In that case Whippershapper, TJ should withdraw the allegation!
you're wriggling TJ - where is the single solitary lie that backs up your claim, show me!
Chat Forum
[closed]
More Ashcroft...
-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
whippersnapper-I don't know what the Torys would do. But there's one thing fer sure-we're all going to feel the pinch whoever gets in. The Tories will cut spending to try and evert disaster. Alternatively, Labour will carry on spending until we lose our AAA Rating and the country will go bust in a blaze of soaring interest rates and hyper inflation. I reckon it's called being betwixt a rock and a hard place. And Brown led us there.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Stevie said:
And you, PRPT are boring with your dull, left-whinge diatribe.
Like when I said this?
The whole thing would be laughable if it wasn't so serious. The only reason any of this stuff is important is because both the main parties are so useless, and I suspect that the party we will end up with making decisions that hugely effect our lives will be the one who didn't screw up last.
It's a bit like pass the parcel, where you know that inside the final layer of wrapping paper is a turd.
You prove my point. You are boring because you don't get beyond name calling AND maybe the reason is that you don't even bother to read what other people read.
You're like one of Pavlov's dogs. You see a key word and off you go.
Posted 2 years ago # -
And before anyone else says it, yes I know Pavlov's dogs couldn't read.
Or could they?
Posted 2 years ago # -
Are you in Egypt Zulu?
In his 2000 statement he said "permanent resident" which means full UK taxpayer not "non Dom"
That is the lie as he never became a permanent Uk resident.
Posted 2 years ago # -
It was a metaphor.
Posted 2 years ago # -
The Tories will cut spending to try and
evertcause disaster
#fixed it for you. this is what they did to cause the last depression - cutting spending deepens and lengthens recessions - see load of examples over the years from 30s usa to 80s Uk
Posted 2 years ago # -
lose our AAA Rating
regardless of what the agencies say it's long gone already Im afraid.
the Uk pays 90bps more for it's debt than other AAA rated countries like Germany. Ratings follow the market, not lead it.
Currently it costs about £90k to insure £1m of UK government debt. That's about the same as Chile which is only A+ and twice as much as the USA and Germany which are true AAA.
Posted 2 years ago # -
In his 2000 statement he said "permanent resident" which means full UK taxpayer not "non Dom"
Still wriggling - Mefty's already covered that one - He stated that was his intention and he later negotiated a change to that, agreed by the cabinet office, to an agreement that he would become a '"long term resident" - all above board, all agreed by the cabinet office.
Quite specifically he has never said that he is a permanent resident or a UK Domicile - quite categorically no lies - Next please...
Posted 2 years ago # -
You are in Egypt aren't you?
Thats as clear a piece of deceit as one can see. Of course as blinkered and stupid as you are you will never admit this but when torie grandees, tory papers, the cabinet secretary all say this was deceit.............?
So clear attempt to obfuscate and mislead deliberately which is a lie in my book. Of course in your alice in wonderland world a lie becomes the truth - newspeak I believe its known as
Posted 2 years ago # -
You prove my point. You are boring because you don't get beyond name calling AND maybe the reason is that you don't even bother to read what other people read
More dull hypocrisy. You started with the name calling, or had you forgotten that? You are a fool, you don't know me from Adam yet carry on with the assumptions.
Posted 2 years ago # -
The worst thing about all of this for me, is that Ashcroft hasn't even broken the Law.
He's altered the shape of British politics, with money hoarded away in a tax haven, (where he pays no tax at all) but obviously finds the idea of helping to fund this country's schools hospitals, and defence completely beneath him. The Conservative party then engaged in a 10 year cover up, that tells you all you need to know about how they'd run the country. By taking Ashcroft's money callmedave tells us he'd rather protect private interests over the public good. Made to choose between the public purse and the tiny minority interests of the super-rich, he chose that latter. I think it's safe to assume that if he gets to no 10, he'd carry on.
This revolting behaviour that both Labour and the Conservatives indulge in, is perfectly legal...The rest of us pay our taxes in full on time, and these parasites (some-one who enjoys the benefits of something without paying their share) who can shout louder than us with donations get away with paying nothing.
Tax Justice Network estimate that rich individuals "avoid" 13bn a year. (The top third of Britain's top 700 industries have paid no tax at all) Thats enough to pay off the deficit in 7 years.
This sums the situation up more than anything, a rich elite few hijacking the political system for their own gain, its been going on a bloody longtime. Micheal foot, lefty though he was, had the right idea:
and if you ask me about those insoluble economic problems that may arise if the top is deprived of their initiative, I would answer 'To hell with them.' The top is greedy and mean and will always find a way to take care of themselves. They always do."
The Tories will cut spending to try and evert disaster.
But create a disaster by making more unemployed. Its not just the public sector jobs that will be affected by this.
Alternatively, Labour will carry on spending until we lose our AAA Rating and the country will go bust in a blaze of soaring interest rates and hyper inflation.
The AAA rating is just politically motivated economists scare mongering. As for soaring interest rates and hyper inflation, we are not Zimbabwe. Your scaremongering language is about a year and a half out of date.
Posted 2 years ago # -
#fixed it for you. this is what they did to cause the last depression - cutting spending deepens and lengthens recessions - see load of examples over the years from 30s usa to 80s Uk
LOL Jerry, very good. I guess you are a Keynesian like Brown-truly economics from the playing fields of Eton. How long do you think theUK can carry on borrowing £1,500,000,000 per day as we did in January? We are currently borrowing £1 out of every £4 we spend. That, my friend, is insane.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I wasn't name calling, I was putting forward my opinion.
What assumptions did i make?
Posted 2 years ago # -
clear attempt to obfuscate and mislead deliberately which is a lie in my book
Here's the problem, unfortunately 'your book' is not the dictionary - you did not accuse him of obfustucating, you did not accuse him of misleading - you specificallly accused him of lying
to speak untruthfully with the intention of deceiving... an untrue statement deliberately used to mislead,
You cannot demonstrate to me a single untrue statement made by Ashcroft!
Posted 2 years ago # -
Yup - it has to be dealt with but slashing spending tomorrow( is that current tory policy ? it keeps changing) is not the way to do it. Gradual reduction in borrowing along with tax rises is the way to do it.
Posted 2 years ago # -
And what did I say that was hypocritical?
I don't need to make any assumptions Stevie, because it is there for everyone to see that you just throw out words at random without understanding their meaning.
Posted 2 years ago # -
The AAA rating is just politically motivated economists scare mongering. As for soaring interest rates and hyper inflation, we are not Zimbabwe. Your scaremongering language is about a year and a half out of date
See- 'Greece' for where we're headed under Brown.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Its on public record Zulu and fits that definition perfectly.
Posted 2 years ago # -
And what did I say that was hypocritical?
You called me out for 'name calling' and at the same time threw insults. There you go, it's called hypocrisy. And as for throwing out words without knowing their meaning, pot, kettle, black. You are just a plonker that can't handle being disagreed with. You forgot to argue this point-
Come on, develop your point. How is Gordon Brown (I think we all know who I'm talking about even leaving off the James bit) 100% responsible for his rich friends (and by adding the word "his" I guess you mean current arrangements only apply to labour supporters?) paying no tax?
Brown has been in charge of Britains finances for 13 years. He has served in a government with a large, workable majority. He could have closed those loop-holes, raised the tax levels on the rich (including his chums like Eric Daniels, Fred Goodwin, Lord Paul, Lord Sainsbury etc etc) any time he had wanted to. So why didn't he? Because Labour are now the party of the rich-as admitted so famously by Mandelson.
-or are you incapable?
Posted 2 years ago # -
This is the lie and this is an analysis of it
I hereby give you my clear and unequivocal assurance that I have decided to take up permanent residence in the UK again before the end of this calendar year. I have given my advisors instructions to make arrangement to give effect to this decision and I will instruct them forthwith to do so within this calendar year.
I hereby firmly agree that I will not seek to be introduced to the House of Lords until I have taken up residency in the United Kingdom within the timescale above mentioned.
At the heart of the issue is whether, in 2000, the tax authorities were misled if they were never shown Ashcroft’s “solemn and binding” declaration to his party leader that Britain was henceforth to be his permanent home.
According to HM Revenue & Customs published guidelines, current in 2000, this signed and witnessed document alone might have ruled out non-dom status.
HMRC’s code says plainly: “You are domiciled in the country where you have your permanent home.”
To successfully change his domicile from the UK, where he was born and brought up, to that of Belize, where he had business interests, Ashcroft would have needed “strong evidence you intend to live there [abroad] permanently or indefinitely”.
http://www.businessgaze.com/was-ashcrofts-binding-pledge-to-hague-shown-to-inland-revenue
Posted 2 years ago # -
edited to reflect your latest:
permanent residence has a specific meaning in Tax law
Domicile also has a specific meaning in tax law.
Wait out and I'll give you chapter and verse
Posted 2 years ago # -
Jerry-he's got you mate. Just let it go
.
Posted 2 years ago # -
See- 'Greece' for where we're headed under Brown.
What, has he booked us all a holiday?
Posted 2 years ago # -
TJ - HMRC Says -
Residence is a complex subject. The terms residence and ordinary residence are not defined in the Taxes Acts. HMRC guidelines about their meanings are largely based on rulings of the courts.
The quote from your article is wrong -
HMRC’s code says plainly: “You are domiciled in the country where you have your permanent home.”
HMRC actually says
Broadly speaking, you are domiciled in the country where you have your permanent home.
Broadly speaking - thats a very big uncertainty there that your chosen article chooses to gloss over...
Thats clearly one for the tax lawyers - I'm not one, IIRC you aren't one - what I can guarantee to you is that Ashcrofts got the best ones available... so TJ - is he lying, or is your newspaper article full of sh@t?
Here you are - HMRC Guide - http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/cnr/hmrc6.pdf Make your own judgement TJ, but with 81 pages the guide still says:
Domicile is a general law concept. It is not defined in tax law. It can be a
complex subject, so the charts can give you no more than a likely indication of your domicile. In the UK, only a court may make a formal ruling on your domicile.So, it looks like the newspaper article you choose to use to 'prove' that Ashcroft lied really is full of sh@t!
Posted 2 years ago # -
Lord ashcrofts pants earlier today;
Posted 2 years ago # -
http://wikimapia.org/1594837/San-Pedro-Fire-Station
"I'm sorry, the Belize Fire Service is busy putting out Lord Ashcrofts Pants, please call again..."
Posted 2 years ago # -
Thats clearly one for the tax lawyers - I'm not one, IIRC you aren't one - what I can guarantee to you is that Ashcrofts got the best ones available... so TJ - is he lying, or is your newspaper article full of sh@t?
As a former tax adviser, I did try and educate on these points. TJ's newspaper is not alone in talking rubbish on this subject I am afraid, the Telegraph produces some poor journalism
A senior accountant said last night: “If Lord Ashcroft had simply moved money from Belize back to this country and given it to the Tories he would have been taxed on it. The Revenue would see it as a remittance for tax purposes and he would pay 40 per cent of the value.”
The first bit of tax planning I learnt within the first few months of starting was that all non dom should have two banks accounts, one for income and one for capital, then they should remit from the capital account, which can be done on a tax free basis. I have met alot of non doms over the years and I have never met one who has paid a single penny of tax on a remittance. That quote is from cloud cuckoo land.
An argument about whether the non dom issue as a whole is good for the country or not is for another day. Obviously it was addressed slightly by the government becuase they felt the need to respond to the Tory proposals for a non dom tax. Unfortunately, like much of the legislation introduced by this government it was ill thought out and many are avoiding paying it.
That is my real gripe, so much bad legislation has been introduced in recent years that has no chance of achieving its announced objective. Look at yesterday, I explained on here how poor the political donations legislation is, so when a decision goes against the Labour viewpoint, what happens, Labour MPs responsible for putting the legislation (the culprit) in place attack the poor b4arstards that have to administrate their pile of junk.
Then we have the draconian terror laws, we used an anti terrorism law to confiscate Iceland's assets! The Government hasn't done its job and the House of Commons hasn't been capable to doing its either. That is a proper scandal.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Ashcroft has a magpie eye for status and political influence. Regardless of the finer points of tax law - the bloke is clearly giving UK voters the creeps. As for the reductive games of primary colour politics so beloved of STW... the same is true of many in NuLab circles (funny how the Grauniad never moans about Apax Partners...).
The VC thing (and the accompanying PR waffle) still makes me uncomfortable - the grasping need to own medals struck from (comparatively) worthless gunmetal.
Posted 2 years ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
