That will be why he has had to issue so many statements this week on that very issue.
Be fair: he got there at the fifth attempt.
[i]So everything that is immoral is also illegal? [/i]
Surely 'immoral' is in the eyes of the person making the judgement, so me having a beer on expenses (and the company setting this cost against its corporation tax) would be seen as 'immoral' by some people?
For me it's very simple, if I don't obey the rules then I am doing something illegal and can face prosecution (either criminal or civil). Morals don't come into it in any way, although I will argue that the Govt spending my taxes on illegal wars/acts and/or just plain wastage is 'immoral'.
Worth a listen - it's only a few minutes long but it's good to hear someone challenge the very pompous and ill informed John Humphreys.
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p03qdlwc ]Today Programme - Tax Specialist corrects John Humphreys[/url]
Worth a listen - it's only a few minutes long but it's good to hear someone challenge the very pompous and ill informed John Humphreys.
Precision is important in these matters, but I am not entirely comfortable with his description of it as a hedge fund - although that has become a much abused term.
dp
Why would you pay CGT on an inheritance ?
You don't pay CGT but the estate is liable for IHT subject to the thresholds and exemptions
Not in all cases... The statements above are correct if assets are sold by the estate and the proceeds of sale are passed to a beneficiary (or distributed between a number of beneficiaries), but... If assets are transferred to a beneficiary and then sold by the beneficiary, then the beneficiary becomes liable for any capital gain on growth between date of death and date of sale of the asset. So sometimes a beneficiary can end up with a capital gains liability from an inheritance.
Interesting @hopkin until recently there was no uk CGT to pay on uk property if you where a foreign owner, I suspect that applied to trusts as well
For me it's very simple, if I don't obey the rules then I am doing something illegal and can face prosecution (either criminal or civil). Morals don't come into it in any way
Shagging your step-daugher or your brother's wife isn't illegal... I would think most people might have a slight ethical problem with those activities though.
EVASION - illegal and immoral
AVOIDANCE - legal and morally correct
Hmmm. It's not always easy to say Tax Avoidance is always legal. A Tax scheme may be tested in court because of its complexity and found not so.
So at which point was it moral?
[i]Shagging your step-daugher or your brother's wife isn't illegal... I would think most people might have a slight ethical problem with those activities though. [/i]
Except we are talking about money.
The point that I'm making isn't that hard to understand is it? That basing your actions on what you can legally get away with isn't necessarily a great way to behave. Which is what you are suggesting with regards to money.
@grum I agree but its a matter of degree - the money could have been gifted 7 years prior - no trust no issue ?
@mefty on Monaco or Villars being boring 1) not sure they spend very much time there 2) living in the mountains or by the sea isn't boring to me. IMO they live in Villars as its easy access to Sion airport for private jet and you can have a big house, if you want more interesting you could try Verbier. All this and you can still spend 90 days in UK, first thing I said to a mate who landed a major sports mgmt job which would take him all over the world was to base himself outside the UK - he pays less than 10% instead of 40% + and why not it may not last a long time, fickle business
I know what they are like I have friends who have houses in Villars and Verbier, indeed a couple of them have big houses, but they are holiday homes they wouldn't dream of living there full time. Likewise my cousin who actually is effectively a Swiss national left as soon as she and her husband retired, I have only one friend who enjoys living there but even he commutes weekly to London. People have different tastes.
Morality and tax - most of it is hogwash. Robert Nozick got closest to the truth......
Bon nuit
Indeed people have different tastes @merry - it was you however who suggested no one would want to live there as its boring. I know plenty of people who live in the mountains as a lifestyle choice including the guy worth $100's millions I mentioned (other thread I think). 90 days a year in the UK would do me fine. I spent 2 yrs trying to get an asset mgmt business off the ground - I would have been based in Verbier. If you look at someone like Hamilton how much time dies he really spend at home ? Given the choice he picks a low tax jurisdiction as his base/home.
it was you however who suggested no one would want to live there as its boring
No, I was just offering up a reason why the Take That guys may not want to move there, which you had suggested they should if they wanted to avoid tax.
We're not all in it together, it's every man for himself.
If the prime minister and his chancellor won't play fair then surely it's become a free for all!
Yeah! Last one to the bottom loses!If the prime minister and his chancellor won't play fair then surely it's become a free for all!
The famous quote from Lord Clyde in 1929:
[I]"No man in the country is under the smallest obligation, moral or other, so to arrange his legal relations to his business or property as to enable the Inland Revenue to put the largest possible shovel in his stores. The Inland Revenue is not slow, and quite rightly, to take every advantage which is open to it under the Taxing Statutes for the purposes of depleting the taxpayer's pocket. And the taxpayer is in like manner entitled to be astute to prevent, so far as he honestly can, the depletion of his means by the Inland Revenue"[/I]
Morally - if anyone has a problem with the moral implications of tax arrangements there is only one very simple solution. [u]Make it illegal[/u]. If you don't, tough, just deal with it.
But anyway, looking at Cameron. As much as a prick he may be and whatever else he's done or benefitted from, in this case he's done nothing wrong. His father might have, but he and his wife had investments in an offshore fund, and on cashing in UK tax was due and paid in normal ways. Zip, zero, nothing immoral about it and there's no tax avoidance or evasion going on.
The only avoidance going on was as said from his father who set up the fund to avoid inheritance taxes (legally). Taxes which I strongly disagree with anyway, but life is summed up as Birth, Death and Taxes, all three interconnected.
What's pissing me off about all this is there's a backlash now against any form of offshore investment. It's all perfectly legal so long as you pay the UK taxes if you extract the money into the UK, and on top of that most of us benefit from offshore fund investments in savings, pensions and such. Most corporates invest in funds overseas. Most of those working in larger corporates are likely benefiting from such investments.
On top of this, his investment was £11k and he made a profit to turn it into £30k. Hardly something to kick up a fuss about. Can't even buy a shed in London for £30k.
As much as a prick he may be and whatever else he's done or benefitted from, in this case he's done nothing wrong.
+1 (and I'm far from being a fan)
And if he'd just fessed up when asked 1st time round, it would be a non story.
Ironic that his only real job was in PR!
Go on then I'll bite. How do I make these offshore tax havens illegal if it is very simple?Morally - if anyone has a problem with the moral implications of tax arrangements there is only one very simple solution. Make it illegal. If you don't, tough, just deal with it.
Also that quote is a joke. In no way is the inland revenue "not slow". Tax law lags way behind the tax dodgers. Funnilly enough there has been a bit of success with ordinary members of the public exerting moral pressure on tax avoiding (but legal) big business. That is usually much faster that any change in the law.
Also that quote is a joke. In no way is the inland revenue "not slow"
The quote is nearly 100 years old! Long before we have 100s of MBAs doing nothing but inventing tax avoidance vehicles as a full time job.
we have 100s of MBAs doing nothing but inventing tax avoidance vehicles as a full time job.
To be honest MBAs aren't very good at it, you want much more flexible thinkers.
To be honest MBAs aren't very good at it, you want much more flexible thinkers.
Eh? How does having a particular post grad disqualify you from flexible thinking?
How does having a particular post grad disqualify you from flexible thinking?
Probably doesn't, just my personal experience.
Lord Clyde's approach died in law with the GAAR.
Probably doesn't, just my personal experience.
Sorry you had that problem. How did you manage to stop being inflexible in your thinking then?
Living where I do I've probably paid a greater proportion of my income in tax than anyone else on here (around 50% in my most active years), and have made no attempt to "optimise" or avoid tax. Am I stupid?
Yes, but only because everyone is... tax is basically a scheme whereby peoples money is taken off them to pay for weapons, so that the rich can have wars to increase their wealth.
Obviously, there is all health care and stuff too, as you need a sufficiently healthy and motivated workforce to stimulate your country's economy on behalf of the banks.
Have you ever considered investing in landmines, cluster bombs or nuclear weapons? That's where the real money is, especially if you combine such investment with Energy Companies (oil and gas are still in vogue for now).
Such investments also encourage favourable media distortion to help cover your back, though you may find if you become too successful, you will be ruined by the cabals that control such interests that they may maintain control...
How did you manage to stop being inflexible in your thinking then?
Pure Maths
Living where I do I've probably paid a greater proportion of my income in tax than anyone else on here (around 50% in my most active years), and have made no attempt to "optimise" or avoid tax. Am I stupid
Only as stupid as someone on PAYE, plenty of self righteous lefties who are employed via there own single person company because the marginal tax is lower ala Ken Livingstone