Anyone going to the Downing Street Protests?

[wellquickwoody]

not particularly moral or patriotic is it when he is telling others they should not be doing it, slippery behavior.
his father made a business getting people to use this bank to do exacty that not neccessarily to "steal" but deprive or as they minimise

Since when did lefties see patriotism as a virtiue?

 

[KZNSeagull]

You describe it as a dodgy investment fund. If that's the case, why did CMD have shares in it? As for Carr, what did he do that was illegal?

He didn't have shares in it - he invested money in a unit trust through that company. What's wrong with that? It is not illegal. Jimmy Carr did nothing illegal. But there is no comparison between the two. DC declared his income from that investment, JC deliberately set things up that way to avoid paying UK tax.

The only thing that is dodgy here is that the company that David Cameron invested money through was set up to avoid paying UK tax. That's the company, not the clients. People trying to claim that this activity is hypocritical at best and fraudulent at worst is barmy. Are they going to try and get him to resign because he bought something from Amazon or Starbucks or Google or any other company that avoids paying UK tax?

 

[wellquickwoody]

Don't bite. The State pension is not a handout, everyone knows that.

I am surprised you didn't pay into a pension fund when you were a prison officer.

Bit late on this so may have already been answered, as a public sector employee Glasfryn would have no choice but to pay into a pension fund, why did you not come clean about that earlier sir?..........

 

[pastafarian]

still waiting for corbyn to publish his tax returns even though there is no evidence he has done anything illegal either.

he is very quiet about his tax business.....whats he hiding?

 

[glasfryn]

It's a private pension fund which means they invest money ...... and wait for it ..... sometimes in foreign companies !!!! So despite your higher than though attitude, your pension is probably partly funded by foreign investments. How does that feel ?

pretty good as if you had of read all the thread I cashed it is pretty soon after I had left the prison service,
you really should read all the thread instead of jumping in halfway through

 

[Westdene Seagull]

pretty good as if you had of read all the thread I cashed it is pretty soon after I had left the prison service,
you really should read all the thread instead of jumping in halfway through

Did you get more than you actually paid in ? Of course you did. So you benefited from those investments ..... some of which were probably foreign.

 

[Giraffe]

Absolute nonsense the whole story. I fail to see what he has done wrong.

A lot more squeaky clean than most well off people and almost certainly cleaner than Blair.

 

[glasfryn]

Did you get more than you actually paid in ? Of course you did. So you benefited from those investments ..... some of which were probably foreign.

have not got a clue ..................................but I do remember moaning about how much it was ...so probably not much more than I put in ................my basic wage then was around £20 a week and at that time I would not have cared where it came from.

I have got more political as I got older and wiser
£20 **** me that won't even buy a round now

 

[clapham_gull]

Absolute nonsense the whole story. I fail to see what he has done wrong.

A lot more squeaky clean than most well off people and almost certainly cleaner than Blair.

As much as I hate to say so, I agree.

Inheritance tax is in my mind a bit of a mess. It's a bit like a 0% finance deal over 12 months - that goes up to a ridiculous amount if you don't pay.

Those who do pay back within 12 months are not avoiding or evading the interest. The rules state that if you pay back in time you don't pay the extra.

It's one of the silly bits of the tax system where people are penalised for not ticking a box in time. Put in place (quite cynically) in my opinion on the basis that the authorities know some people won't.

Got to be a fairer way - it's either this or that.

Gifts and deeds of variation are not dodgy instruments.

Anything "off shore" is open to investigation rightly, but attacking the PM because his mother took some advice that any high street accountant (or your neighbour) could give you is a bit weak. Can't blame him or his mother for being organised.

Might as well demonstrate against anyone who has inherited anything.

 

[drew]

He didn't have shares in it - he invested money in a unit trust through that company. What's wrong with that? It is not illegal. Jimmy Carr did nothing illegal. But there is no comparison between the two. DC declared his income from that investment, JC deliberately set things up that way to avoid paying UK tax.

The only thing that is dodgy here is that the company that David Cameron invested money through was set up to avoid paying UK tax. That's the company, not the clients. People trying to claim that this activity is hypocritical at best and fraudulent at worst is barmy. Are they going to try and get him to resign because he bought something from Amazon or Starbucks or Google or any other company that avoids paying UK tax?

You actually admit it was a dodgy company and still see no problem. Are you forgetting that CMD was no ordinary investor, he was the son of the guy that ran the company.

 

[highflyer]

Absolute nonsense the whole story. I fail to see what he has done wrong.

A lot more squeaky clean than most well off people and almost certainly cleaner than Blair.

Well indeed Cameron has never illegally invaded a middle eastern country.

I have no love for Cameron, but this is story of inheritance tax is looking more and more like a deliberate distraction by elements of the right wing press, with two intentions. Firstly to discredit, and perhaps even remove Cameron in order to undermine the 'in' campaign. Secondly to distract us all from the real story (and Cameron's real failures) revealed by the Panama papers, which is the whole offshore system, the role it plays in the global economy, and Cameron's failure to tackle secrecy in the UK overseas territories despite declaring his intention to do so two years ago.
And of course a number of newspaper proprietors really really want people to focus on Cameron's fairly bland tax affairs and stop talking about the kind of 'proper' tax dodging, involving complex company structures and schemes, which many of them are involved in.

I hate Cameron and what he stands for, but I don't think this one has legs.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

 

[drew]

As much as I hate to say so, I agree.

Inheritance tax is in my mind a bit of a mess. It's a bit like a 0% finance deal over 12 months - that goes up to a ridiculous amount if you don't pay.

Those who do pay back within 12 months are not avoiding or evading the interest. The rules state that if you pay back in time you don't pay the extra.

It's one of the silly bits of the tax system where people are penalised for not ticking a box in time. Put in place (quite cynically) in my opinion on the basis that the authorities know some people won't.

Got to be a fairer way - it's either this or that.

Gifts and deeds of variation are not dodgy instruments.

Anything "off shore" is open to investigation rightly, but attacking the PM because his mother took some advice that any high street accountant (or your neighbour) could give you is a bit weak. Can't blame him or his mother for being organised.

Might as well demonstrate against anyone who has inherited anything.

I'm totally lost as to what you are going on about in respect of IHT. You die, your estate is valued, you deduct the threshold and then the estate pays 40% if what is left to HMRC. Alternatively, you die and leave everything to your spouse and no inheritance tax is paid. Finally, you die and leave some to your spouse, which isn't subject to inheritance tax and then from the balance, you deduct the threshold and pay 40% to HMRC and distribute what's left to the beneficiaries. That's basically it.

Were the demonstrators there because the IHT. I doubt it.

 

[beorhthelm]

I'm totally lost as to what you are going on about in respect of IHT.

what clapham_gull was illustrating with an interesting example is how people plan for inheritance. you gift someone an asset a certain time before you die (7 years) and there's no inheritance tax due. so in among the examples you gave theres a forth or more variations of planning how you will distribute your estate to avoid the 40% being sliced off.

i dont think the demonstrators really knew what they were there for, just a day out.

 

[highflyer]

what clapham_gull was illustrating with an interesting example is how people plan for inheritance. you gift someone an asset a certain time before you die (7 years) and there's no inheritance tax due. so in among the examples you gave theres a forth or more variations of planning how you will distribute your estate to avoid the 40% being sliced off.

i dont think the demonstrators really knew what they were there for, just a day out.

I agree that there are ways of planning inheritance - and being rewarded with tax savings that are legitimate tax planning - eg using the law as intended.

And this is now becoming politicised in a way that is probably unhelpful.

However I also know that quite a few of the protesters were fully aware of why they were there. Many of those protesters have been shouting about tax avoidance and evasion for many years, and know quite a bit about how it all works.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

 

[drew]

what clapham_gull was illustrating with an interesting example is how people plan for inheritance. you gift someone an asset a certain time before you die (7 years) and there's no inheritance tax due. so in among the examples you gave theres a forth or more variations of planning how you will distribute your estate to avoid the 40% being sliced off.

i dont think the demonstrators really knew what they were there for, just a day out.

Are you sure that is what he was getting at when referring to ticking boxes? If he meant giving people gifts then why not say that.

I understand what you are saying but I was of course referring to what happens once you have died. You can give your whole estate away and provided you don't die within 7 years there is no inheritance tax due. However, once you have given the gift you have no control over it. That could leave you a bit buggered if you fall out with the people you have given the gifts to!!!!

 

[studio150]

I agree that there are ways of planning inheritance - and being rewarded with tax savings that are legitimate tax planning - eg using the law as intended.

And this is now becoming politicised in a way that is probably unhelpful.

However I also know that quite a few of the protesters were fully aware of why they were there. Many of those protesters have been shouting about tax avoidance and evasion for many years, and know quite a bit about how it all works.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

So why were they there, if they know a lot about tax avoidance and evasion they would know that nothing illegal has been done by Cameron.
So where they marching because the PM had correctly paid income tax on his dividends and had avoided capital gains tax because his profit didnt reach the threshold for when a tax liability arises.
It would seem to me to be a waste of a march to shout out the PMs paid his taxes and done nothing wrong.
Alternatively they were there because .....what?

 

[highflyer]

So why were they there, if they know a lot about tax avoidance and evasion they would know that nothing illegal has been done by Cameron.
So where they marching because the PM had correctly paid income tax on his dividends and had avoided capital gains tax because his profit didnt reach the threshold for when a tax liability arises.
It would seem to me to be a waste of a march to shout out the PMs paid his taxes and done nothing wrong.
Alternatively they were there because .....what?

Because they have been protesting for many years about the offshore system and the damaging tax avoidance and evasion that it facilitates.

And when the media is paying attention you take your chance.

Some are allowing themselves to fall into the trap of focussing on this IHT story, and that is obviously what the media are interested in right now. But it's a distraction. I wish Corbyn would back off (unless he knows something we don't)


Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

 

[sparkie]

Looks like Farage is refusing to publish his tax return.

What are you hiding, Nige ?

 

[Brian Fantana]

30 pages later, and no one can yet articulate what Cameron has actually done wrong?

As I posted earlier in the thread, the crux of it seems to be jealousy that DC had a decent amount of money to invest in the 1st place.

 

[drew]

30 pages later, and no one can yet articulate what Cameron has actually done wrong?

As I posted earlier in the thread, the crux of it seems to be jealousy that DC had a decent amount of money to invest in the 1st place.

They have on numerous occasions but you have your fingers in your ear and probably are still singing 'ding a ling'.

1. Hypocrisy. He went to great lengths to criticise other celebrities for legal (but questionably not moral) schemes based overseas.
2. He took a long time to come clean and then eventually that was with reservations, ie not benefit in the 'future'
3. He lobbied the EU about rules for overseas trust funds knowing he had had investments in them (and probably knows many that still do, possibly within his own family although admittedly legal).
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/apr/07/david-cameron-offshore-trusts-eu-tax-crackdown-2013
4. Possibly not previously made reference to but he has now stated he sold other shares. What were these and had there been any possible or perceived conflict with any legislation that he has subsequently been involved in.
5. As much as I don't like the man, Corbyn seems to have a long list!!!!