clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,323
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Other Sport] Say it ain't so Lewis!
- Thread starter GJN1
- Start date
This has always puzzled me. I try to imagine somehow I hit the jackpot and am suddenly earning a thousand times a year more than I used to. Would my reaction be "great, but I'm not paying any tax. Whisk me off to somewhere where I don't need to pay any".
How much cash do you really need? It's not just Hamilton, it seems to afflict many once they are making big money.
He can wrap himself up in the Monaco flag next time he wins. Grasping bugger.
How much cash do you really need? It's not just Hamilton, it seems to afflict many once they are making big money.
He can wrap himself up in the Monaco flag next time he wins. Grasping bugger.
bha100
Active member
- Aug 25, 2011
- 898
I have always wondered why, the guy is worth over £130 million, if he just paid the 3 mill vat on the jet, lets be honest is it really going to make any difference to his life, he will still have a cool £127 million and some more
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,323
I think you are confusing breaking the law and sticking two fingers up to Tax regulations until the HMRC catch up with you.
What's quite clear in the programme is the laws are often in place.
More and more of these schemes are being deemed illegitimate by the week. Re: Investment in loss making movies, Mel Brooks had it nailed.
Such Tax efficiency schemes are in place to promote business.
They are not designed for an individual to re-class their personal income and possessions as business expenses.
A sole trader putting through the odd thing as "business" is one thing. Hamilton doing the same with his private Jet is another.
All the experts on the programme agreed. He wasn't due a refund.
The rules are there.
HMRC are gonna be busy.
Sent from my LG-K520 using Tapatalk
- Jan 3, 2012
- 16,589
All of this.
I believe in tax, but I also have no problem with people who seek legitimately to minimise the amount of tax they pay.
Having watched the Panorama programme, this does not seem to be about legitimate avoidance, which would surely make it evasion.
We have a friend who is a very competent tax adviser who has been venting her spleen about a lot of these sorts of dodgy dealings for a long time.
FatSuperman
Well-known member
- Feb 25, 2016
- 2,830
If you were self-employed, would you set up a Ltd company and then take your full income as a PAYE salary? Paying employers NI as well? When you sit down with an accountant they are likely to talk you through the options, I would suspect that remarkably few people chose to pay the most tax they possibly can. I am by no means defending the practice, but I think it's worth remembering that our ire here should be at the system that allows this to happen. A significant number of people are BOUND to try and take advantage of it by legal means, if it's not too taxing (haha!) to do so.
The rich have been doing it for time immemorial, but now it is increasingly an option for high earners (six-figure salary people). And since the majority of tax in this country is paid by the top 20% of earners, it's no surprise the government are taking actions (decades late, but you know how they roll).
A year or so ago the UK tax code overtook India and became the longest, most complicated tax code on the planet - this was whilst brining in an act on corporation tax that was supposed to simplify things (that particular set of nifty rules is over 800 pages on it's own).
If we had a simpler system, we would have fewer issues. How can it be so bloody difficult to do!
FatSuperman
Well-known member
- Feb 25, 2016
- 2,830
Just another step closer to the the Nanny state.
portlock seagull
Why? Why us?
- Jul 28, 2003
- 17,075
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,323
But there would be contributing taxes in the country they live, whilst the programme was generally about those who don't so I'm not sure what your point is.
That's not the argument with this plane.
Sent from my BTV-DL09 using Tapatalk
boik
Well-known member
When I was contracting, I chose to use an umbrella company, and paid normal PAYE through them. Everyone said I could avoid tax by going self-employed, but I didn't like the morality of it and was earning more than enough after tax. I must admit, the convenience of it was also a major attraction, but I saw no reason to make my life complicated just to avoid paying tax that I didn't object to paying. People will call me a mug, but life has taught me that money is far from the most important thing out there.
OK, OK. Fair enough. You unwittingly gave me the impression you were in favour of tax dodging.
This is an interesting thread. I think my view is that we should all try to minimise our tax hit, and expect the state to make a better effort to rake in what is legally due. Which....is slightly not how I usually view things.... after all I would never argue it is our duty to see how much we can drink before driving and the duty of the old bill to hold us to account.
I have always favoured a flat % income tax rate, and no concessions. So the poor ******* on £15K pays £3K on his/her 20%, while Sir Albion, on a self-proclaimed £150K, pays £30K. That is fair and proportional. And HMG can increase or decrease the % based on need, with increasing need reflecting HMG's shitness, an incentivisation to them to do better that will be factored into the minds of voters, come next general election.
This also saves on tax lawyers etc. Unfortunately it fails to offer the opaque system that allows for corruption by politicians in pursuit of support or personal gain, and the associated Google-style raping of our economy. So politicians are much more in favour of a complicated tax system that can be manipulated without the rest of us being able to work out WTF is going on.
Sometimes I'm minded to suspect there is no such thing as society and, instead, just individual tax-minimising electors and their grasping families.
D
Deleted member 2719
Guest
So Lewis and Co are smashing the country for an estimated 5 Billion a year in tax.
Loop hole or not they are greed C&&ts and Simon Cowell said it as is, you earn the money you pay your tax.
Hamilton in my eyes has always been a arrogant unlikable guy and this does not surprise me a jot.
So will Hamilton say he will pay the 3.3million he owes the tax man as a goodwill gesture because I am not greedy c&&t, it would give him the great chance for a look at me PR campaign.
Loop hole or not they are greed C&&ts and Simon Cowell said it as is, you earn the money you pay your tax.
Hamilton in my eyes has always been a arrogant unlikable guy and this does not surprise me a jot.
So will Hamilton say he will pay the 3.3million he owes the tax man as a goodwill gesture because I am not greedy c&&t, it would give him the great chance for a look at me PR campaign.
- Thread starter
- #74
Probably caprination tax...
OzMike
Well-known member
Let's be honest, given the chance most people on here wouldn't do it any differently, if they had that sort of money.
Hamilton might be British, but not most of his earnings are from working abroad, as there's only one Grand Prix in England a year.
Hamilton might be British, but not most of his earnings are from working abroad, as there's only one Grand Prix in England a year.
That sums it up perfectly.
Revenue and Customs should take him to court and let's see how he feels about paying tax then.
I gather that the private jet wheeze Lewis signed up to saved him about £3.3 million in tax. That is a substantial wedge to be sure and there aren't many that would voluntarily pass up on that sort of amount given the opportunity. However, if you have sufficient income to even be thinking of avoiding that sort of sum then one imagines you must lead a financially secure existence. Fundamentally, would he really miss this amount? If I were in that situation I would like to think that I would simply take the hit and go some way to paying back for the education and healthcare I have received to date.
Not that I'll ever get the chance to put that theory to the test.
Not that I'll ever get the chance to put that theory to the test.
Shropshire Seagull
Well-known member
The naivety regarding tax on this thread by some is shocking.
On the faux patriotism bit - I was born in Brighton and educated there, I now live in Shropshire, does that mean I'm a faux Albion supporter now just because I don't happen to live in Brighton anymore?
For the super-rich, ways of saving money on their tax bill are not much different to the likes of us doing our shopping at Aldi instead of Waitrose to save on our food bill. I could afford to shop at Waitrose but choose to buy some of my shopping at Aldi to save my money.
So long as the law is not broken I have no issue with anyone taking steps to reduce their tax bill. Let he who is without an ISA cast the first stone since the original purpose of the ISA was to earn tax-free interest.
On the faux patriotism bit - I was born in Brighton and educated there, I now live in Shropshire, does that mean I'm a faux Albion supporter now just because I don't happen to live in Brighton anymore?
For the super-rich, ways of saving money on their tax bill are not much different to the likes of us doing our shopping at Aldi instead of Waitrose to save on our food bill. I could afford to shop at Waitrose but choose to buy some of my shopping at Aldi to save my money.
So long as the law is not broken I have no issue with anyone taking steps to reduce their tax bill. Let he who is without an ISA cast the first stone since the original purpose of the ISA was to earn tax-free interest.
Captain Sensible
Well-known member
Allegedly, the Swiss were charging him a special low % tax when he was “living” on Lake Geneva. Then they wanted to up that, and he bolted to Monaco.