Benefits and tax: astounding graphic

[Driver8]

Yes there is. It's a moral wrong rather than a legal one but it is still a wrong .

Why pay tax than you need to? Tax avoidance is simply planning sensibly to minimise your tax bill. e.g. making a pension contribution to get tax relief, if a husband pays higher rate tax and the wife doesn't put assets in her name etc etc

As I said I think people are getting confused between tax avoidance and tax evasion. two very different things.

 

[mikeyjh]

What the hell does anyone vote for?,.. they assess whats best for them, and vote accordingly... thats democracy.

That's what some, mostly tories or of the right, don't understand - Some of us vote a certain way because we believe that we should care for those with a greater need, that we should have a more equal society. That may mean that we vote for a party that, for instance, is likely to increase our taxes but some calculate that the sharing of that wealth is GOOD thing... That's democracy.

 

[mikeyjh]

Why pay tax than you need to? Tax avoidance is simply planning sensibly to minimise your tax bill. e.g. making a pension contribution to get tax relief, if a husband pays higher rate tax and the wife doesn't put assets in her name etc etc

As I said I think people are getting confused between tax avoidance and tax evasion. two very different things.

But it's not as simple as that is is - There is what we may see as 'acceptable' tax avoidance such as pensions or an ISA, and then there's aggresive transfer pricing which many multi-nationals engage in, which is outrageous but this side of the law, apparently. Even then the line between legal and illegal is quite grey, as someone earlier mentioned in Denis Healey's quote.

 

[BLOCK F]

As you ask, the Communist Party only have a few members, but even if they were a serious force, I doubt I'd vote for them, unless they'd ditched a whole series of their policies and, more importantly, philosophical underpinnings. But I'm more interested as to why you are so keen to associate the common good with communism when the former notion has been around for over 2,500 years, while the latter has really only come to prominence over the past 150 years.
Individuals or parties may well disagree about which party or organisation is best for the common good, but it doesn't mean that they're all correct in their assessment of what it is. What's patently apparent is we've lost the ability to assess what it is, because we're more concerned with insisting on the private good. And look where that's left us.
In case you're unaware, that's most of us in debt, working longer hours, for longer years, with less rights and benefits, while a small cabal swans away with it.

As I asked,who do you vote for?Presumably the party that you think will do the most good for the common good.Which is?

 

[drew]

No. The Government serves everybody. It is a myth the Govt serves only the rich.

Maybe they do but can you honestly say they serve them equally? I doubt it, particularly this government.

 

[keaton]

...and that would be exactly right, until all 20k turn up and the police get a view of the attendees, and the mood of the attendees, who knows what could happen.

Couldn't there be more people potentially being guilty of tax fraud than benefit fraud?
Anyone in the country could be guilty of tax fraud

 

[somerset]

Couldn't there be more people potentially being guilty of tax fraud than benefit fraud?
Anyone in the country could be guilty of tax fraud

All things are possible if course......it was simply an exaggerated illustration.......

 

[Bold Seagull]

Why pay tax than you need to? Tax avoidance is simply planning sensibly to minimise your tax bill. e.g. making a pension contribution to get tax relief, if a husband pays higher rate tax and the wife doesn't put assets in her name etc etc

As I said I think people are getting confused between tax avoidance and tax evasion. two very different things.

I think most people would say what you're describing as being 'tax planning'. This is simply a sensible way of ensuring you only pay the tax you need to pay. Tax avoidance in a lot of people's minds, are the complex schemes that exploit grey areas and loop holes in the tax system to avoid tax. A murky world of shadow companies and deceit all treading a thin grey line of what is legal and what is evasion. I think that is the moral wrong people object to. Nothing wrong with sensible tax planning and structuring your finances accordingly, but there is a raft of avoidance out there which I think can be claimed as being morally questionable.

I note as Mikeyjh also says:

But it's not as simple as that is is - There is what we may see as 'acceptable' tax avoidance such as pensions or an ISA, and then there's aggresive transfer pricing which many multi-nationals engage in, which is outrageous but this side of the law, apparently. Even then the line between legal and illegal is quite grey, as someone earlier mentioned in Denis Healey's quote.

 

[Machiavelli]

As I asked,who do you vote for?Presumably the party that you think will do the most good for the common good.Which is?

You didn't ask who I voted for. You just seemed to associate the common good with communism. The best government in British history was the Labour one of 1945-51. Unfortunately, none of the current parties come close to that standard. I'm fortunate enough to be able to vote for my MP, Caroline Lucas, who gets most things right, and surely the commitment to addressing climate change would be an example of acting towards the common good. Most don't have that opportunity, so I'd probably advise voting for Labour or, if they stand a better chance of better the Tories, the Lib Dems. I'm mildly encouraged by Ed Miliband, but he just needs to be bold as he's at his best -- and gets closer to the common good -- when he's bold.

 

[The Merry Prankster]

Why pay tax than you need to? Tax avoidance is simply planning sensibly to minimise your tax bill. e.g. making a pension contribution to get tax relief, if a husband pays higher rate tax and the wife doesn't put assets in her name etc etc

As I said I think people are getting confused between tax avoidance and tax evasion. two very different things.

The non payment of tax by Amazon, Starbucks etc., etc., etc. is all perfectly legal avoidance but (some would argue) morally reprehensible.

 

[Bold Seagull]

I'm mildly encouraged by Ed Miliband, but he just needs to be bold as he's at his best -- and gets closer to the common good -- when he's bold.

I'm mildly upset that Labour have him as their leader in the first place. He's about as far from bold as you can be. Having a shadow Chancellor in Ed Balls is like one of those people who keeps a loved ones corpse locked away in a room. A remnant of all that was bad about Labour's chaos at the end of their reign.

There are plenty of talented people in the Labour Party, and yet Miliband appears powerless to make decisive changes to bring a fresher, untainted cabinet to power. At present they are struggling to present a convincing case that they are ready to return. Their only strength at the moment is the current governments weakness. They seem to lack a basic tactic of attacking current policies with ideas of their own.

In short, the country is in the grip of a shambles between the major parties. The next vote is basically going to be on who is less bad. I won't be voting. We need a radical change to our ruling system in this country. As Billy Connolly once said, anyone who wants to be a politician, shouldn't be allowed to be a politician...

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Yes there is. It's a moral wrong rather than a legal one but it is still a wrong .

I'm assuming you voluntarily pay the tax on your pension contributions then ? Or pay the tax on your duty free as you come through customs ? Or don't take out ISAs ?

 

[BLOCK F]

Just out of interest,Mach,who do you vote for?Communist Party maybe?
Got to remember that even if one agrees that one should vote for the common good,individuals will disagree as to which party or organisation is best for the common good.

See Mach,I did ask who you vote for!

 

[BLOCK F]

You didn't ask who I voted for. You just seemed to associate the common good with communism. The best government in British history was the Labour one of 1945-51. Unfortunately, none of the current parties come close to that standard. I'm fortunate enough to be able to vote for my MP, Caroline Lucas, who gets most things right, and surely the commitment to addressing climate change would be an example of acting towards the common good. Most don't have that opportunity, so I'd probably advise voting for Labour or, if they stand a better chance of better the Tories, the Lib Dems. I'm mildly encouraged by Ed Miliband, but he just needs to be bold as he's at his best -- and gets closer to the common good -- when he's bold.

Thanks for the answer and thank heavens there aren't too many in the country who feel the same as you about the Greens,then we really would be in trouble ; although Ed and his merry band also fill me with a great deal of apprehension and I fear for the country's finances after a few years of him and Balls in power.

 

[Machiavelli]

See Mach,I did ask who you vote for!

You did: apologies.

 

[Machiavelli]

I'm mildly upset that Labour have him as their leader in the first place. He's about as far from bold as you can be. Having a shadow Chancellor in Ed Balls is like one of those people who keeps a loved ones corpse locked away in a room. A remnant of all that was bad about Labour's chaos at the end of their reign.

There are plenty of talented people in the Labour Party, and yet Miliband appears powerless to make decisive changes to bring a fresher, untainted cabinet to power. At present they are struggling to present a convincing case that they are ready to return. Their only strength at the moment is the current governments weakness. They seem to lack a basic tactic of attacking current policies with ideas of their own.

In short, the country is in the grip of a shambles between the major parties. The next vote is basically going to be on who is less bad. I won't be voting. We need a radical change to our ruling system in this country. As Billy Connolly once said, anyone who wants to be a politician, shouldn't be allowed to be a politician...

I think this is a bit harsh. There were plenty of quite radical proposals in Miliband's conference speech this year: a commitment to building 200,000 houses a year; joining up the NHS with social care; the provision of care and facilities for children between 08:00 and 18:00 on school days. I do agree that his shadow cabinet -- with the possible exception of Burnham, and probably Flint -- have been very poor at communicating this in 2013.

 

[Machiavelli]

Thanks for the answer and thank heavens there aren't too many in the country who feel the same as you about the Greens,then we really would be in trouble ; although Ed and his merry band also fill me with a great deal of apprehension and I fear for the country's finances after a few years of him and Balls in power.

You are aware that the country's finances were far worse in 1945-51 when Labour introduced the NHS. Government debt was over 200% of GDP then. It's also been higher than it is at present for about 200 of the last 250 years. So I'm interested in why you're so concerned about the country's finances. I think this is because you expose yourself to too much of our dire media, but you might have a different answer.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

..... (there are complicated reasons for this).......NO THERE AREN'T - the 'Tories' in particular are up to their neck in the racket, that's all.


.....it chimes well with the public to target "scroungers". - It does indeed chime well, and that's no accident. Because they have repeated their mantra so often, it has taken on the life of a truism, and because people are fearful for their own futures, they are easily led towards scapegoating a group that has had a big target painted on it's back by the Coalition's black-ops propaganda department.

Mark my words, if we don't all get a grip, some sadistic sociopathic posh boy will be writing up his own version of the 'Final Solution'.

I should add that this is merely my opinion, why don't you try that, Mr Mail Reader?

Episode 1 of Benefits Street on Channel 4 attracted viewing figures of 4.3 million to reinforce the stereotype of scroungers. The politicians of a certain party will be rubbing their hands together in great joy as the build up to the 2015 election gets off the ground.

 

[Hugh'sDad]

Why pay tax than you need to? Tax avoidance is simply planning sensibly to minimise your tax bill. e.g. making a pension contribution to get tax relief, if a husband pays higher rate tax and the wife doesn't put assets in her name etc etc

As I said I think people are getting confused between tax avoidance and tax evasion. two very different things.

I'd ask .....why pay any tax?

 

[Driver8]

I'd ask .....why pay any tax?

We pay tax because we have to. If there are ways of legally structuring your affairs so you pay less tax you'd be a fool not to do so.

If the rules allow companies like Amazon to choose where they pay tax who can blame them for choosing the lowest taxed jurisdiction?

It's the rules that need changing.