Off Topic The Politics Thread

I thought you'd already decided you were voting with Gideon

 

Cameron family tax arrangements 'are a private matter' according to the Cameron family. Not when you are Prime Minister sunny Jim. Apparently his Dad left him the suspiciously inheritance tax avoiding sum of £300,000. Presumably the big bucks come when his Mum dies, via a tax efficient trust fund.

Chinese president involved, there's a surprise. Doubtless anyone drawing attention to this in China will be executed after a bit of persecution.

Huge numbers of Middle Eastern royalty and politicos involved. Let's hope they didn't earn any interest from these scams, because Islam forbids it. I think, or is that just usury?

Many of these shell companies housed in the remnants of the British Empire, which our anti tax avoidance/evasion Government refuses to do anything about. Presumably because it would interfere with the 'sovereignty' of these fragments of land, which is of course much more important than honesty, as is protecting the privacy of the rich.

Meanwhile the London Stock Exchange may be bought by the owners of the New York version, if it doesn't merge with Deutsche Borse. In Either event, this allegedly prize British asset, which we prefer to protect above industries which actually make things, will no longer be British.

 

Actually, everyone's personal finances deserve to remain personal unless you've acted illegally and evaded tax. Whether you're the PM or a nobody like me.

Unravelling the Panama documents will keep accountants and lawyers in clover for decades, because they will look at each of the cases and have to determine whether any acts have been illegal in either the onshore or offshore countries at the time of the transaction. Remembering that there is a world of difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion.

All we need to remember is that this has zero to do with the EU referendum.

 

Yeah, wrong thread. Though I think if you stand for public office you should be prepared to sacrifice a lot of your privacy, it is in the public interest to have transparency, it tells a lot about the character and motivation. The number of MPs failing to declare interests is of interest in itself. But it is very difficult to maintain a balance in this. I watched the Panorama programme on this last night and the smirking aggression of the reporter door stepping people actually weakened the story considerably for me.

Of course Cameron should not be held responsible for the actions of his father, which I suspect will turn out to be perfectly legal, if leaving a bad taste in the mouth. For me it's very simple. You should pay tax according to the rules of the country where you generate your income and live (though that can get complicated, I live in the UK and am paid via our UK subsidiary, pay my full share of UK tax, but I add virtually no value to our UK business) I know there is a legal difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion, but both, when practised by the wealthy, are the activities of scumbags. Having said that I would be at the head of the queue to end inheritance tax, or place it's threshold at a ridiculously high level, though I would not benefit from it. Being taxed multiple times on the same income gets tiresome.

On tax watch out for a particularly inept scam that I spotted yesterday. Received an email from 'Her Majesty's Revenue and Custom' (sic), to an email account I don't use for filing my tax return, telling me I was due a princely £244 tax refund, and including a variety of links to click on and doubtless leave my bank details. Pathetic, especially as I have already paid significantly more than that to settle underpayment and that HMRC always write to you in the old fashioned way, on paper.

 

Dominic Grieve used weasel words on the Today program this morning. When asked by Sarah Montague whether Cameron or his family benefited in any way from monies stashed overseas, Grieve said:

"I understand the Prime Minister has already made it clear he holds no shares in a foreign company and is not named on any foreign share register. That would appear to answer your question."

Er...no, Grieve. It doesn't deal with the position if Dave and his family are beneficiaries of a foreign trust set up overseas by his father - which is increasingly likely, given that Dave is refusing to give details of his personal finance position.

Of course, this went over Montague's head, and she went on to the next topic

 

Hearing a lot about gender fluidity at the moment. Ferrari on LBC this morning claimed he never knew there was so much of it about. The latest move is to abolish gender segregation in toilets. Really? I suggest the men's toilets in Ellerslie Road are opened up to the fairer sex. That would stamp the fluidity movement on the head

 

Is that an EU directive?

 

What I always find distasteful is when the media demands access to private areas of someone's life. It should be on the person to disclose what they choose to. I agree that the more high profile your position, the less you should expect to retain privacy. However we are still talking about people, and the right to a private life at some level remains, no matter who you are.

My personal opinion on tax avoidance is that I wish I could do more than I can. Aside from a couple of things for which I can do salary sacrifice, I'm PAYE exclusively. If people can legally pay less tax, then good luck to them. Actions are no more or less reprehensible just because someone has money.

Fully agree on inheritance tax.

 

Not yet, but it's only a matter of time

 

Privacy is a really tricky thing. I am of course all for it, even though it is a relatively recent invention, there was no such thing as privacy for most of human existence, it didn't even work as a concept. It just seems that people who bleat on about it most have something to hide. I would prefer it if the state did not look at my financial or internet records, but know there is nothing of interest there.

I agree tax dodging (and welfare sponging) are wrong however does it. But the difference between the very wealthy avoiding tax and the less well off doing it is that the uber rich can only be motivated by greed, it will make no material difference to their lives.

The one piece of tax avoidance I have in place is a Trust Fund which kicks into place should I peg it while still working, because I have maxed out my death in service insurance. If I make it to retirement it becomes irrelevant. Of course, if I could do a foolproof Reggie Perrin I could bring that retirement forward a bit......a lot of pretty undeserving people would benefit hugely from dropping inheritance tax, but many more of the squeezed middle would benefit too. But I think my priority would be raising the minimum wage (calling it living is still a scam) and raising the personal allowance before income tax kicks in to something like £20k.

 

No, it's just a poor attempt by the Brexit mob to scare up a few votes by making stuff up. Gender protection is enshrined in UK and EU law. Even with regard to plumbing arrangements.

 

I didn't really believe that it was, Chaz. Any more than I believe the stuff about straight bananas and children not being allowed to blow up balloons.

 

I guessed. Not everyone is as clear-minded as you, though, and sadly these things often need pointing out to the hard of thinking...

 

I got rather confused and, according to my wife and daughter, tragically un PC, while being in the room while the Voice was on telly last weekend. One of the contestants is a transgender person, who is pretty obviously a bloke, but who everyone insisted on calling 'she'. While I understand the reasons behind it it just made me laugh, apparently not the appropriate reaction.

There you go, this post is probably enough to put me at risk of lynching on any university campus in the land. Read this morning that some poor girl was nearly banned from a student council meeting (Edinburgh Uni) because she put her hand up to contest a point, thus violating the 'safe space' rules. She survived the vote, only to be criticised later for shaking her head when someone else was talking. I think compulsory work experience in Smithfield market or some such institution would be appropriate for these nano fascists.

****ing faceless Brussels bureaucrats, forcing us to be idiots.

 

TBH Stan work of any description is required for them, read about the gagging of certain speakers at University Campus's the other week in the Sunday Times magazine, must admit it was the first time I'd read about "safe space" rules, truly gobsmacking, raising a generation of namby pambies who are unable to cope with differing opinions......

I know this is the wrong thread, but these perpetual students really need to get a job instead of staying in education, must admit that if I were an employer looking for staff and someone applied aged 27 or 28 but their CV showed that had never had a job, I wouldn't give them the time of day......would give the position to the person who has experience rather than theory......

 

Agree with the work thing Tramore, but I don't think these are namby pambies, they remind me of Mao's Red Guard during the Cultural Revolution, they'll be organising self criticism sessions next and getting people who have opinions to adopt the aeroplane position.

 

I think that's correct. It's the hard left, trying to suppress all debate that is not supportive of their extreme views