter, clothes, food and the odd luxury etc. for themselves and a small family. Anyone lucky enough, and I do consider it in a large part luck that someone is living in a time when what they supply happens to be in demand, has a responsibility through reasonable tax, to help those less fortunate who work just as hard (if not more so in some cases) at a job which is more menial (hate that word but can't think of anything more appropriate). I do think the wealthy have had far too easy a ride in the last twenty years or so, as evidenced by the rich/poor divide in this country and it is the main reason why NuLab cannot be considered part of the Labour movement. So yes I think the rich should be made to pay higher taxes, I can't help but spit when Gideon comes out and says "we're all in this together", are we hell as like, alright for him a man who hasn't had to work a day in his life, had his education for free and has that nice nest egg in the Cayman Islands!
    Whether it's immoral to use the law to avoid tax goes back to a post the Major made in another thread where he used the analogy of a "fictional" scenario :
    Personally I will judge the integrity of a wealthy man on how he treats the most menial of his employees and those around him who have been less fortunate.
    Here's what I don't get though, and we're at two years of trying and failing I think, what does it matter how much money is taken in tax as long as the wealthy can enjoy the fruits of their labour with the luxuries etc that it brings?
    Midas might add one or two further observations to what is a pretty balanced post.

    It might well seem attractive to simply raise taxes, for after all if you rob Peter to pay Paul, Paul would no doubt be in favour of the arrangement. However Peter might not be too happy, and simply move to a more tax friendly environment. Since it is invariably Peter who creates the wealth making opportunities and with it a growing economy and job opportunities it seems rather short sighted to encourage his departure. The ONS estimates that this scenario is going to cost the Exchequer 4.5bn this year.

    When you have worked hard for your money, only to find the portion that goes in tax is substantially wasted by an occasionally corrupt, often incompetent and invariably profligate government and public sector, it is extremely galling. Under such circumstances it could be argued that it is morally acceptable to miss out the middle man, and spend whatever you choose for the common good in a way over which you have some control.

    Morality of course is not an absolute, whilst law is, or at least should be. Your morality and mine may differ but who is to say with authority whose morality is the more moral. You might think it immoral for a person to avoid paying an amount of tax, but that person might think it immoral to hand over tax which will in part be totally wasted, or finance a war in which people die, and may prefer to reinvest it in a business and so provide more jobs. OK a tad convoluted but you know what I mean.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •