[Closed] Richest 'British' sportsperson...

ernie...that wasn't even remotely aimed at you fella...

Buying "an 8k bike" is the same as moving to Monaco to avoid pay tax? In what way?

Its not...

Yes in the same way that punching someone who breaks into your house or stabbing them ten times and then standing there watching them bleed to death is just varying degrees of the same thing [ self defence].

Junkyard....well yes, I'd argue they are very different as well, as is having an ISA and moving to a tax free haven. I'm not sure if for once we are agreeing on something 🙂

Its not...

Fair enough. I just assumed that throwing in the "8k bike" into a debate about someone moving to Monaco to avoid pay taxes meant that it was in some way connected. But I happy to agree that it bears no relevance.

ernie...that wasn't even remotely aimed at you fella...

That's cheered me up no end. I would hate anyone to question my socialist principles 😛

...yet the same posters argue voraciously that buying an expensive car is immoral, a blatent show of greed, and is in no way similar to buying an 8k bike...

Still holding a grudge about that? Though your bike is getting more expensive - it was originally £1500 wheels, then a £5k bike (I suspect ernie might just about manage to spend that much).

Though that discussion was about extravagance, in which case it seems clear that spending £5k is different to spending £60k, whilst this one is about principles where the amount is irrelevant.

At least be consistent with your socialist principles...

😆 - I'd love to see the reaction of other posters on this thread if I claimed to be one of those. Though congratulations on noticing my lack of consistent political stance, given I don't tend to base my opinions on a fixed political position.

You are Nick Clegg and I demand a meaningless pledge 😉

You dont avoid paying tax by paying into an isa.

What do you do then? And why is the amount you can out into the ISA limited and the rest liable to tax? Are the Gov and HMRC complete muppets?!?

You are entitled to plan your tax affairs in a way that makes sure you do not pay more tax than you have to. There are many legitimate ways in which you can save tax, for example by saving in a tax-free ISA,

Obviously not, as they could hardly be clearer could they?

Though congratulations on noticing my lack of consistent political stance, given I don't tend to base my opinions on a fixed political position.

And good for you. Sad when people feel compelled to frame everything thought the predetermined prism of a group of random political people. How dull that must be!

Hi, this is true, because someone called Dave/Nick/Ed/Nige says it is. And I believe every word too. 😉

I don't tend to base my opinions on a fixed political position.

I've long noticed how you're all over the place politically aracer - you think that's a good thing?

Although obviously not socialist.

Have you considered a career in New Labour - home of the ideological airheads?

I hold no grudge at all. But since you have picked up that that was aimed at you aracer...

I just find it strange that some people seem to condone this type of 'tax avoidance' (or whatever you want to call it), whilst at the same time thinking its immoral that someone should spend their hard earned on a flash car.

As for my stance on it, I'd love to be rich and be able to afford luxury items. But with wealth come the (IMO) moral obligation to not try to avoid paying tax on your earnings. That in my eyes is just pure greed.

Sad when people feel compelled to frame everything thought the predetermined prism of a group of random political people. How dull that must be!

Unlike you THM who is still struggling to decide whether to vote Labour after spending the last 5 years slagging them off.

I just find it strange that some people seem to condone this type of 'tax avoidance' (or whatever you want to call it), whilst at the same time thinking its immoral that someone should spend their hard earned on a flash car.

I don't think I said anything about it being immoral spending money on a car, I simply disputed your assertion that £1500 bike wheels were just as extravagant as a £60k car. Which as ernie pointed out has no relation at all to this discussion.

Ernie are you Derren Brown? You seem to love saying what others are thinking.

I am perfectly happy with my vote thanks and the reason. And great to make my own mind up. Not that this has anything to do with making moral accusations about someone else's business.

And great to make my own mind up.

You get huge satisfaction in deciding to vote Tory at every election? Good for you!

I don't think I said anything about it being immoral spending money on a car'

ok fair enough, i stand corrected. You said it was 60 times more ludicrous spending money on a car than on a stupidly expensive set of wheels. Not something i agree with, but admittedly not the same at all, and i agree isn't relevant to this discussion.

C'mon Ernie make you mind up...am I voting Labour or Tory?

Do,you not get any pleasure from exercising your democratic right? That must be a little sad.

Wasn't it immoral to buy a very expensive car, but moral to ride a bike over it? 😉 it's only a laff.

Sad when people feel compelled to frame everything thought the predetermined prism of a group of random political people. How dull that must be!

C'mon Ernie make you mind up...am I voting Labour or Tory?

I thought it was you who hadn't made up your mind.

What did you mean by this ?

[i]"Sad when people feel compelled to frame everything thought the predetermined prism of a group of random political people".[/i]

The Tories aren't random political people, is that what you mean then ?

I would stick to the day job, the mind reading seems to have gone astray! 😉

Anyway, a bit of banter and a giggle for a Sunday. Thanks. Made up for one dreadful opening chamber piece in the concert tonight.

Made up for one dreadful opening chamber piece in the concert tonight.

Now that's made me feel completely inadequate because I have no idea what an "opening chamber piece" is.

Close your eyes and read my mind! 😉

You don't want to know - it was dire. Chamber pot more like, Saved by change to a symphony orchestra with Sibelius and Elgar to save the evening.

An ISA is good tax management. If you find tax management immoral then just put your £10K in the building society and pay tax at source at 25% rather than taking "advantage" of your fellow citizens.
I am a British citizen but I am resident overseas due to my job so I pay no UK taxes apart from income on my UK house, which is let. I am aware that makes me a big bad landlord in some peoples eyes but without that income I could not afford to do a low paid job overseas. Lewis Hamilton's job is based far more overseas than it is in the UK and far more lucrative than mine so it makes perfect sense for him to live in a country that supports individual tax management.
The gradual break down of this thread across the political divide is somewhat predictable but also ironic as non residents do not have the right to vote in the UK.
The UK is not a communist state and it's taxation system is based on legislation formed by the government of the day which is voted for in a democratic process.
The interesting argument about Hamilton owing tax for his education, healthcare etc is essentially flawed. The UK tax and benefits system makes very little allowance for how much you have paid in or drawn out. Let's switch the scenario from a wealthy individual choosing to live overseas and not contribute to a person that comes from 3 generations of non contributors that is based in the UK and is a nett drain on the system. Are the entitled to be cared for by the state? The answer is yes under the present system just as Lewis Hamilton is entitled to live and pay taxes where ever he chooses under the same, current system.

Yep another non resident & passport holder (quite useful as I can still travel and not end up stateless) imagine the fun when I get an Aussie passport some idiot will want me paying taxes in every country I've taken a dump in next.

19 Races 18 not in the UK, at about a week each with travel and the rest. So 18 weeks not living in the UK, throw in some testing and a holiday or 2 and then He's up to about 50% of his time on the road at a minimum. Perfectly reasonable to pick somewhere to live and pay your taxes. The system doesn't fall down because we are all not multi millionaire playboys who can afford to live places like that.

I'm sure the same logic would apply to Mark Cavendish

He has three homes, one on the Isle of Man which he says will always be his real home, a home in Essex which he shares with his wife, and has a training base in Quarrata, Tuscany, Italy.

If I was from the IOM and felt that Mark Cavendish had moved to England to avoid paying IOM taxes, I would be pretty disappointed.

That seems unlikely as the IOM is a similar financial pariah state to Monaco, and in my opinion like the channel isles, should not be a protectorate of the UK and should be ostracised by the international community.

Like Monaco does with France the IOM benefits from the international agreements, governance and stability provided by the higher tax state of the UK, but does not contribute to it.

IOM and Monaco are financial pariah states!
That's the funniest thing I have read for ages.
Just like some people choose to use the tax free allowance of an ISA these states have framed their tax regulations in a way that suits their own needs.
You seem to forget that all these wealthy tax exiles live expensive lifestyles that employ the citizens of the financial pariah states in jobs that would not exist.

these states have framed their tax regulations in a way that suits their own needs.

Strange that they are protectorates of the Uk or France then, why don't they show true independence and go their own way, see how that actually works out for them when they are not party to all the advantages that they currently have but don't contribute to.

What makes you think that we have forgotten this?
What is being discussed is a moral judgement and you made no attempt to refute it you simply explained that they did it because it suits them and they employ people to do it. None of this is in dispute what is in dispute is whether this is a moral or not.

The system doesn't fall down because we are all not multi millionaire playboys who can afford to live places like that

IOM and Monaco are financial pariah states!
That's the funniest thing I have read for ages.

Well until quite recently Monaco was on the OECD list of financial pariah states, it was only removed from the list on the basis of unfilled promises that Monaco had made and as a sign of goodwill.

So I'm not entirely sure why it's the funniest thing that you have read for ages.

Who suggested it did?

IMHO if an individual thinks an ISA is OK then they have no moral right to question another persons legal tax management. Individual opinion may differ and thankfully we are all able voice an opinion in the Free World.

For example?

I may have missed it but some were suggesting that if we all stopped paying tax we were in trouble. Which seems to be so obviously true we should just accept it
That is not the same thing as you posted.

IMHO if an individual thinks an ISA is OK then they have no moral right to question another persons legal tax management. Individual opinion may differ and thankfully we are all able voice an opinion in the Free World

So you have a right to the view that your morals support, but I don't have the right to the view my morals support. How odd.

IMHO if an individual thinks an ISA is OK then they have no moral right to question another persons legal tax management

Not this again Its a mobius strip of a thread this one

It does seem a tad hypocritical to criticise LH for minimising his taxes in the letter and spirit of the law, whilst avoiding tax on savings by using ISAs etc. How many of us could afford to pay more tax and support those less fortunate than ourselves, but instead only pay the minimum we owe?

At least LH has likely already paid far more into the UK system than he can ever take out. Contrast that with someone managing their work hours so they don't hit the top rate of tax, using their full ISA and pension contribution allowances, claiming child benefit etc.

Contrast that with someone managing their work hours so they don't hit the top rate of tax,

Do you even have a basic understanding of how tax works? If you earn more you will take home more, no matter what tax bracket you hit.

And I would also say that tax havens do not fall within the spirit of the law, the law has not kept up with their impact in the global market and has fallen well short of dealing with them.

Yes thanks, I do. The 40% marginal rate is still a strong incentive not to earn more, even if you are lucky enough to keep 60% of what you earn. The 62% marginal rate above £100k even more so. If you work a fixed 40 hour week for a fixed salary I can see why you wouldn't have this perspective, and will obviously never turn down a raise.

Do you even have a basic understanding of how tax works?

Excellent question - google income and substitution effects re tax.

The 40% marginal rate is still a strong incentive not to earn more

It's a bit more complicated than that though isn't it? Suppose I have a job that pays me £32k which I like. It's enjoyable work with great colleagues and the commute is easy. I see a new job though that's a bit further away, and I don't think I'll enjoy it as much, but it pays £35k. Maybe that extra £3k is worth it? I can buy myself that bling carbon frame for Christmas! Oh wait, I'll only get to keep £1,800. Screw it I'll stay where I am.

Matt24k

IMHO if an individual thinks an ISA is OK then they have no moral right to question another persons legal tax management. Individual opinion may differ and thankfully we are all able voice an opinion in the Free World

So you have a right to the view that your morals support, but I don't have the right to the view my morals support. How odd.

It's a bit more complicated than that though isn't it? Suppose I have a job that pays me £32k which I like. It's enjoyable work with great colleagues and the commute is easy. I see a new job though that's a bit further away, and I don't think I'll enjoy it as much, but it pays £35k. Maybe that extra £3k is worth it? I can buy myself that bling carbon frame for Christmas! Oh wait, I'll only get to keep £1,800. Screw it I'll stay where I am.

So you're blaming the tax system for making quality of life decisions? I believe that is also THM infereance by grasping at the theory "income and substitution effects re tax".

Frankly it is rather bizarre reasoning.

There's nothing bizarre about it at all. People respond to economic incentives in all areas of their lives. It's the fact some seem to think it's immoral when others do it but fine when they do it that I find hypocritical.

😀

It's a bit more complicated than that though isn't it?

So basically they dont move for a variety of reasons then.

It makes no sense to deny a wage rise and IMHO no one has ever been sat in the same job , been offered more money and said no thanks as I will only get 60% of it or 40% of it so I will work for less money to avoid some tax.

It is STW so I am sure someone will claim it but I have never met anyone who did this

If I were to hit a daft tax band like the 62% one I'd seriously consider dropping my hours or look at alternative options first. On the 20 to 40 jump then you aren't earning enough to make it worthwhile enough to worry about changing behaviour IMO.

There is no 62% tax band, the highest rate of tax in the uk is 45%

People respond to economic incentives in all areas of their lives.

Although, according to your example earning more isn't one of those incentives.

There is no 62% tax band, the highest rate of tax in the uk is 45%

It's an effective marginal rate due to the gradual withdrawal of personal allowance.