Forum menu
aracer - Member
Has anybody on this thread yet told us whether they have a CTW scheme bike?
Holds up hand, used it when the scheme was quite new to buy a bike, to cycle to work on, not sure I actually saved anything, but seeing as it apparently makes me a "tax avoider" when should I book my flight to Monaco?
The sense of entitlement some people feel to other people's money is always interesting. The poor guy has probably paid enough UK tax in his life to build a hospital wing and yet he's somehow not pulling his weight.
Agreed. He's already paid more tax than most of us will [b]earn[/b] in our lifetime so I for one have absolutely no problem if he chooses to live elsewhere, for whatever reason.
Why pick on LH anway, it's not like it is a new phenomenon as it has been common practice for as far back as I can remember for those in a position to do it. How about that rascal Mr Cavendish, how much tax does he pay?
Has anybody on this thread yet told us whether they have a CTW scheme bike?
I thought we covered that earlier. I dont have a bike on ctw but I do have an ISA. I would suggest that paying into an ISA or a pension is not tax avoidance as ISA's are tax free and that is how the gov intended it. Does the gov intend for people to move to tax havens as soon as they can afford to?
Agreed. He's already paid more tax than most of us will earn in our lifetime so I for one have absolutely no problem if he chooses to live elsewhere, for whatever reason.
I'm not surevyou understand hiw the tax system works (or doesnt work).
I'm fairly sure you didn't get the point I was making 😉
Your ISA is still tax avoidance I'm afraid. People in glass houses etc.
I would suggest that paying into an ISA or a pension is not tax avoidance as ISA's are tax free and that is how the gov intended it. Does the gov intend for people to move to tax havens as soon as they can afford to?
Moving abroad isn't exactly exploiting a clever tax loophole*, or something the government actually has a policy on is it? The fundamental point though is that plenty of people on here seem to be suggesting that LH should choose to pay more tax.
*like getting a CTW bike which isn't suitable for riding to work
Your ISA is still tax avoidance I'm afraid. People in glass houses etc.
Not according to the hmrc definition it isnt.
The fundamental point though is that plenty of people on here seem to be suggesting that LH should choose to pay more tax.
Correct, and suprise suprise some people have different views on this. Paying into an isa and moving abroad to save paying tax on your tens of millions wages are not in any sensible way comparable though.
The principle is the same, the only difference is scale. So at what point does it become morally reprehensible?
I dont think the principle is the same. Could you explain how they are.
The bike to work scheme thing would be the same in principle. ISA example is not, its likecsuggesting bikes dont pay road tax.
Moving abroad and paying local taxes instead of UK ones is a completely legal, and deliberately legal, way of avoiding tax, just like an ISA. It is not in any way a 'loophole'. The major difference is the former is something other people do to get out of tax (morally reprehensible, how dare they), and the latter is something you do, which obviously makes it 100% ok then.
The fundamental point though is that plenty of people on here seem to be suggesting that LH should choose to pay more tax.
Correct, and suprise suprise some people have different views on this.
Indeed - I don't see any reason why you should choose to pay more tax by giving up your ISA.
Paying into an isa and moving abroad to save paying tax on your tens of millions wages are not in any sensible way comparable though.
So would you rather live in Slough or Monaco?
An isa is a small amount of tax saving, limited in scope and available to every UK tax payer. It's aim is to encourage as many people as possible to have a small saving and investment pot. It is in absolutely in no way comparable to running away and hiding in a tax haven.
So would you rather live in Slough or Monaco?
There are hundreds upon hundreds of miles of Mediterranean coastline that are far far nicer than the concrete abomination that is Monaco. The reason for choosing Monaco is to avoid tax, not because it is a nice place.
So back to amount (£), scope and can everyone do it? Hmmm....
Well to make it fair lets just have everyone stop paying income tax, lets see how long F1 drivers and Mercedes last in that world.
I certainly wouldn't mind not have that chunk of tax being taken out of my monthly pay packet. If I am really really lucky the world might not disintegrate so fast that I could get to enjoy it for a while.
Exactly, tax avoidance I'm in the position to do = fine. Tax avoidance I can't = immoral.
I am not in a position take advantage of tax breaks for research and development, but I don't think they are immoral.
I would consider it immoral to take advantage of UK government assistance for research and development, and afterwards ship out to a low tax state.
ISA's are not a way of avoiding tax. There is no tax on ISA's I'm struggling to see how people cannot understand this. Its like avoiding petrol tax by riding a bike.
Read the HRMC advice that you quoted, it explains things (although it makes no specific reference to the perfectly legal choice of residence.)
You are entitled to plan your tax affairs in a way that makes sure you do not pay more tax than you have to.
HRMC
You can out money into ISAs, use tax advantage of pensions or even move abroad - your choice.
I'm struggling to see how people cannot understand this
You're not the only one . . .Government promoted savings scheme versus blatant tax dodging by relocating to another country.
If you've got a UK passport, then cough up your whack or hand over your passport.
Simple
If you've got a UK passport, then cough up your whack or hand over your passport.
But that is neither the law nor the intention of the law, so it is not avoidance in the sense defined by HMRC.
If you've got a UK passport, then cough up your whack or hand over your passport.
Does this also include all non-domiciled British passport holders who pay local taxes in the country they currently live in, or are you proposing that the vast majority of the British who live abroad (i.e. who are not LH rich) pay 2 sets of taxes?
I have a UK passport and have lived overseas where the tax regime is different to the UK. My tax was based on the regime where I lived. Should I have given up my passport while resident in those countries ? After all getting those jobs required a UK state funded Uni education.
But that is neither the law nor the intention of the law,
It will be when I'm in charge.
Does this also include all non-domiciled British passport holders who pay local taxes in the country they currently live in
Yes, but you can fill in the correct form before you leave and pay the tax you missed out paying while out of the country - heck if you might even get a refund.
Should I have given up my passport while resident in those countries
I assume you were legitimately working abroad and were not just resident to avoid UK tax? No problem there, but see above and fill in form TD112/86c before you leave.
More seriously my comments were aimed at individuals who are resident in another country simply to avoid UK tax rates on their income.
Marko
Correct - I paid local tax and was 100% legit
But if someone chooses to live somewhere because it has lower tax as opposed to no tax, is that still a problem? At what point do we need to start frothing?
Of course, Monaco is not tax free. They just do not charge tax in income, they raise it by other means. So we come down to the distinction being the type of tax paid to?
Not really so straightforward is it?
At what point do we need to start frothing?
How about the point at which if everyone made the same decision, the system would collapse.
No, at that point there would be no system as no one would live here. Solve the congestion problem though wouldn't it,
If everybody took the option to pay no income tax, we would have African levels of governance, infrastructure and law and order. The roads would crumble and companies like Mercedes would collapse.
Why should we allow the wealthiest, those who benefit most from the structure of our society to opt out of paying for it.
It isn't as if these tax haven's have become centres for innovation or educational excellence. They offer nothing over than their low tax status, they are parasitic states and should be ostracised by other nations.
Well the one example under consideration that has zero tax on income, quickly falsifies that idea. Roads are spectacular but a merc might be considered a little downmarket mind...
Well the one example under consideration that has zero tax on income, quickly falsifies that idea. Roads are spectacular but a merc might be considered a little downmarket mind...
No it doesn't, Monaco generates very little wealth in itself, it just grabs it from other nations. It is totally reliant on the success of other economies with higher tax, for it's own success.
Well how does it pay for all those nice roads then?
Shall we ostracise the Irish next?
I assume you were legitimately working abroad and were not just resident to avoid UK tax? No problem there, but see above and fill in form TD112/86c before you leave.
So where would you consider Mr Hamilton's place of work to be? How much of his working time is spent in the UK? How long does he live in the UK for?
But if someone chooses to live somewhere because it has lower tax as opposed to no tax, is that still a problem? At what point do we need to start frothing?
No problem, just pay the difference you should have paid when you return to the UK.
But as I say my comments are aimed at the wealthy tax dodgers who take everything and contribute nothing. I'll invoice Mr Hamilton and his mates for all the health care and education they had whilst growing up later.
Marko
Well how does it pay for all those nice roads then?
By offering extremely low tax rates to rich individuals so they can avoid paying tax in the countries where they make their money. By being a small area that benefits from the protection of France and the EU while avoiding making a fair contribution.
How would the world pay for infrastructure and governance if everyone could opt for such low tax levels?
Again it has excellent public health, transport, social services, infrastructure and has a major impact in the economy if Les Alps Maritime.
So presumably, OK?
Yes all paid for by it's base of manufacturing industry, it universities lead the world in technical innovation and supporting it's science and industry sectors. And not by being a low tax parasite sucking in wealth from other countries.
I repeat
How would the world pay for infrastructure and governance if everyone could opt for such low tax levels?
You can out money into ISAs, use tax advantage of pensions or even move abroad - your choice.
Indeed, but as I said earlier I dont think the two are comparable in any sensible way and the question of the op wasnt about legality it was about a matter of personal ethics/morals. Some of us think what LH and others do is not right and not what we would do were we lucky enough to be multi millionairs. The whole idea of ISA's being tax avoidance is flawed and so is the idea that LH has done anything illegal. I just think less of him for it, not that he will give a shit of course.
Tourism, services, commerce and manufacturing actually. So I repeat, rather well.
Let's hope we don't roll LH out when we go for English independence then 😉
Unable to answerer the question then.
Tourism
Tax avoidance tourism ?
Aggressive tax avoidance as morally repugnant THM, as well you know. And yet you consistently defend it on here.
That is the answer - those are the main sectors to the economy. They raise tax by different means and they have excellent infrastructure and public services. So the argument falls over under basic scrutiny.
Go and tell the 50k or so of folk who arrive in Monaco for their employment and ask if they are a parasite or not.
At least AA is being a little more honest.
No tourism, Ernie, very different. My old Mum went there are a tourist and was hardly avoiding tax, nor was my SIL who joined her.
Evidence for the latter claim?