Panama Papers

chucknorris

Moby wrote: »

I also thought the phrase ' mass chavvy benefits culture' rather offensive.

It is, but the problem is how to distinguish between those in genuine need, and those who opt for a benefits lifestyle over a working lifestyle. Whilst I accept there will be many people that are in need, and that they should definitely receive benefits, surely you accept that there are also non genuine cases, and that some effort should be made to correct that?

martinsurrey

kabayiri wrote: »

Genuinely, if being a tax haven confers huge advantages, then why doesn't the UK consider becoming the biggest tax haven of the lot?

Double_V wrote: »

Why do we have these tax havens in the first place ?
Can we not shut them down ?

I believe these loopholes/tax haven/laws whatever you can call them were invented for the riches.

https://home.kpmg.com/xx/en/home/services/tax/tax-tools-and-resources/tax-rates-online/corporate-tax-rates-table.html

The UK IS a tax haven compared to a lot of the world, our corp tax rate of 17% from 2020 puts us as the lowest in the G8, should France (33%) try and shut us down or sanction us?

antrobus

Double_V wrote: »

Or you could simply pass bills/sanctions etc whoever is the body.
Like UN intervenes and orders countries not to make this or that. Why can't they do the same. ...

Same difference. The spare aircraft carriers and marines concerned where largely metaphorical. Although possession of said is useful if you want to make your threats credible.

Double_V wrote: »

...Somebody who leaked these docs must be inspired by Snowden.

I suspect that the two squaddies who leaked the MP expenses records might be a better example. They are both free and anonymous as is the source of the Panama Papers. Snowden was confined to the Ecudorian embassy last time I looked.

P.S. And the two squaddies allegedly got a £100k for their trouble. No idea whether the Sueddeutsche Zeitung paid anything.

antrobus

martinsurrey wrote: »

...The UK IS a tax haven compared to a lot of the world, our corp tax rate of 17% from 2020 puts us as the lowest in the G8, should France (33%) try and shut us down or sanction us?

The highly regarded Antrobus Dictionary of the English Language defines a 'tax heaven' as follows;

Any jurisdiction that has tax rates that are lower than yours.

Moby

chucknorris wrote: »

It is, but the problem is how to distinguish between those in genuine need, and those who opt for a benefits lifestyle over a working lifestyle. Whilst I accept there will be many people that are in need, and that they should definitely receive benefits, surely you accept that there are also non genuine cases, and that some effort should be made to correct that?

Totally agree Chuck....and those that take advantage should be prosecuted/denied benefits. It's just the generalised sweeping statement comments I'm referring to.

Moby

antrobus wrote: »

. Snowden was confined to the Ecudorian embassy last time I looked.

I think that's Assange....wanted by Sweden and USA....Snowden is 'at large' in Putin land.

antrobus

Moby wrote: »

I think that's Assange....wanted by Sweden and USA....Snowden is 'at large' in Putin land.

You could be right. Maybe I'm getting my 'leakers' confused.:)

Anyways, would that be the same 'Putin' as is featured in the Panams Papers? Some newspapers are reporting that Russia is very unhappy with their release, and regard the whole thing as a dirty trick by western intelligence to undermine the Russian government.

P.S. The Icelandic PM has resigned. One casualty.

Moby

antrobus wrote: »

You could be right. Maybe I'm getting my 'leakers' confused.:)

Anyways, would that be the same 'Putin' as is featured in the Panams Papers? Some newspapers are reporting that Russia is very unhappy with their release, and regard the whole thing as a dirty trick by western intelligence to undermine the Russian government.

P.S. The Icelandic PM has resigned. One casualty.

When you look at what has been released you could see why he would think that! I'm just beginning to be aware that the internet enables the instantaneous world wide release of information like this and how is it possible to ever be totally secure against it?...... and the repercussions ....who knows?
https://panamapapers.icij.org/20160403-putin-russia-offshore-network.html

chucknorris

Moby wrote: »

Totally agree Chuck....and those that take advantage should be prosecuted/denied benefits. It's just the generalised sweeping statement comments I'm referring to.

That's another problem with those that do abuse the system, they give ammunition to those that tend to use generalisations.

chewmylegoff

Moby wrote: »

Of course there are different motives between individuals regarding these issues. Some are more culpable than others but as chewmylegoff says the purpose is often: ' Is that not culpable as well? To me that is stretching moral relativism beyond the pale....especially when those taking advantage of such choices are often judging others and making policy regarding welfare benefits and taxation for those who do not have such options available to them; the very same people who believe it is correct that I have not deserved a pay rise for the last six years because I work in public services and the country can't afford it!

But what is the evidence that these people who make govt policy in the UK are avoiding tax whilst telling you that you can't have a payrise? So far we have evidence that the father of the prime minister was the director of an investment fund with multiple clients incorporated in a tax haven. This hardly equates to what you are saying - it's not like the Panama papers show George Osborne embezzling govt funds and hiding them in a numbered Swiss bank account whilst laughing at your 0% payrise.

I'm still not clear what taxes you think are being wrongfully evaded and what you think morally acceptable looks like. Is it your view that it should be illegal for any UK person to invest money in a company located in another jurisdiction?

Presumably therefore you want to ban UK companies from having overseas subsidiaries (which pay no UK corporation tax on their profits even when those profits are remitted to the UK thanks to the reforms of Gordon Brown). You must also want to ban all inward investment into the UK as we can't have overseas nationals investing their money in the UK rather than investing it locally for all of the same reasons? Or is inward investment legitimate, it's only outward investment that is the problem?