Leekbrookgull
Well-known member
Once again,and apart from the pun,good work Daivd Conn.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Many footballers facing financial ruin by HMRC
- Thread starter Uncle C
- Start date
Beach Hut
Brighton Bhuna Boy
I would question the priorities of any Government that consider this more important than the stunning amount of corporation tax huge companies appear to be able to avoid paying in the UK these days.
Avoidance is not against the law. Too many people buy what the media tell us.There is not a single person on here who has called hmrc to see if they can pay more tax or not paid someone in cash to avoid VAT. Hypocrites.
Added to that, if you think the footballers are being chased because they have avoided paying the most tax you are wrong. They are chased by hmrc because they are well known. There are many more, much bigger fish.
Added to that, if you think the footballers are being chased because they have avoided paying the most tax you are wrong. They are chased by hmrc because they are well known. There are many more, much bigger fish.
Creaky
Well-known member
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,303
in this case they did. but then HMRC decided the particular tax relief scheme was too popular, some of the investments *may* have been exploiting the tax break to generate a relief without a genuine investment in film. which may not have even been illegal or evasion, even if against the sprit of the legislation.
the point missed here is that the government created this problem when they created the tax relief. which is who's behind just about every avoidance method, but some seem to want to demonise those that take up the offers, while taking up others (ISA, Pensions, travel card loans, cash to tradesmen etc).
Fair point
Baldseagull
Well-known member
The bedroom tax was not retrospective, i.e. they did not ask for a payment for all the previous years that a spare room was in existence.
In this case their was tax relief for investments in British Films, to encourage investment in making movies, it seems that a company that formed to collect investment and back movies operated in a way that HMRC says should not have had the tax relief. This is ok, dispute away, but what they are doing is making a demand for payment ahead of a court ruling. If you were suspected of fiddling your benefit claims, but disputed that, it could not be demanded until a court had ruled that you were at fault and owed it.
This is not fair, though I do understand that someone who is expecting to made bankrupt in a few weeks time, may find ways to make some of their wealth disappear before the tax man gets the court ruling.
A very good point. Maybe the it would be fairer for the HMRC to either freeze, or take a snapshot of the person's wealth at the time of the dispute and then be able to go after the assets once judgement is made?
One of the biggest issues is that HMRC doesn't even understand tax itself and is pretty poorly run. I struggle to believe they have the skill set to work out these schemes given it took them 7 attempts to agree just a single year of my tax liabilities ( as well as 18 letters from them and six phone calls from me ). HMRC aren't even responsible to a specific Minister - they are stand alone. Try making a complaint against them - the hoops you have to jump through are unbelievable.
If people are evading tax then fine, deal with them but HMRC needs some of it's power taken away and brought under the responsibility of a Minister.
If people are evading tax then fine, deal with them but HMRC needs some of it's power taken away and brought under the responsibility of a Minister.
So the HMRC can also add politics into the mix? No thanks. I prefer them to enforce the tax laws of the land outside of political meddling....just like the judiciary. You've had a bad experience, but I have generally had good experience. I do find there is an onus of me to help them and explain stuff to them but I find if I do this, and work with them, and present a clear case with my justifications, they are fine with me.
I was also once selected for a random VAT check which was a right ball-ache for me but conducted with total professionalism by the HMRC.....might have helped that Mr VAT spotted some Albion stuff and declared himself a supporter and spent time drinking tea with me an discussing the woes of our support.
They already do - it's no co-incidence which big corporates have managed to negotiate huge discounts in their tax bills.
Besides, not everyone is a tax expert, why should WE have to guide them ? For a vast majority of people their tax affairs are simple yet HMRC don't even get those cases right.
ADDITION : HMRC are collecting tax for HMG so of course they should be responsible to the government.
The Merry Prankster
Pactum serva
And another in agreement.
Publius Ovidius
Well-known member
But the problem is that these companies are multinationals who have presences in most countries around the world. There was a lady giving a lecture I went to who said that if multi nationals had to pay tax at the point of sale, ie whichever country they made the "sale", then that would only benefit the accountants
Her argument was that say Amazon, who sell into the UK, but take the order on the .com webpage via the USA , ship the order from Luxembourg, and collect the money from your account on Amazon, which may have been set up in the UK. So how could anyone predict what the profit from that item would be? Management charges from individual companies into and out of Amazon corporate make sure that the countries that would have had the most penal tax rates, would make sure the most costs would wipe out any profits etc.
Ireland jumped on this bandwagon to keep their economy afloat. Amazon, apple, dell, have all huge presences in Ireland because the corp tax is minimal.
True. But whether we like it, or not, as a UK resident it is your duty to pay taxes and your duty to pay them correctly. That's the law and your responsibility. And I personally see the HMRC as there to help me do this. And my experience backs this up. Maybe if you approach them with a different mind-set then problems emerge? After all, they're only human.
Also, I simply do not agree that they get the "vast majority" of simple cases wrong. Do you have any evidence of this?