MONEY MORAL DILEMMA:Should Chanelle avoid using Ziggy?

ZUBAIR_3

my friend used different tradesmen at different times. even reputable ones offered him no vat , no tax , no receit cash discounts. he should have reported them after job done and paid in cash.

Avalon_Adam

Off course she should. The fact he doesn't declare his earnings makes no difference. Our taxes are going to fund a war in Iraq and countless other stupid projects of this government. If he's good and cheap then she should definatley use him

Avalon_Adam

BigSky wrote: »

This isn't a political issue, it's a maths problem. If Ziggy does not pay income tax, national insurance and VAT then the tax burden for everyone else has to increase. If you want lower tax then make sure everyone pays their way:

Are you naive enough to believe that our tax increases are down to small traders not paying the government tax? I suppose they would have a problem funding MPs 30% pay rises and the War in Iraq. Our money is squandered by the government so its better off in the pockets of the people who graft hard

Avalon_Adam

Middlestitch wrote: »

Use him and report him!

Hypocrite. You are even lower than a tax cheat. I think by using him in the first place to get a cheep job then grassing. ever heard of being an accessory to a crime?

Tetsuko

I'm just wondering how many people who say that they would be so happy to grass up this worker in the blink of an eye are whiter than white themselves.

How many people might have given someone a lift and stuck the money towards the petrol in their pocket without declaring it or mowed their neighbours grass who then gives them a tenner for doing it for them, or pays them a little something for house-sitting/looking after the kids/walking the dog while they were on holiday/popping down the shop for an elderly relative etc etc etc. Bet there are quite a few people who've stuck monies in their pocket without declaring it as the income that it is :think:

How many people on here declare any income they get from all their clickthrough sites and survey websites everyone keeps boasting about making money from on here?

It's like being in a page of 1984. Some people on here would probably want Ziggy to "dissapear" in the night for his crimes against the party :eek:

When people spend a fortune paying their accountants to try to find legal loopholes so they can avoid paying their taxes and will complain and sue to get anything they can out of a misfortune it's good moneysaving but when a working man might need to put shoes on his kids feet or food on the table, it's theft. The world's gone crazy

I think the person who made the comment about casting the first stone was spot on.

paines

As a self-employed tradesman for 40years, always paying my tax correctly, I have always had the likes of Ziggy being able to undercut and force a lower wage for legit operators.
Do you think that is right? How would you like that situation in your job?

stinky

A Classic moral dilemma. One that I've had to argue about many times.

I used to be totally against paying cash and the builder getting away with not paying tax. However, one grows up and realises the main person losing out is not the builder - he just moves on to another job. The main person that loses is ME. Sure - in the bigger picture its wrong that he is breaking the law - and yes it takes tax away from the NHS etc. But the reality is - I only have a certain amount of money to pay for a job. Why should 90% of the population get a cheap job done for cash - while I pay full price and stand alone on my moral soapbox.

Nah - I'm joining the populous - and saving myself some money now! I'd use Ziggy.

This is of course if I actually thought Ziggy could do a good job. Much comes down to personality of the builder. I would still make sure he wasn't a dodgy builder, but someone who knew what he was doing.

I'm actually having building work done at the moment - 40k's worth. When asked if I wanted to pay some of it cash - I said a most definite YES. Most of it will be cheque - and I will have my full guarantees from the builder. But I'm not going to turn down saving myself £3k odd by being the goody goody.

Wake up people - most of this country doesn't care about the rest of the country. Its not right - sure - (I wish it was different) but its not my job to stand alone and save it. The people responsilbe for Ziggy not paying his taxes is the Govt. I'm afraid. Its the Inland Revenue that should be doing a better job of chasing non-tax payers, not my job to do it for them. And while they're at it, they can chase companies like Tesco - who run offshore accounts and split their business into colours (Blue Tesco etc.) to avoid billions of tax in this country. I'm meant to feel bad because I'm avoiding paying a tiny amount? Do any of you feel bad for shopping at Tesco and supporting their devious tax avoidance?

Also - if one of you goody goody's was offered £1000 to do a job cash in hand, by a friend for example. Would you all really declare that money? I very much doubt a single one of you would.

Gregm

Tetsuko wrote: »

I'm just wondering how many people who say that they would be so happy to grass up this worker in the blink of an eye are whiter than white themselves.

How many people might have given someone a lift and stuck the money towards the petrol in their pocket without declaring it or mowed their neighbours grass who then gives them a tenner for doing it for them, or pays them a little something for house-sitting/looking after the kids/walking the dog while they were on holiday/popping down the shop for an elderly relative etc etc etc. Bet there are quite a few people who've stuck monies in their pocket without declaring it as the income that it is :think:

I totally agree, I had some plumbers around to change my boiler this week, all above board etc. But then I decided I wanted one of my gas fires disconnected so I just asked one of the guys if he could do it for me 'for a drink', he did it and I gave him £20.

Another situation a few weeks ago I was about to drive to spain, I popped into my local garage and asked them to just check the car over before I go, you know oil, water and tyres etc. They did it for me and said there was no charge (I know hard to beleive a garage to not charge), so as I walked out I put a few quid on the counter and told them to put it 'in the drinks pot'.

I am sure I am not the only one who has done this. These people have done me a favour and saved me a few quid. Do I expect them to declare this? No.

How many people tell a taxi driver to 'keep the change', it might only be 50p but over the course of a year I am sure they get £100's from it, do you think they declare it? Sorry but if you do then you need to join the 'Real World'.

If Ziggy has been recommended by someone you trust then use him, let him decide how to handle his taxes, if the IR are doing their job he will get caught out in the end.

harryhound

Phew, at last a bit of realism is breaking out, some of us have jobs that add value to the economy, not just shuffle the taxes.

As a pensioner, here is my two pennyworth contribution.

FACTS:

* By and large the government has NO money of its own. It takes our money and spends it, less expenses, on our behalf; or more dishonestly prints more than it collects.

* There is little or NO morality in how the government spends our money, by and large, it buys our votes and thus the legitimacy to stay in business by raising taxes to finance its schemes.

* Tax law has almost NO logic; it is just an arbitrary collection of more and more complex rules. This complexity wastes the power of some of the best brains in the country, as accountants and collectors play very well paid games of poacher and gamekeeper.

* Even in the Western world taxes differ in their rules and the amount they raise BUT everywhere there seems to be a trend to big government and big business. Personally I don't like big government; it becomes oppressive, inefficient and makes horrendous mistakes (Iraq ?!).

* If ordinary people start making money out of something, the government will think of a way of increasing taxes on it.

So where do I stand on Ziggy? Is he capable of doing a better job than I am ? Probably not, he sounds as bit of a "jack the lad". I'll decorate my own home AND I WON'T BE PAYING TAX ON THE ADDED VALUE I CREATE.
It is not my job to audit Ziggy's accounts. I doubt he is getting away with much, like me he is paying 17.5% VAT on his materials and the Revenue & Customs will be on his tail. It is probably bravado, like the market trader who claims his shoddy goods have fallen off a lorry. (Anyone want to start a thread on tax paid by Private Equity directors ?).
In the past I discussed "Ziggy" with an East German refugee colleague; it seems that in Germany it is a good idea to check your contractor's tax certificate, when arranging house repairs; or you BOTH end up in court. Do we need that system over here?

Harry.

PS Just in case you think me a zero tax pensioner freak: I have a SMALL self employed business to augment my pension. On its profits I have to pay tax and national insurance. During my lifetime, the action I took, that created the most value, was redesigning, for free, a proposal put forward by government officials. I saved the rest of you 3/4 of a million (probably over 1.5 million in today's money) So if you would like to contribute your share of 2p to a charity, let us ask Martin if he has got any ideas for a charity specialising in education in money and tax affairs.

Scorpio_Brighton

Just as it's a company's job to make money from us, so it's a government's job to leave its ordinary workers just enough to keep them working and paying taxes, rather than rioting in the streets. We don't riot easily enough, but some do fight back.

A friend who recently retired found that after half a century of work, tax and National Insurance, even his meagre pension was taxed. Included in what was counted as his taxable income were the amounts he would have to pay in Council Tax, TV Tax, Insurance Tax, Vehicle Tax, VAT and Excise Duty; so like the rest of us, he was even paying tax on taxes out of his pittance.

Then he realised that the tax-man could hardly insist that it was impossible for him to live on a pension that barely covered his fixed costs. That was, after all, what the government said he could live on. So when he started to work to make ends meet, it was strictly cash in, cash out. For the first time in his life, he can now buy some of the modest luxuries he always wanted. He still pays VAT and excise duty at a minimum of 17½% on practically every undeclared pound he spends. That is higher than the top income tax rate of some successful economies, so he is not living tax free, he has just restrained the rapacity of the state a little.

Tax Freedom Day (the day we'd get the first £1 of what we earn if we paid all our tax first) was June 1st this year, a whole week later than in 2002. That's a week more working to finance Civil Service pensions and MPs freebies than we did five years ago. Quite a thought, isn't it? Can you think of anything we get from the state now that we didn't get five years ago, other than increased repression and surveillance? We don't even get decent programmes any more in return for the £135.50-a-year TV Tax (which actually costs you £225.83 if you pay 40% income tax on part of your earnings first: and that's not counting the National Insurance Tax you paid as well).

If she thinks he can do the job properly, Chantelle should count herself lucky to meet a man who shares the saving of keeping his tax bill low, and she should pay him at least 10% more than he asks. He's almost certainly under-valuing his work, and he might well go to prison for exercising those particular political beliefs. In any case, the others are probably also ripping off the tax-man, but not sharing any saving with her.

It's by resisting paying tax that we keep it down, not by paying it. That's why the super-rich pay so unbelievably little tax. Unlike us, they can afford to go elsewhere, and the government is afraid that they will, if asked even to pay the same proportion as the rest of us.