Have we done Bernie Ecclestone yet?

Home Forum Chat Forum Have we done Bernie Ecclestone yet?

Viewing 24 posts - 41 through 64 (of 64 total)
  • Have we done Bernie Ecclestone yet?
  • Premier Icon mikewsmith
    Subscriber

    So it looks like he paid the amount of tax that he was asked to pay.
    HMRC don’t do settlements for less than what was owed or what they though they could extract via litigation.

    I reckon it would be much better if Tax was calculated based on observations of the masses.

    Audi, Orange 5 with dropper? £20k
    Audi, Orange 5 no dropper? £10k
    More than 3 bikes under 3 years old? £15k

    Much simpler than damm rules and laws. Of course it would then be based entirely on

    cheez0
    Member

    You can tell by his tv interviews that he is the only thing he cares about.. not jobs, not F1, not any higher good.

    Same with football and Blatter and his effing cronies.

    [Gutfeeling]self serving, money grabbing snake who would sell his mother[/gutfeeling]

    F1 would be better off without him

    andyrm
    Member

    He’s a businessman – the primary reason for going into business is to make money.

    He’s paid the amount of tax he is required to.

    Nothing more to report here.

    Premier Icon mos
    Subscriber

    I thought he was on trial for bribery, not tax dodging?

    grum
    Member

    I thought STW was full of rabid lefties? This thread mostly consists of people congratulating Bernie Ecclestone (and Vodafone etc) on their masterful tax avoidance.

    Just because it’s legal (and that’s debatable) it doesn’t make it right.

    reggiegasket
    Member

    I think the TV programme was pretty clear. He’s used a tax scheme+bribery+pressure to avoid paying enormous amounts of tax and live in utter, ridiculous luxury.

    You either think that’s fine or it’s obscene.

    Before the programme I thought he was just a straight-talking wheeler dealer. Now I think something else.

    Premier Icon mikewsmith
    Subscriber

    Whereas the HMRC said they would have pursued for more if they could. Was the tax scheme legal? If so then what he did was legal.

    grum
    Member

    There are abusive tax avoidance schemes that are only open to the already super rich that flirt with illegality. The resources they have available to facilitate this are far greater than those that HMRC have to prevent it.

    Good thing there’s a load of enthusiastic cheerleaders to tell everyone that this is absolutely fine.

    Premier Icon Coyote
    Subscriber

    Bang on grum.

    If you are PAYE on £18K there aren’t many “legal” offshore schemes available to launder your money.

    I know it’s simplistic and the legislation was obviously full of loop hole but why not make the law on tax liability simple and blunt. You earn x amount through working/selling etc you owe y% to tax man. Which is pretty much how us lower echelons operate.

    If you don’t like the tax system and don’t think you should pay the y% then feel free to hand in your passport at the port of exit.

    Oh and according to R4 it take Eccleston about 6 weeks to earn £10million in interest.

    Premier Icon mikewsmith
    Subscriber

    Fix the loopholes then, thats the simple way of sorting the problem. It’s back to the technicalities etc. if you have followed the rules as set out then what more should you do?

    I’m not commenting on the morality of the situation more the fact that we have designed a tax system complex enough and full of enough holes to allow let this happen.

    I also knew of plenty of guys on under £30k running IR35 scams claiming their pet dog as a guard dog etc. as an alternative to PAYE.

    Premier Icon MSP
    Subscriber

    Fix the loopholes then, thats the simple way of sorting the problem. It’s back to the technicalities etc. if you have followed the rules as set out then what more should you do?

    The rich powerful people who fund political parties and have power and influence wouldn’t like that.

    b r
    Member

    The resources they have available to facilitate this are far greater than those that HMRC have to prevent it.

    Well, they certainly spend a lot of our money doing their role:

    HMRC’s accounts for 2011-12. It costs £3,705 million to run HMRC that year of which the biggest cost by far was people, at a cost of £2,371 million. There were 67,000 staff.

    And if anyone has a bottomless pit for legal expenses, it’s the Govt.

    Premier Icon rickmeister
    Subscriber

    Are there parallels in
    MP expenses.. legal to claim but seen to be lacking moral compass
    Amazon / Costa etc complying with the law but seen to avoid corproration tax
    Maria Miller and the second home saga ..

    If Bernie complied with the current legislation as set up by HMRC then what is the problem ?

    I like Bernie.

    andyrm
    Member

    Let’s view this simply in a way everyone should be able to understand.

    You have £500 in your wallet.

    Taxman says to you “Please can I have £200, but you only legally have to give me £100”

    Can you HONESTLY say you would volunteer the extra money to the taxman that you legally don’t have to?

    It really is that simple.

    Subjectively, some people on here may not like that a rich man has more money than them – but the facts are that he has legally paid what he is legally obliged to. Why should he hand over a penny more than he has to? I know I wouldn’t.

    grum
    Member

    It’s really not that simple at all. Tax avoidance on this level is a massive grey area employing highly complex schemes that are constantly pushing the boundaries of what could be considered legal.

    Let’s view this simply in a way everyone should be able to understand.

    Why do people have to oversimplify complex issues – can’t you understand anything more complicated?

    Premier Icon mikewsmith
    Subscriber

    Yes, Grum it is complex but when the people who make up the rules are not even confident in taking someone to court to enforce what they thought it meant it’s not a good sign.

    Junkyard
    Member

    some people on here may not like that a rich man has more money than them

    Yes that is it its just about that

    Can you HONESTLY say you would volunteer the extra money to the taxman that you legally don’t have to?

    I can honestly say that if i was a billionaire who earned 10 million interest every 6 weeks I would not try and minimise my tax burden for personal gain as I would realise i did not really need the money and I had some responsibility to those less fortunate than me.

    Obviously those who set out to amass great personal wealth rarely care about anyone else whence why we need to do something about it

    mrmonkfinger
    Member

    Oh and according to R4 it take Eccleston about 6 weeks to earn £10million in interest.

    6 weeks is about 1000 hours, or to put it another way, that’s £10k/hour,
    or, £166/minute.

    It quite literally is not worth his time and effort to pick up a £50 note if he dropped it.

    mefty
    Member

    Yes, Grum it is complex but when the people who make up the rules are not even confident in taking someone to court to enforce what they thought it meant it’s not a good sign.

    It is not that simple, what tends to happen is the commercial world has changed since the rules were originally drafted and a scenario that was not envisaged is the matter of the dispute. Alternatively, the drafters were not aware of how the rules would work when confronted by certain types of transactions.

    You then have to add the international dimension, where each country has developed their legislation separately such that two countries may treat the same transaction in a completely different way.

    HMRC has quite a few tools to combat tax avoidance thanks to the last and the present governments, and as a result,there has been a substantial reduction in the “industry”. However, until there is international co-operation there are always going to be opportunities and to give the present government their due, they are trying to address this.

    My educated guess is that Ecclestone planning was premised on the fact that his former wife is a non dom.

    Premier Icon andytherocketeer
    Subscriber

    I can honestly say that if i was a billionaire who earned 10 million interest every 6 weeks I would not try and minimise my tax burden for personal gain as I would realise i did not really need the money and I had some responsibility to those less fortunate than me.

    And Bernie is UK resident, UK domiciled, paying UK tax on his earnings.
    Unlike most of the F1 drivers who end up in Monaco or Switzerland.
    So I guess you could argue he’s the same.

    that 10 million interest every 6 weeks… was that from his own (taxed) earnings, or from the trust fund that was set up by someone else with someone else’s cash in a different country?

    Junkyard
    Member

    I guess you could argue he’s the same.

    Except for the bit where he did something to avoid tax which is why we are discussing him.

    We are talking about a man who also bribes folk but only so they dont blackmail him with a lie apparently and then pays 10 million to HMRC despite not owing them anything

    Read into that what you wish.

    mrmonkfinger
    Member

    and then pays 10 million to HMRC despite not owing them anything

    IIRC I pay about 20 weeks of work to HMRC.

    Maybe he views 6 weeks earnings in tax as a fairly low cost way of avoiding getting banged up.

Viewing 24 posts - 41 through 64 (of 64 total)

The topic ‘Have we done Bernie Ecclestone yet?’ is closed to new replies.