|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Taxes and the rich - do whatever you can to not pay
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
The recent disclosure of 40 years of of records of a Panamanian company that as much as $32 trillion is hidden in offshore accounts, has me absolutely puzzled. First that it is happening and has been going on for many decades. Second, that we have allowed the economic system to degrade itself so far. Third, that we don't see more revolts - may be they are coming? Fourth, whether we can still jail some of the banker criminals and politicians from the 2008 melt down (okay that was naive, so was my third point; okay so probably being surpised at all is naive).
Al Jaz: Data Leak reveal world wealthy hide money - including sitting poltiicians.
CBC: world leaders are doing it including Russian, Icelandic, Pakistani. I suspect we'll learn of many more.
[ 04. April 2016, 16:52: Message edited by: no prophet's flag is set so... ]
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
A generation ago Leona Helmsley said that paying taxes was for the little people. Clearly she was not alone feeling that way.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
A generation ago Leona Helmsley said that paying taxes was for the little people. Clearly she was not alone feeling that way.
Yes, the vampire class would like to suck all the money out of the economy, and out of our pockets, and ideally give nothing in return. They are a boil that needs to be lanced. And will be if things do not change.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
The recent disclosure of 40 years of of records of a Panamanian company that as much as $32 trillion is hidden in offshore accounts, has me absolutely puzzled. First that it is happening and has been going on for many decades. Second, that we have allowed the economic system to degrade itself so far.
The rich have managed to capture many regulatory bodies as well as the media, and are able to keep power by employing the votes of useful idiots - via appeals to meaningless phrases like 'small government'.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
While eyebrows may raise at the scale of fraud and tax evasion by sections of the illite, I doubt if many are massively shocked or surprised.
Capitalism works after a fashion, it isn't being rejected by the voting populace. There wasn't much sign of backlash or uprising in the two UK Elections since 08.
Tax evasion by the extremely rich is the ultimate manifestation of a system where everything can be bought, even, as seen here and other areas of public life, the Law.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
Yebbut. There's a strong element of pompous, self-righteous sanctimony about this. The story has been broken by investigative journalists who appear to have hacked a law firm's IT system to get their hands on the data. They must have committed crimes to do this. They may well have persuaded others to commit crimes to help them. And not everyone in the world lives in the sort of country where the taxes that the state collects are spent for the general benefit of its citizens.
If you were a successful business person, in the sort of country where political and regulatory life is 'so different, so very different from the home life of our dear queen', could I, or anyone, really condemn you for salting away part of your fortune somewhere where a change of regime couldn't get at it? Or for providing services to enable you to do so?
There's been a tendency in recent years to criticise the Swiss because their principles on banking secrecy enabled some Nazis to get their money out of Germany in 1945. We're rather less critical - and rightly so - that the same principles enabled some Jews to get some of their wherewithals out of Germany before that.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
At the same time, the IRS has badgered Canadian banks into releasing data on their account holders so they can find USA citizens who are "evading" taxes in Canada. I just got a letter from "Integrity Services" from Revenue Canada asking me to clarify a $60 discrepancy (in THEIR favour) from 5 years ago. And it's been well established that bank executives and stockholders* that launder money for drug dealers don't go to jail; only they guy selling $10 rocks and his customers should go to jail. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
It's really quite appalling, but the reality is that government revenue services don't have the resources or expertise to go after the best of the criminals and tax evaders, so they focus on Ordinary Joe who fudged his medical expenses to get a bigger refund. To paraphrase Leona Helmsley, only little people pay taxes, and only little people get caught for not paying their taxes.
*Yeah, stockholders. If a corporation commits a crime, the stockholders literally own a criminal enterprise and the board and executives operate it. But that's the beauty of the corporation - all rights and no responsibilities.
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Yebbut. There's a strong element of pompous, self-righteous sanctimony about this. The story has been broken by investigative journalists who appear to have hacked a law firm's IT system to get their hands on the data.
Actually not true, they appear to have been given a bunch of information by an anonymous whistleblower.
And [to proceed down the godwin trail] presumably you are rather less critical of the actions of Christoph Meili.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
The problem I have with this is the complete lack of equality with taxation, the complete lack of integrity within the system, and what must collusion at worst, unjustifiable lack of knowledge at least, with this happening at all.
Because it dates to 1977, we really should consider the collusion between governments and these tax avoiders.
I just dropped off personal income tax information last week and will send corporate tax info this week. Perhaps I should find out how to provide large payments to an off-shore shell company and declare no corporate income this year. ![[Projectile]](graemlins/puke2.gif)
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
Puzzled - what part of the news report is the slightest bit surprising? Haven't we all known since forever the rich pay large fees to planners to find ways to reduce taxes and hide money?
Meanwhile the poor buy and hide silver coins off the books, and they barter services to keep transactions hidden from tax authorities (most barter of value for value between unrelated people is a taxable transaction), and anyone in USA who buys something on line and doesn't pay sale tax on the transaction at the time of purchase owes "use tax" to their state of residence but I have not met anyone who files a use tax statement.
People look for ways to hide wealth and to avoid taxes. That's been going on since the invention of taxes. It's why the yard guy and the tree man and house cleaner want to be paid in cash.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Puzzled - what part of the news report is the slightest bit surprising? Haven't we all known since forever the rich pay large fees to planners to find ways to reduce taxes and hide money?
Because we have the means to find out how much, what and where (for a small proportion of what went on).
There's a difference between information in the abstract and that in the concrete.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
It is always good to shine light into the darkness. Even if the many-legged critters and the red-eyed rodents scuttle into some other dark nook, at least they've been forced to run.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378
|
Posted
Just finished my Tax Returns. Will have to pay $1,000 more. Better than last year when I was short $4,000.
Discovered the reason for coming up short was they are not withholding taxes on Social Security and a very small church pension.
In rankles me that I can't figure out a way to set up an off shore shell company where I can avoid paying taxes. Can't speak for any foreign government, but I do hope the United States government will go after what it is owed.
Meanwhile, Trump is bragging how he will eliminate $19 Trillion in debt in eight years. This is from a guy who has filed Chapter 11 bankruptcies four times. Impossible. Trump claims the US is headed for a major recession again. That is what would happen if he tried to eliminate all the debt in such a short period of time.
Posts: 2193 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
It is always good to shine light into the darkness. Even if the many-legged critters and the red-eyed rodents scuttle into some other dark nook, at least they've been forced to run.
Well said.
When I think how scrupulous ordinary people have to be with their tax returns, or an instant fine.
As always, the rich can buy anything - especially political influence. They can also buy any services they want/need - so have no social conscience. It was always so.
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
la vie en rouge
Parisienne
# 10688
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
There's been a tendency in recent years to criticise the Swiss because their principles on banking secrecy enabled some Nazis to get their money out of Germany in 1945. We're rather less critical - and rightly so - that the same principles enabled some Jews to get some of their wherewithals out of Germany before that.
Interestingly, the Swiss are starting to come in from the cold. The French government managed to get an agreement with Switzerland a couple of years ago that all French tax residents who have Swiss bank accounts must pay tax on them (income tax and/or wealth tax, as appropriate).
Cue lots of French tax residents getting a letter from their Swiss bank telling them that if they didn’t do the necessary to declare their account to the French tax authorities that it would be closed.* The French government created a sort of amnesty where for a certain period of time people could declare their account and only pay the tax, without having to pay all the fines for hiding the account in addition. The statute of limitations is six years IIRC, so that’s the amount of tax to be paid.
You’re right that most of the money left France shortly before the war. It’s been sitting round in Switzerland ever since, and to be frank, 70 years is really long enough to return it to the French economy and pay taxes on it.
The French treasury has made a killing out of this. I think they’ve been rather surprised by their own success; the backlog for processing regularisation files is huge. I don’t think they anticipated just how much money was squirreled away around in Switzerland.
I think the French are probably going to go after Luxembourg next.
*Telling the bank “go on then” is a rather dangerous route to go down. French banks are subject to money-laundering regulations that mean that if a very large sum unexpectedly arrives in an account, they have to find out where it came from. The only two viable options for Swiss account holders were regularise the account or transfer the money to another tax haven.
--------------------
Rent my holiday home in the South of France
Posts: 3696 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
If you were a successful business person, in the sort of country where political and regulatory life is 'so different, so very different from the home life of our dear queen', could I, or anyone, really condemn you for salting away part of your fortune somewhere where a change of regime couldn't get at it? Or for providing services to enable you to do so?
This is a good point.
On the other hand, the countries I've seen named are Australia, Iceland, the UK (in the case of Mr Cameron's father*) Russia and China. And whereas I can in principle understand Russian and Chinese taxpayers being wary of the intentions of their respective regimes, the individuals concerned seem to be quite prominent within those regimes.
* Allow me to say that despite the many bad things one can say about Mr Cameron, I think holding his father's sins against him is unfair. Ezekiel 18 and all that.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
simontoad
Ship's Amphibian
# 18096
|
Posted
This is the sort of stuff that makes me think that taxes on consumption are the way to go, despite their ugly regressive problems.
--------------------
Human
Posts: 1571 | From: Romsey, Vic, AU | Registered: May 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
There is also the point that masses of people in quite ordinary countries get up and scream that they are being oppressed, that their taxes are being abused, and that anything they do to evade them is okay. Leona Helmsley is the poster girl for this, and can you really persuade me that Cameron's father was a victim of a regime? At some point these squawks of protest must be ignored, otherwise no taxes would be collected at all.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
andras
Shipmate
# 2065
|
Posted
And Cameron has refused to say if the family still has money in a tax haven.
He says it's a private family matter. Oh no it isn't!
--------------------
God's on holiday.
(Why borrow a cat?)
Adrian Plass
Posts: 544 | From: Tregaron | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by andras:
And Cameron has refused to say if the family still has money in a tax haven.
He says it's a private family matter. Oh no it isn't!
Precisely. My tax affairs are not a private matter - they have to be revealed to the government. As a public figure, Cameron should be transparent in his affairs.
As when he says "I am too busy running the country to deal with that", claiming it is a private matter suggests to me that he still has a shit-load of money there. That he is still avoiding paying tax on many many millions.
Hypocritical knob.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
I cynically wondered if those stocks are in Samantha Cameron's name. He very carefully said 'I' not 'we' throughout that speech.
You and me both. I'd be all over that global search like a rash. Especially in her maiden name.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
andras
Shipmate
# 2065
|
Posted
... or a trust for the kids, or in Sam's mother's name, or...
The old Tory grandees like Macmillan would have thought this sort of conduct beneath them. Not the present lot.
--------------------
God's on holiday.
(Why borrow a cat?)
Adrian Plass
Posts: 544 | From: Tregaron | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
My tax affairs are not a private matter - they have to be revealed to the government.
But not to the whole world. And even if they were, I doubt you'd be expected to tell everyone about your father's arrangements.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
I hope that this data dump might actually result in something. But I also saw the movie "The Big Short", mentioned in the link below. Makes me consider will there ever be a wall? Not Trump's wall, or Israel's, but the one of revolutions?
"The shills for the people who really run the world have been pulling all-nighters, crafting avowals in the casually arrogant language of the ultra-entitled." (from the link below, CBC)
Massive data leak is only the latest of many signs that the ultra-rich are playing by different rules.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
To start with David Cameron - I think that the only way forward would be to have an independent examination of all of his (and his family's) financial affairs. Such an investigation doesn't need to expose all his financial affairs to the public eye - but it needs to be rigorous enough that any conclusion can be trusted by the public at large.
I have to say, though, that I don't think it will happen. The chances are that he will resign after the EU referendum (regardless of the outcome) and then he will be given a free pass. But it all makes a mockery of the "we're all in this together" line he keeps trotting out. Like buggery, we are!
Looking to the future, I would suggest that all senior politicians in future (ie Cabinet level) should undergo independent financial examination. With great power comes great responsibility - and part of the responsibility is to be more open and transparent about your finances than the average member of the public. If people don't want to have their financial affairs scrutinised in this manner, then they shouldn't be in positions of senior government.
(My evil side wonders (hopes?) if Boris Johnson's name might soon be linked to this. He's just the kind of person who wouldn't think twice about using any and every means to pay as little tax as possible. He is very quiet at the moment. Could it be because....???)
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
On wonders whether the Registers of Members Interests that records the financial interests of MPs "which others might reasonably consider to influence his or her actions or words as a Member of Parliament" could be extended to include off-shore assets. Certainly, anyone who currently has, or has previously benefited from, cash invested in off-shore low-tax funds who subsequently makes speeches about, or organises summits to regulate, such accounts would be covered by such a register. After all, who wouldn't consider that such financial arrangements could influence them?
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
Listening to Cameron's statement yesterday, my thoughts were that he had made sure he could stand this scrutiny in advance. He listed his assets and earnings: "I own a house which we do not live in currently, I have my earnings as PM," etc. Which, when Samantha Cameron is also earning and there is no mention of what she owns, smells of organising his affairs for these eventualities.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
TonyK
Host Emeritus
# 35
|
Posted
Heaven knows I have ceased to have much respect for Mr Cameron and his cabinet, but 10, Downing Street have now issued a statement ( BBC news item, for those who can read it!)
Basically it says that the Prime Minister, his wife and his children, do not benefit from any offshore funds. Mrs Cameron does hold property shares, which are declared in her income tax return. (Mr Cameron had previously said that he doesn't own any shares).
As the commentator observes, this does not establish whether or not the Prime Minister and/or his immediate family have had such benefits in the past.
And, of course, we can hardly blame a man for what his father did/does!
Why Downing Street, rather than Mr Cameron himself, made the statement is open to conjecture!
--------------------
Yours aye ... TonyK
Posts: 2717 | From: Gloucestershire | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TonyK:
As the commentator observes, this does not establish whether or not the Prime Minister and/or his immediate family have had such benefits in the past.
Especially if the past includes the few hours between the PM's statement and the Downing Street communication.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TonyK:
As the commentator observes, this does not establish whether or not the Prime Minister and/or his immediate family have had such benefits in the past.
And, of course, we can hardly blame a man for what his father did/does!
Depending on your definition of "in the past", these two comments seem to be incompatible. He would surely have benefitted from any dodgy dealings of his father's while he was a child, but it would hardly be fair to blame him for that fact.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
He would surely have benefitted from any dodgy dealings of his father's while he was a child, but it would hardly be fair to blame him for that fact.
And there in a nutshell we have an acknowledgement of and defense of the privileges of class in our society.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
He would surely have benefitted from any dodgy dealings of his father's while he was a child, but it would hardly be fair to blame him for that fact.
And there in a nutshell we have an acknowledgement of and defense of the privileges of class in our society.
So are you saying that David Cameron should be considered guilty of tax avoidance even if he hasn't actually avoided any tax, on the grounds that his father has?
If someone's father was a thief - and therefore as a child they benefitted from said theft - would you say they should be considered guilty of theft now that they are an adult? Of course not! So why would it be any different if we replace "theft" with "tax avoidance" in that question?
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
If he is where he is because of being able to attend Eton and Oxford, and form the contacts he has used in adult life there, surely he has benefitted, and to our cost twice over.
Once because we didn't get the benefit of the taxes which could have been paid in the past, and twice because he is incapable of seeing the harm his policies are doing and goes on doing them. Where someone else might act differently.
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
So are you saying that David Cameron should be considered guilty of tax avoidance even if he hasn't actually avoided any tax, on the grounds that his father has?
No I'm not. I don't have an answer, it just struck me that the question you raise about this particular instance could be seen as a metaphor for wider forms of hereditary privilege that act through advantage, patronage and financial well-being in a capitalist society. That's all I was commenting on.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alwyn
Shipmate
# 4380
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
So are you saying that David Cameron should be considered guilty of tax avoidance even if he hasn't actually avoided any tax, on the grounds that his father has?
For what it's worth, I would not say that.
Speaking of politicians being held responsible for their parents, I compared the Daily Mail's coverage of this story ("As Prime Minister he has spearheaded efforts to make global finance more transparent. He has spoken out repeatedly against tax avoidance and is hosting a major summit on the issue next month") with their coverage of another story involving a politician being held responsible for a parent ("Red Ed’s in a strop with the Mail. Doubtless, he’s miffed that his conference was overshadowed by the revelations of his former friend, the spin doctor Damian McBride, serialised in this paper, which exposed the poisonous heart of the Labour Party. [...] what has made him vent his spleen [...] is a Mail article by Geoffrey Levy on Saturday about the Labour leader’s late father, Ralph, under the arresting headline ‘The Man Who Hated Britain’").
For some reason, the approach of this newspaper to Mr Cameron seems a bit different to their approach to Mr Miliband.
--------------------
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc
Posts: 849 | From: UK | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
In the US most of the serious contenders for the presidency have released their tax returns. (Donald Trump not, unsurprisingly.) This does not preclude howls of special interests. Nor does it prevent blatantly dodgy people (yeah, him again) from becoming serious contenders. So although light is helpful, it is not perfectly cleansing. For that you need laws. Or, following the example of Jesus, a whip.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
If he is where he is because of being able to attend Eton and Oxford, and form the contacts he has used in adult life there, surely he has benefitted, and to our cost twice over.
Once because we didn't get the benefit of the taxes which could have been paid in the past, and twice because he is incapable of seeing the harm his policies are doing and goes on doing them. Where someone else might act differently.
I agree.
Someone who never had need of public services (because they can pay for any services they need) are unlikely to make fair decisions about how tax is raised and spent.
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
I find the tenses of Cameron's statement rather suspicious. He is a millionaire, he was a millionaire *before* his father died - how exactly is a career politician going to become a millionaire prior to inheriting from his parents ?
The question is not so much did he benefit from his father's wealth and tax arrangements, but rather, at what point did he drastically simplify his financial arrangements and were they legit / ethical before he did so ?
And, moreover, what was he saying publically about tax at the time.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
FYI Ian Cameron's business dealings were already known: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2012/apr/20/cameron-family-tax-havens - David Cameron inherited £300,000 from his father. This still doesn't explain how he became a millionaire.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
Cameron inherited £300k from his father's UK will. Nothing is known about how much he inherited from the offshore holdings, the Jersey stash, or another possible account in Switzerland.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
When I bought my house I had to explain where all the money in my bank account came from to the solicitor. 1. My Dad's estate. 2. My savings accounts. I needed to show the source statements, I think, as well as my current account.
Perhaps Cameron inherited from other people in the family. Perhaps gifts were made before seven years before his father's death. (That's quite usual, isn't it?) Perhaps he should show his workings, too.
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
sharkshooter
Not your average shark
# 1589
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
...
Tax evasion by the extremely rich ...
Actually, most of what will come to light here will be tax avoidance, not tax evasion. There is a significant difference in that the former is technically legal (if immoral - it goes against the spirit of the law while abiding by the letter of the law) while the latter is illegal and may result in criminal charges.
But then, how many of the middle class have paid cash for something to avoid paying a sales tax? (Tax evasion)
Of course, there are many reasons for hiding assets, and only one of those is tax related.
Let's only hang the guilty.
--------------------
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer. [Psalm 19:14]
Posts: 7772 | From: Canada; Washington DC; Phoenix; it's complicated | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by sharkshooter:
Let's only hang the guilty.
I'd be happy to see a few squirm in the dock.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
sharkshooter
Not your average shark
# 1589
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by sharkshooter:
Let's only hang the guilty.
I'd be happy to see a few squirm in the dock.
It is one of my pleasures in life.
--------------------
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer. [Psalm 19:14]
Posts: 7772 | From: Canada; Washington DC; Phoenix; it's complicated | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
In the US most of the serious contenders for the presidency have released their tax returns. (Donald Trump not, unsurprisingly.) This does not preclude howls of special interests. Nor does it prevent blatantly dodgy people (yeah, him again) from becoming serious contenders. So although light is helpful, it is not perfectly cleansing. For that you need laws. Or, following the example of Jesus, a whip.
If you'd not noticed, American rich are conspicuously absent. This is because the rich in America pay considerably lower taxes than other first-world nations. And the justification is entrenched in the culture.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stercus Tauri
Shipmate
# 16668
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
A generation ago Leona Helmsley said that paying taxes was for the little people. Clearly she was not alone feeling that way.
The Canada Revenue Agency feels that way too. A few years a go I started a small business and made the grand total of $40 on the first year's operations. That earned me a tax audit that involved having my house searched for signs of concealed sources of income. I wasted three days while their little troll squatted in the house going through every last scrap of paper that he could find, and it must have cost the other tax payers thousands (he didn't find anything objectionable). My former employer routinely cooked the books, faking project cost overruns to look like R&D expenses that would be tax deductible. Yes - the people with the biggest tax liabilities seem less likely to end up paying, and I doubt that will ever change.
--------------------
Thay haif said. Quhat say thay, Lat thame say (George Keith, 5th Earl Marischal)
Posts: 905 | From: On the traditional lands of the Six Nations. | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Uriel
Shipmate
# 2248
|
Posted
Regarding Cameron, the following points have been made by Richard Murphy of Tax Research UK:
1) Cameron has made no statement regarding his father's actions. While he is not responsible for anything his father has done, he must have a view on it. He could have said that much as he respects his father, much as he loves him and much as he is grateful for what he did for him he has to disagree with him on the use of offshore. That Cameron has not said this implies that he is not prepared to condemn egregious tax avoidance, and is something that he should clear up immediately.
2) Cameron has given assurances that he is not currently benefitting from any offshore trust, nor will he, his wife or children do so in the future. The statement about the present is probably correct, he should know his own finances. But he cannot say about the future. Cameron carefully did not mention his mother in the statement about current or future benefit. It is probable that Cameron's mother inherited the bulk of his father's estate in 2010, and when she passes it is probable that he and his children
will inherit. Cameron cannot therefore give any cast iron guarantee that he will not gain from his father's offshore setup.
3) He has given no assurance that he has not benefitted from these arrangements in the past. He was at one point very clearly dependent on his father, who was in turn dependent on these offshore operations for his main source of income. So again, Cameron has dodged the question, implying that he has something to hide. If his only gain was when he was a child (e.g. school fees) then he has nothing to hide, those were decisions that he didn't make. But if he was supported as an adult, for example while establishing his political career, that is another matter.
Cameron needs to come clean on this - what happened to his father's offshore money, where is it now, where could it go in the future. And most importantly, does he agree or disagree with his father's actions in denying the Treasury large sums of tax revenue.
Posts: 687 | From: Somerset, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
