Is being a tax avoider socially unacceptable?

Generali

Out,_Vile_Jelly wrote: »

I'm not sure you can compare pensions and ISAs with large scale corporate tax dodging.

Tax-free saving is designed to encourage people to think long term and save for their future. I'm sure we can all agree that with an ageing population less dependency on the State is helpful all round. Corporate tax dodging benefits a select few already-rich share-holders and makes the pot smaller for everyone.

I find those that consider it a "duty" to avoid tax where at all possible, and who defend the likes of Gary Barlow, are the first to moan about the local schools and that they can't have free IVF on the NHS.

For the record, I've been offered lower prices for cash payment for tradie jobs in my house, and I always pay properly. I work in a publicly-funded sector (university); why would I want to make cuts and redundancies more likely?

Even companies that pay very low rates of Corporation Tax are still following the law.

Tax laws are tax laws. If I take a particular course of action that means I pay less tax but remain within the law then I don't see what the problem is. If I act within the law but am still doing wrong then surely the law should change. How can reasonably be expected to have my tax calculated outside tax law?

A complicating factor is 'fiduciary duty'. If I run Apple or Amazon or any other listed company then I have a fiduciary duty to my shareholders. I have to do what I can to maximise their returns. If I deliberately overpay company taxes then I leave myself open to being sued or even jailed for abandoning my fiduciary duty.

wotsthat

Tax is complicated enough without having to decide which forms of tax avoidance are moral and which aren't.

Politicians playing politics instead of focusing on writing rules that aren't full of loopholes.

Loughton_Monkey

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I believe there is a key difference between the "everyday" tax avoidance and those that go out of their way to avoid tax.......

I go out of my way to avoid tax.

Specifically, a couple of shopping trips to France saves me about £3.5K on tobacco, and £2.5K on alcohol, the bulk of which is UK tax.

Then, of course, there is the transfer of assets to Mrs LM's name to avoid higher rate tax, using ISA and Pension Contribution limits to the full.

My latest little manoeuvre involves deferring state pension (thus achieving a 'healthy' 2½% interest rate from the state) for a few years while rampantly drawing down small pension funds to within an inch of higher rate tax. At an appropriate juncture I can scale back the drawdown and grasp the full £40K (say) lump sum all at once without fear of higher rate tax.

Generally, I'm using things that the more hard-up person wouldn't have the means to do. Something you'd be proud of Graham, I'm sure.

In turn, the mega rich can do additional things that I can't do. I don't class that as wrong. HMRC should have the laws changed if they are worried about it.

Out,_Vile_Jelly

I have always hated obsequious fawning over the wealthy; something that seems particularly endemic in British society, from forelock-tugging to inbred Royals, to rich-but-thick celebrity z-lister obsession. Politicians seem especially fearful of upsetting any large company in case they threaten to leave the UK. Consequently, we end up being ruled by multi-nationals rather than our elected representatives.

I would like a politician to explain that taxation pays for civilisation. I recently read some English social history that described the near-impossibility of road travel in the 17th and 18th centuries, and how difficult it was to unite and co-ordinate efforts in highway maintenance. Trade needs infrastructure, and infrastructure needs a cut of trade profit to be planned and maintained. If companies want to do business in the UK, and benefit from a stable, prosperous, healthy, educated workforce, with cash and leisure time to spare, then they have to pay clearly defined taxes. If they don't want to, they can f-off and try and make a profit from subsistence peasants, or set up shop in Southern Italy (where a Milanese businessman told me some years ago it was still impossible for companies based in the industrial North to open factories down there due to the !!!!! corruption).

ETA- the name of the friendly types in The Godfather films seems to be censored, bizarrely.

PasturesNew

I don't need to avoid it. Not earning enough to reach the tax free threshold
I'd LOVE to be a higher rate taxpayer.... it'll never happen.
I'd be smug and brag.

Graham_Devon

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

Specifically, a couple of shopping trips to France saves me about £3.5K on tobacco, and £2.5K on alcohol, the bulk of which is UK tax.

Well, you may be saving that much on tobacco and alcohol, but you are breaking the law by a considerable margin.

So yes, the sort of shopping you are doing to avoid taxation is socially unacceptable.

sinizterguy

Within the framework of the rules, I will pay as little tax as possible, my company will pay as little as possible and I expect other people and other companies (no matter what the size) to do the same.

Improve the framework to do what you want it to do rather than implying ill or good will when paying tax ....

Mess with it too much and companies and individuals who can may choose to take their business and their taxes elsewhere.

All else is waffle.

DigForVictory

There's intelligent financial management - using tools provided like ISAs.

There's a very murky area for the high net worth individuals where their advisors will make suggestions without a murmur as to the legalities or moralities involved.

As soon as the punter knows that their financials are not actually legal? That's deliberate evasion & I'd hope to see it stomped on.

I pay my taxes to enjoy GB PLC - the schools & libraries & hospitals & museums - all the things that make up for being cold & wet 51 weeks of the year. Just thinking of someone choosing to enjoy it all but not put their hand in their pocket for it? Gets the circulation flowing nicely.

toby3000

I sometimes think that the reason we have loopholes is because of lawmakers underestimate the sheer dishonesty of multinationals. Is it legal for Starbucks UK to pay massive sums of money to another Starbucks company for the right to call itself Starbucks? Apparently so. Is it honest? No, not really, and I think any normal person can understand that.

One thing I do find bizarre is the idea that these tax dodgers are going to leave the UK. Who do Amazon and Boots think they're kidding? And who cares if they leave? I know it's different with manufacturers, but they actually don't seem to come up.

Graham_Devon

toby3000 wrote: »

Is it legal for Starbucks UK to pay massive sums of money to another Starbucks company for the right to call itself Starbucks? Apparently so. Is it honest? No, not really, and I think any normal person can understand that.

Exactly - and I honestly fail to comprehend how on earth this can be linked in any way to someone having an ISA or a pension.