[Closed] The Panama Papers.

Wilburt, are you sure the architect of that scheme you described wasn't Cameroonian rather than Nigerian?

Well, Cameron is where he is today as a result of his Dad's money. Also, Cameron would have been influencing policy whilst his Dad was alive. Therefore you cannot seperate them with the simplistic statement you made above.

That's right. Vladimir Putin's daughters are very smart and hard working. It's no surprise they're independently wealthy. I don't know why everyone wants to make some sort of connection between them and their father.

You can't blame any child for what their parents did

True. But when this child is (as PM) responsible for reducing the levels of such activity going on, it's essential that we know if he received any benefits or will receive any benefits from his father's activities.

After all, if he stands to gain from his father's activities, he's not very-well incentivised to cut down on such activities, as per his responsibility and public committment...

There's a very clear conflict of interest - which needs resolving.

it seems his fathers business dealings were very in tune with daves career path

The Telegraph has established that Ian Cameron’s firm Blairmore Holdings Inc was moved to Ireland in 2010 - the year David Cameron became Prime Minister.
A source close to Blairmore Holdings - which is still operating with assets of £35 million – said the company had been moved because its directors believed it was about to “come under more scrutiny”.

Details of Ian Cameron’s offshore business interests were revealed in the so-called Panama Papers – a leak of 11.5 million documents from the Panama law firm Mossack Fonseca - which claimed their first major scalp on Tuesday with the resignation of Iceland’s Prime Minister.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/05/panama-papers-david-cameron-forced-to-declare-tax-affairs-amid-o/

Apparently this may be VERY significant in terms of Cameron Family finances...

The thing that strikes me most is this, from the video description:

Further sources have revealed that Gerald Carroll’s Farnborough Aerospace Aerospace Centre in Hampshire England was “targeted” by BAE Systems and HSBC International within the framework of a systematic break-up embezzlement operation

Which has direct parallels with what happened to Astra Holdings PLC

[url= http://www.amazon.co.uk/Public-Interest-Devastating-Governments-Manufacturer/dp/0316877190 ]In the Public Interest: A Devastating Account of the Thatcher Government's Involvement in the Covert Arms Trade[/url]

Worth noting that both David Cameron and John Bredenkamp have been linked to Astra Holdings...

Whether this is relevant to alleged links between Cameron's Blairmore Holdings and the Carroll Trust remains to be seen... I'm approaching skeptically at the moment, [url= http://pm-cameron-family.blogspot.co.uk/ ]but there does seem to be some truth in this[/url]:

Sources have confirmed that the dossiers contain compelling criminal evidential material surrounding Smith Williamson's shocking fraudulent accounting operation which was targeted at the Carroll Global Corporation industrial empire. Further sources have said that Smith Williamson were appointed by the Carroll Foundation Trust immediately prior to the commencement of the systematic embezzlement and criminal liquidation of the trust's billion dollar world wide investment holdings spanning a staggering sixteen years.
It is understood that the files also contain a forensic paper trail surrounding the very close links that Prime Minister David Cameron and Alexander Cameron QC criminal barrister family estate interests continue to retain with Smith Williamson the Cameron family offshore tax haven based investment vehicles Blairmore Holdings Blairmore Asset Management and the Cameron links to a clutch of Church of England charities and family trusts whose funds are also managed by Smith Williamson.

[url= http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/panama-fund-run-david-camerons-7687547 ]
Panama fund run by David Cameron's dad 'used bishop middle-man to avoid UK tax for 30 years'

The preacher is said to be part of a "small army" of officers based in the Caribbean who put their names to investment fund Blairmore Holdings Inc[/url]

According to the Guardian, one of more than 100 news outlets which have studied the so-called 'Panama Papers', Blairmore Holdings did not pay a penny of UK tax over 30 years.

It was incorporated in Panama, based in the Bahamas and counted Mr Cameron Snr as one of 11 directors in a 2006 prospectus.

According to the Guardian, the firm's complex structure meant it "retained up to 50 Caribbean officers each year" who signed paperwork and filled official roles such as treasurer and secretary.

They are said to have included Solomon Humes, a now-dead bishop with the Church of God of Prophecy whose roles in the fund included vice-president.

But despite the large contingent of directors in the Caribbean, the Panama Papers are said to show UK-based directors regularly held board meetings themselves.

"The clear intention for Blairmore was to avoid becoming UK tax resident and the test for this, even in 2006, is the location of the central management and control.

"This means where the key business decisions are taken. The evidence here suggests in this period they weren’t taken outside the UK, in which case it is hard to see how the company was not managed and controlled, and therefore tax resident, in the UK at the time."

The Mirror phoned the London offices of investment firm Smith & Williamson, two of whose managers described themselves as directors of Blairmore, for comment.

FTSE 100 barely changed over past 10 years, so how does that idea work?

We've had 8 years of austerity for about half of the UK population, who at the same time pay all or at least most of their taxes.
In contrast, boom time has continued for some, who pay little or no tax whatsoever.
Here is why we should have taken the clues seriously for years; Cameron, Osbourne and all of their pals in larger business, the financial sector and those with wealth to disguise have been getting fatter throughout the difficult years. The current crop of greed-merchants at the helm in Westminster have kept the system working for them at the expense of everyone else, throughout. We should be angry at this and many folk have barely yet woken up to the huge extent of the scandal, the damage and the selfish greed.

no, you said that the stock market keeps rising ie using the present tense. that is not true, as noted it is largely unchanged over the past decade - a time when people like to claim that income inequality has increased

the problem with exaggerating to make a false point

But when this child is (as PM) responsible for reducing the levels of such activity going on, it's essential that we know if he received any benefits or will receive any benefits from his father's activities.

income inequality

😀

We should be angry at this and many folk have barely yet woken up to the huge extent of the scandal, the damage and the selfish greed.

bread and circuses

so the leaks so far show that tax avoidance crosses political parties, nations, sectors etc and included many famous names including the world's most celebrated football star

so the obvious question is why?

why do so many people have such an obvious aversion to paying tax, especially those whose responsibility it is to spend/manage it?

@wrecker - what exactly do you mean by 'he's not accountable' for his father's finances?

so the obvious question is why?

why do so many people have such an obvious aversion to paying tax, especially those whose responsibility it is to spend/manage it?

Greed. Pure and simple. Greed and a sense of entitlement.

I mean that he's not accountable, not only for his fathers financial arrangements, but for anything else his parents did.
Woody Harrelsons father was reportedly a hitman, not really woodies fault.

Camerons snrs' actions are in the public interest but you can't blame CMD for it.

why do so many people have such an obvious aversion to paying tax

Camerons snrs' actions are in the public interest but you can't blame CMD for it.

That being the case, is it reasonable to blame him for not being more open about it?

How many spin doctors have been involved in what has been revealed so far?

That being the case, is it reasonable to blame him for not being more open about it?

Blame is interesting word...I'm not blaming him for anything.

However, it's hardly democratic when money gets you into positions of power...so Cameron snr accumulated lots of wealth unethically, that undoubtedly contributed towards making Cameron jnr Prime Minister...and then, as an MP Cameron jnr would have been in a powerful position to influence policy that may well have benifitted Cameron snr's unethical wealth aaccumulation..all very mucky imo...

I don't care about it now and I wouldn't have cared about it if he'd somehow slipped it into conversation on PMQs or whatever.

Let's assume for a moment that like many other offshore investors, the Cameron family fortune was based on Criminal ventures, be that Arms deals, Drugs deals or Human Trafficking.

Of course, it may be that for the most part, the Cameron Empire kept their hands clean (aside from the odd arms deal by Dave when he was rising through the ranks, or a bit of networking by his brother Alexander), yet their funds were being used for such activity...

All hypothetical of course (unless the Carroll Trust allegations in my post above prove true), but would it change your opinion?

As I said @mefty we can agree to disagree

I would love to, but you are all over the place a bit like our very own poundland Donald Trump. You post an article bemoaning Barry O'Bama's, Irish problem again, lack of action which supports my contention that it is predominately the US that have been deprived of tax revenue. Of course ignoring, Washington has been in gridlock on this along with many other issues for ages because no party has complete power.

How 'ethical' are the investments made by Blairmore going to be, a corporate that clearly has no valid moral compass?
Arms? Drugs? Corrupt regimes? Mining? Asset stripping from weak national economies..?
Remember, Cameron still 'controls' this entity, regardless of whatever its accounts might indicate. It uses placed men to help pretend that control & management are not located in the UK.

All hypothetical of course (unless the Carroll Trust allegations in my post above prove true), but would it change your opinion?

Corrr blimey..

Some of you are better at investigative reporting than investigative reporters..

Thought about a change of career?

Greed. Pure and simple. Greed and a sense of entitlement.

Or a belief that the 'government' won't spend it wisely and that corruption abounds, which continues to be proved especially considering the present unsurprising revelations.

Oh brilliant!

Are we all allowed to suspend our tax payments until we resolve that one then? Maybe we can pop by one afternoon and audit random government departments? Failing that, has tax become an opt out for all of us then? Or just the rich and corporates? 🙄

It'd be ironic, wouldn't it? The head of the government using a lack of faith in that government to justify tax avoidance?

Or a belief that the 'government' won't spend it wisely and that corruption abounds

😆 😆 😆

Comments like that prove that Some people live on planet nutbrain.

Or a belief that the 'government' won't spend it wisely and that corruption abounds

Can someone explain where the illegality/immorality lies with Blairmore? Which tax has been avoided?

Presumably the funds into the vehicle were post tax, then capital gains accrue in the vehicle and don't get much if any tax. However, the beneficiaries would get taxed if they crystallised any gains back into the UK (as long as declared).

What am I missing?

It's an investment vehicle, based in a nil tax zone. It trades in investments, makes profits and also gains, which are not taxed. Cameron claims to have no shares in it, so he has nothing to declare now or if it is wound up. But where does the value contained therein go? This company is a significant part of the family's wealth. What does he own, which owns something else/5 times removed that owns Blairmore..?
This is, after all, exactly the business model of the Panamanian/BVI etc avoidance specialists, to disconnect the UK resident natural person from the profits and proceeds. He has other wealth and need not draw on this source at present, keeping the whole thing at distant arms' length.
Look very carefully at the words used in the Downing street statements and think about what has not been said. And yes, some people do investigate things for a living.

That doesn't answer my question though - assuming Cameron was a beneficiary, how would he benefit from the capital gains in the vehicle without paying some tax (making the reasonable assumption he declared all income in his tax return).

Or a belief that the 'government' won't spend it wisely and that corruption abounds, which continues to be proved especially considering the present unsurprising revelations.

So, you act corruptly because you're trying to end corruption 🙂

That's the point, especially if you don't need to realise it here and now. If you can afford to, you can sit tight with your current income, future consultancies and directorships; Cameron as an example is completely sorted for the rest of his days, before considering the family investments. Anyway, if you wanted to realise it as a cash asset, you simply use the capital value of the vehicle to borrow elsewhere; receiving a 'loan' is not income.. UK trust law is some of the most porous in the world.

Or a belief that the 'government' won't spend it wisely and that corruption abounds, which continues to be proved especially considering the present unsurprising revelations.

With that fantastic logic you may as well drop litter, as someone else will be. Or steal from old ladies, as someone else has....

That makes sense re using it as loan collateral thanks.

Edit: but would that be legal? Plus you'd need to repay the loan, or would you just default and the lender takes the vehicle? Seems to lack substance but I'm not au fait with tax law in that area.

Going back to my original question, assuming everything is done legally (I.e avoidance not evasion) where is the lost tax to the UK exchequer? Is it the CG that would otherwise have been taxed? Isn't it just being deferred rather than avoided because it will have to be suffered on eventual remittance?

I wish the Guardian et al would actually explain this rather than printing click bait about whic famous people have some tenuous overseas investment.

Can someone explain where the illegality/immorality lies with Blairmore? Which tax has been avoided?

It depends on exactly when, but basically it pretended to be an overseas controlled company such that it wasn't subject to UK taxes. However, as it was controlled by UK citizens in the UK (by proxy using 'fake' local directors who just sign off everything), it should have been subject to UK tax laws.

They've been clamping down on this a lot over the years, getting stricter and stricter, so exactly how illegal it was and when would require some digging (which is happening now).

Probably also why they moved it to Ireland at some point (I guess it was considered too illegal to continue the risk of being caught).

Personally if I was Cameroon, I'd walk and take the money (if he has as much as everyone accuses) with me. Wether he's a goody or a bady why put up with this s..t from people. It'll be the same for Corbean when he makes it in, like the leader of any party, crap will be published true or not because some people hate you for what you represent. Why would anyone be a politician these days.

I starting to feel sorry for some of these MP and that cannot be right!

Personally if I was Cameroon, I'd walk and take the money (if he has as much as everyone accuses)

I just love the unfortunate/ironic choice of name - BLAIRmore - so many jokes just in that

I think CMD has got into the classic politicians pickle of not being straight from the start. yesterday's statement as noted ^ merely adds to the suspicions. they never learn do they?

they never learn do they?

He was so infuriated that the plebs dared to question his integrity, he couldn't find the words...

Binners raises the issue of paying tax being only a choice for the rich and corporates, the reality is if you are a small corporate and can afford £2k to spend with a good accountant just about anyone can avoid significant tax both personal and corporation and as i have said before plenty folks on here will be doing £8k salary and dividends and using the other half's "allowance" and then justifying it by saying "well i am taking the risk" in reality the overall tax take in this country is very low as we are all now running £10k + tax free allowances (not that long ago you £3k) Dividends, Corporate Tax avoidance (at all levels) and a whole raft of other ways of simply not paying/offsetting (work in Progress anyone?)tax (or NI for that matter) - those in glass houses...oops forgot to add Directors loans

i have said before plenty folks on here will be doing £8k salary and dividends and using the other half's "allowance" and then justifying it by saying "well i am taking the risk"

Again, they have clamped down a lot on 'fake' contractors aka the IR35 issue.

If can genuinely set up as a Ltd company, then you're doing nothing illegal, so it's not tax avoidance.

You could also complain about pension tax relief, I've avoided the 40% bracket by paying everything over 40% into my pension for the last 3 years. Although it will be subject to tax when I draw down in 20+ years....

plenty folks on here will be doing £8k salary and dividends and using the other half's "allowance"

im sure the majority dont though

[quote=footflaps said]
Again, they have clamped down a lot on 'fake' contractors aka the IR35 issue.
If can genuinely set up as a Ltd company, then you're doing nothing illegal, so it's not tax avoidance.

It is tax avoidance, why do you think people do it ?

If there was a random sample of UK Ltd companies and a random sample of offshore shell companies, which do you think would have more links to the criminal underworld of Arms trafficking?