How long will Cameron stay at No.10

DiggerUK

C_Mababejive wrote: »

This whole tax thing is a total non story. He hasnt broken the law.........

But he is head honcho in the legislative body that originally made these laws, and after making a lot of noise about curtailing such schemes, he has failed to do so.
This conflict of interest leaves him, his family, and the obscenely wealthy, avoiding taxes that few others can take advantage of.

He is also on record for lobbying in the EU to stymie attempts for European wide action against such schemes..._

Generali

Safe until a new leader elected in time for next election.

DiggerUK wrote: »

But he is head honcho in the legislative body that originally made these laws, and after making a lot of noise about curtailing such schemes, he has failed to do so.
This conflict of interest leaves him, his family, and the obscenely wealthy, avoiding taxes that few others can take advantage of.

He is also on record for lobbying in the EU to stymie attempts for European wide action against such schemes..._

There is no conflict of interest and no tax avoidance.

It really isn't hard to understand. Are you really that stupid or are you being disingenuous?

DiggerUK

Generali wrote: »

There is no conflict of interest and no tax avoidance.It really isn't hard to understand........

There is a massive conflict of interest, his public stance is that he is going to lead a crackdown on tax avoidance schemes, and hopefully, the causes of tax avoidance schemes.
Instead he has done nothing of the kind, obstructs European efforts to do so, and resists coming clean when presented with the evidence.

He has benefited from tax avoidance, because whilst his money was in the scheme, it grew, taking full advantage of the tax situation. The few hundred he paid over 2010/11 reveals the advantage..._

Generali

Safe until a new leader elected in time for next election.

DiggerUK wrote: »

He has benefited from tax avoidance, because whilst his money was in the scheme, it grew, taking full advantage of the tax situation. The few hundred he paid over 2010/11 reveals the advantage..._

No he didn't.

Moby

DiggerUK wrote: »

There is a massive conflict of interest, his public stance is that he is going to lead a crackdown on tax avoidance schemes, and hopefully, the causes of tax avoidance schemes.
Instead he has done nothing of the kind, obstructs European efforts to do so, and resists coming clean when presented with the evidence.

He has benefited from tax avoidance, because whilst his money was in the scheme, it grew, taking full advantage of the tax situation. The few hundred he paid over 2010/11 reveals the advantage..._

He took advantage of his privilege and wealth and protected his interests. His mother made the gifts of cash to avoid paying inheritance tax. Legally correct but he clearly didnt want us to know about it and thats the point;) Also whether Blairmore is legal or not doesnt change the fact that he benefited from shares in an offshore tax fund......probably paying no tax while in the fund ...and of course he still hasnt said anything about the other 72k of shares and whether they were from an offshore fund......and why has he brought forward all these tax evasion proposals now? Do people really think he is doing this by choice......That he really wanted to do this?..... but of course we are all in this together arent we!:rotfl:

Nick_C

Safe until a new leader elected in time for next election.

Tromking wrote: »

Rich, privileged people like Cameron ... they`re great at keeping more of their own money away from the taxman than the rest of us.

I have to disagree.

Look at the tax figures published yesterday. Cameron and Osborne are each paying approximately 37% of their income in income tax.

My income this year will be around £23,250. My income tax will be around £1463, around 6.3% of my income.

The rich pay far more tax than people with modest incomes. If we didn't have lots of wealthy people in this country like Cameron and Osborne paying very high levels of tax, there would be no money to hand out to the !!!!less and workshy.

I actually think the rich pay far too much tax. A flat rate of tax would be much fairer. Why should the rich have to pay a marginal tax rate of 45% when people with modest incomes are only taxed at 20%?

Moby

Nick_C wrote: »

I have to disagree.

Look at the tax figures published yesterday. Cameron and Osborne are each paying approximately 37% of their income in income tax.

My income this year will be around £23,250. My income tax will be around £1463, around 6.3% of my income.

The rich pay far more tax than people with modest incomes. If we didn't have lots of wealthy people in this country like Cameron and Osborne paying very high levels of tax, there would be no money to hand out to the !!!!less and workshy.

I actually think the rich pay far too much tax. A flat rate of tax would be much fairer. Why should the rich have to pay a marginal tax rate of 45% when people with modest incomes are only taxed at 20%?

You only know whats in their tax return not what they have been able to hide from the taxman. They pay more tax because they have far more resources and privileges.

chucknorris

Safe until a new leader elected in time for next election.

Nick_C wrote: »

I have to disagree.

Look at the tax figures published yesterday. Cameron and Osborne are each paying approximately 37% of their income in income tax.

My income this year will be around £23,250. My income tax will be around £1463, around 6.3% of my income.

The rich pay far more tax than people with modest incomes. If we didn't have lots of wealthy people in this country like Cameron and Osborne paying very high levels of tax, there would be no money to hand out to the !!!!less and workshy.

I actually think the rich pay far too much tax. A flat rate of tax would be much fairer. Why should the rich have to pay a marginal tax rate of 45% when people with modest incomes are only taxed at 20%?

We are going to take a look at the Isle of Man this summer, IF we like it there we will consider moving there, and taking advantage of the lower taxes, 10% basic rate income tax, 20% top rate, no capital gains tax, corporation tax currently 0% (but 10% for banking, property and very large retail) although I'm probably not looking to start a company, but it isn't impossible that I end up doing so, and taking advantage of the 0%/10% tax and there is no stamp duty either. We would still retain some property over here and pay some UK tax, but I would probably keep that income just below the higher rate tax band, to keep it at the basic rate. Although the cost of living is higher in the IOM, so you probably need sizable investments to come out on top.

Also I couldn't believe how cheap the houses are over there (compared to Surrey):

https://www.onthemarket.com/details/2326502/

That would be about double the price where we currently live.

Mistermeaner

Safe until a new leader elected in time for next election.

Moby wrote: »

You only know whats in their tax return not what they have been able to hide from the taxman. They pay more tax because they have far more resources and privileges.

Im now hitting a marginal rate of 60% - what privilege do I have that are not a result of hard work?

chucknorris

Safe until a new leader elected in time for next election.

Mistermeaner wrote: »

Im now hitting a marginal rate of 60% - what privilege do I have that are not a result of hard work?

I would be too if it wasn't for investing in my SIPP, wouldn't you rather invest in a SIPP or other form of pension and get the 60% tax relief?