We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
London mayoral candidates publish tax records

tartanterra
Posts: 819 Forumite
Not sure what to read into this. Is it a bad thing if all our our representatives at all levels start to be upfront about their financial arrangements?
I do think it's a symptom of the public's mistrust in politicians.
In the 2010-11 tax year
Conservative Mr Johnson paid £210,410 income tax on an income of £473,280.
Labour's Mr Livingstone paid £22,691 tax on an income of £94,568. He also paid £11,970 in corporation tax.
Liberal Democrat Mr Paddick paid £14,534 in tax on an income of £76,804.
And Green Party candidate Ms Jones paid £15,577 in income tax on an income of £63,028.
I do think it's a symptom of the public's mistrust in politicians.
In the 2010-11 tax year
Conservative Mr Johnson paid £210,410 income tax on an income of £473,280.
Labour's Mr Livingstone paid £22,691 tax on an income of £94,568. He also paid £11,970 in corporation tax.
Liberal Democrat Mr Paddick paid £14,534 in tax on an income of £76,804.
And Green Party candidate Ms Jones paid £15,577 in income tax on an income of £63,028.
Nothing is foolproof, as fools are so ingenious! 

0
Comments
-
Interesting that the Fat Cat Tory paid almost 45% tax whilst the socialist paid a little more than 35%.0
-
Interesting that the Fat Cat Tory paid almost 45% tax whilst the socialist paid a little more than 35%.
Not to mention the fact that he didn't publish details on his company, only what he received from his company by way of salary & dividends.
I hope this comes back to scupper his campaign.0 -
How do paddick and jones earn their money?0
-
princeofpounds wrote: »How do paddick and jones earn their money?
Paddick gets a pension as an ex-copper.
Jones is a member of the London Assembly.0 -
Wow, politicians make quite a lot of money.0
-
The big issue for me in all this is not how people pay tax, it is that Livingstone said that tax avoidance essentially was the preserve of the "rich b*stards" and that they shouldn't be allowed to vote.
To quote Andrew Gilligan:
The big problem for Livingstone is that he has been a vocal supporter of UK Uncut, which campaigns against not just (illegal) tax evasion but also (legal) tax avoidance – by Vodafone, Topshop and other big companies. "These rich !!!!!!!s just don't get it," Livingstone wrote in 2009. "No one should be allowed to vote in a British election, let alone sit in our parliament, unless they are paying their full share of tax." The former London mayor called for everyone to "pay tax at the same rate on their earnings and all other income".
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/andrewgilligan/100142332/ken-livingstone-tax-avoidance-his-supporters-disquiet-grows/
Do as I say, not as I do.Please stay safe in the sun and learn the A-E of melanoma: A = asymmetry, B = irregular borders, C= different colours, D= diameter, larger than 6mm, E = evolving, is your mole changing? Most moles are not cancerous, any doubts, please check next time you visit your GP.
0 -
I followed this yesterday. It's far worse for Ken than it seems, even if you leave aside the NIC avoidance which is pretty hypocritical.
His partner has one of two shares in the company and so got the same dividend. It appears that the corporation tax has been essentially double counted. A great deal of money has been retained in his company, and it appears despite earning more than Boris he has arranged his tax affairs to avoid being in the 50% band, presumably for political reasons. There are also some questionable tax deductible political donations rumoured to be in the full statement.
Nothing wrong with this in itself - all the measures are legal - except that he has used tax as a weapon of attack in his campaigning. As well as anti-semitism and a lot of unpleasant slurring.
What he has managed to engineer is a situation where in fact he's destroyed his own career, may have damaged the labour party, at a time when the tories looked in serious trouble on tax. To appear as a fatter cat than the fat cats under attack is a serious political miscalculation. And frankly he deserves everything he's unleashed upon himself.
Good article here: http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2012/04/06/death-by-a-thousand-nics-beckons-for-the-livingstone-campaign0 -
red ken is red-faced?0
-
ITs OK, despite all the issues raised including the dodgy political funding the BBC have never felt this in any way deserves mentioning so it is clearly not a real story (or else the BBC are institutionally biased...)tartanterra wrote: »Not sure what to read into this. Is it a bad thing if all our our representatives at all levels start to be upfront about their financial arrangements?
I do think it's a symptom of the public's mistrust in politicians.
In the 2010-11 tax yearI think....0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards