ECCOnoob

Why would you want it in a 12 year old's name then? What were they going to do with it?

I think sending them back is totally moronic to be frank. The Government has made a stance on what it thinks the public should do. They are entitled to do that. The Government received a lot of criticism from the press and the general public for not explaining their reasoning. The Government are taking steps to rectify that by providing written reasons for their position. Its supposed to be about keeping the electorate informed. Its supposed to be answering the questions we demand they answer. Its not a campaign leaflet. Its not supposed to block or oppose leafleting from the in OR out campaign groups. Its official government information in response to a specific demand. They cant do right for doing wrong. Perhaps if all these reactionaries actually bothered to read the leaflet alongside the forthcoming campaign materials they might be in a position to make an informed decision come referendum time.

This is hypocrisy... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/london-mayor-election/mayor-of-london/9136015/How-Ken-Livingstone-funnelled-238000-through-tax-avoidance-scheme.html This is hypocrisy... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10294973/Unite-the-union-paid-no-tax-in-2011-and-2012.html This is hypocrisy... http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/jun/08/labour-tax-row-donor-john-mills Where was the protesting? Where was the demands for the culprits to be put in jail? Where was the personal insults about them and their families?

The cuts were necessary. The country was in debt. The previous government(s) had a massive overspend and it needed to be culled. SOME people and SOME departments deserved to have their money cut. YES of course I can see the hypocrisy and if it was for being a hypocrite alone that Cameron was being attacked for I would be able to live with that. However, its not is it. Its being unfoundedly accused of theft, fraud, tax evasion, acquiring laundered money and with plenty of personal insults to him, his wife and his dead family member just because he was born into a wealthy family and has money. That is what is unnecessary. That is what needs to stop. Its pure envy and is being encouraged (even demanded) by the opposition party without any grounds.

What exactly are you people looking for. Jesus Christ how long is this witch hunt going to carry on for. There were 11 million documents in that leak and they certainly weren't all related to the Cameron family. The media have just spent a week of mass hysteria and wholly unfounded PERSONAL attacks on Cameron, his deceased father and his family. There has been less than a dribble of the same treatment for the thousands of other high profile leaders, politicians, celebrities and businessmen named in the papers. So far every accusation thrown at Cameron has been completely unfounded. He has published his tax returns (which incidentally we are still waiting from Albert Steptoe). NOTHING has been found to be illegal. NOTHING has been found that shows that DC failed to pay due taxes. NOTHING has been found to show that any of the monies he has received from the offshore funds or the recently disclosed gift was anything different to what any other wealthy individual would have access to. That includes many of our own ordinary pension schemes and income trusts which are available to the masses just by walking into your local bank or stockbroker. Now, I am not saying that there is some wholly moralistic aspect for which Cameron is not above criticism but for god sake. Lets get realistic. How many others in Parliament INCLUDING LABOUR have done the same. If there is going to be a lynch mob then they need to direct towards ALL parties involved not just the tories. Its absolutely disgusting treatment. Quite frankly, Cameron has done more than enough showing his tax returns as it is. I would have told the media and Compo go shove their request where the sun doesn't shine. Its personal financial information. What do you want, all his bank statements? His entire tax history from year of birth? All his credit card statements? Where does this end. Once Cameron has been mauled to death its is just and equitable to start on every other MP. Then perhaps the Civil Servants, even the lowly clerks - after all, what they got to hide right? How long before that trickles down to everyone else. Kiss privacy goodbye.

She is not a 53k dresser. Stop taking the headlines at face value. She is a personal assistant. Lots of high profile people have them including several wives / spouses of those in high offices. Just because the paper focuses on the so called "fashion and beauty" advice does not mean that she doesn't do lots of other things. Now, im not saying that this woman should be paid by a the taxpayer. In fact IMO she shouldn't. However, lets not pretend that being the wife of the Prime Minister does not come with a whole string of unofficial and unpaid duties. That includes being there during all state and ministerial functions, being hostess to visiting dignitaries, charity work, official receptions, engagements and managing the media attention that comes with it. Someone has to be there to deal with the errands, running around and administration that comes with it. Can we please stop the headline grabbing nonsense.

I agree. But just like the whole expenses saga, the mud slinging and attacks have to stop and stop right now. Fact is NOBODY from either side of the house is morally (albeit legally) clean. Its well known that there will be plenty of labour MPs, Liberal MPs and independents who would do or have done exactly the same. The personal nature of this saga is getting quite on my wick. Moron Livingstone for example. He actually was so cocksure that he was prepared to embarrass himself by going on TV and saying the PM should face jail. For what exactly Ken?? Does the moron not understand how criminal prosecution and sentencing works. As for the Pilsbury Doughboy Watson. Tick tock tick tock. Checked your own records for any misdemeanours? Then of course there is the union puppet Albert Steptoe. Yes, unions who use their "charitable" status to avoid corporation tax despite making big profits on their investments. The focus is on changing the law. They ALL need to be focused on that. However, even before any of that happens. They ALL need to be focused on the little matter of a life changing referendum we have coming up in less than 2 months. Enough already. These idiots demanding that Cameron to resign might soon be crying when they see who is likely to replace him. Its not gonna be Saint Corbyn that's for sure.

Talk about a bandwagon. Seriously the media need a rocket up their backsides and report on some actual news for Christ sake. Nobody gave a flying frig of the fact that the Wife of the Prime Minister had an assistant when the role was first recruited six years ago. The only reason for a change of personnel is because the role became vacant and this friend of a friend of a friend who just happens to be posh has got the job. She is one of the many many "special advisor" roles which are held by not just the PMs office or his wife's office but by layers of deputies, quangos, departments. Labour had over 80 of them during their most recent turn in office. I would bet my house that if this recent Cameron attack was not happening this story would be burred in the back pages, if it was even mentioned at all.

But this rolls back to the same old argument. "dodged tax" is too broad. Legallly utilised some scheme to reduce tax liabilities Legally been the beneficiary of his dead fathers historical investments which legally utilised some scheme to reduce tax liabilities Illegally and deliberately faked / manipulated a company name/share scheme to avoid tax OR Illegally but unknowingly become beneficiary to his dead father's illegal and defrauded investment schemes. Its not just black and white and showing his tax returns (which of course will prove that he paid a significant amount of tax) will never satisfy the blood thirsty media.

To be frank, if someone asked me a deeply person question about my late father's finances, the proceeds of such and what (if any) of those finances/trusts/property/investments and god knows what else were sourced from offshore it would take me a lot longer than four days to work out the following: 1. Is it anyone's business 2. What paperwork do I need to check - where is it 3. What answer should I give (legally and factually) 4. Seek legal advice 5. Make an official announcement. NOBODY has yet proven in a court of law that any of the investments / proceeds / monies received by the deceased, Cameron or any other member of his family were obtained or managed illegally. This is pure trial by media. The left wing have jumped all over this Panama Papers leak and without any judicial involvement are making personal attacks not just about our current Leader but his deceased bloody father. Its absolutely disgusting. Whatever Cameron did or did not do is up to the HMRC and ultimately a Court to decide. As far as i'm concerned, NOBODY has a right to make unfounded accusations and judgement without any position of direct knowledge, legal knowledge or judicial power. In just under 2 months we are about to make one of the most important decisions this country has had for decades and YET every single headline on tomorrows papers is all about Cameron and his tax affairs (NONE OF WHICH HAVE YET BEEN PROVEN TO BE ILLEGAL). Its an absolute joke.

My god there is some venom being spewed around on this thread. Lets not get carried away. Can we just remember that British history is not exactly squeaky clean ethics wise when it comes of slave labour and workers rights. We might well be all on some moral high ground now and sneering and pointing about other cultures but lets not completely forget that we used to be a country that ran a bloody worldwide empire. We invaded countries, took all their resources and had the population act as mere colonised staff for their new overlords. We treated women as second class citizens right up until 30 years ago. Even when they did join the male dominated world of work they were still only good for typing and making tea. If you were a non white forget it. Very rare for most immigrants to get above service level jobs even as recent as 40 years ago. Today, we have massive areas of the black and grey economies in this country that lapped up the cheap foreign labour coming from abroad being given very dubious contracts and working for little or below minimum wage levels.. Certain companies (allegedly) are still utilising this market - hence all the recent hoo haa about companies such as Sports Direct.

Anna sometimes you speak like a child. Grow up. Get a clue of what REAL third world looks like. The poorest in this country are nowhere near. EVERYONE in this country can walk into a hospital and get treated. EVERYONE in this country can walk into a shelter / hostel / homeless service or other organisation and be given a meal and somewhere to stay. The disabled are given state money to live their lives. The jobless are given state money to provide basic standard of living until they find other work. The elderly are provided with care they need whether they can afford to pay for it or not. The breeders are given a minimum amount of state money for every child they choose to bring into the world. The recession is not bringing the country to a third world nation. To suggest so is just ludicrous. This is how the poor live in the third world..... http://www.abcnewspoint.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Top-10-Most-Poorest-Countries-In-The-World-2015-Ethiopia.jpg This is how the poor live in this country..... http://images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/1/590x/secondary/63672.jpg This is what street homeless looks like in the Third World.... https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b8/Street_Child,_Srimangal_Railway_Station.jpg This is what street homeless looks like in this country.... http://www.hwns.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/hwns-2015-medium-1539.jpg

The 14 page document, to be sent to 27 million homes, is designed to respond to public demand for more details about the EU referendum by setting out the facts behind the government's position. Opinion polls suggested that 85% of people wanted the government to provide more information We demanded it. They are providing it. The elected majority government's position is that they want to stay in so now they are giving us the facts we screamed for. The two campaign groups (WHICH ARE NOT THE GOVERNMENT) will be given public money for their own campaigns out or in later on. Just think of it as public information. This is no different. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35980571

How about some of those "yoof" spend the 60 years of their career actually training, developing and improving to work their way up the ladder. How about some of them bother to seek promotion with a route into a more suitable role for their age either by way of management, consultancy, operations or supervision. You are not going to sit there and say that someone who is a building labourer now will automatically still be one in retirement years. If they are, then that's their problem. Not everyone stays in the same job for life. Even if there is no actual career progression - people can choose to change jobs if necessary for health, monetary of family reasons. Happens all the time.

They have some charitable status but the point is, when an organisation has multi million pounds investment portfolios making substantial profits should SOME of this income not be taxable. Its all well and good the trade unions bitching about private companies and their tax avoidance schemes but maybe its time they were a bit more open and honest about their own status. Does ALL the services the union provides really deserve 100% tax exemption? Do ALL those naming and shaming speeches about tax avoidance and cheating the ordinary working man really hold strength when unions are using the same to protect their own investments and own monies? When those unions are making vast donations to a political party whose focus has been to attack the opposition directly on their tax affairs, should they not ensure that their own affairs are above any public criticism. Just like questions are being raised about how much the Tories have benefited from legally "tax avoided" profits from their corporate donors, its not beyond the realms of probability that questions could be raised about how much the Labour party have benefited from legally "tax avoided" profits from their union donors. Its no secret how much Labour receives from unions - far far far more than the Tories ever would. Its even been widely reported that labour are worried about losing as much as £6million if the union donations are restricted. What's good for one should be good for the other. Its all well and good Steptoe attacking tax affairs but make it personal and he is in for a nasty retaliation. No matter how insignificant. No matter how legal. No matter how accepted the affairs of the unions are. They will be brought up. If I were Corbyn and get it out in the open as soon as possible and make sure there is nothing else lurking in the cupboards. They will be coming for him. Problem is he is so politically naive and such a weak leader that he just wont realise that until its far too late.

Has Corbyn mentioned that Unite failed to pay any tax in 2011/2012 despite having 50+ million pounds worth of investments making a substantial profit for their investors. Has he done that yet? I mean I assume he will have done straight away of course. You cannot be that far up their backside without making sure that no skeletons come out of the closet that would make you look, well, a bit silly to say the least. No? He hasn't... oh dear. "....but the exchequer ruled we don't have to.... The laws on corporation tax say we legally are not obliged to pay...." So they were LEGALLY avoiding tax because the laws and rules allowed them to do so. Sounds so familiar.

Whatever he puts he will be waiting a while for any response from me. My personal details remain personal until a court or the police decide otherwise.

I thought Landmark got busted for having illegal immigrants working for them. Or maybe that was Jumbo.

Because Barry Cashinhand was CHARGED with an offence.

Let me try another scenario. Lets just imagine that some civil servant leaked thousands of documents with personal information of ordinary citizens suspected of false benefit claims or undeclared earnings. Would the papers be celebrating? Would they be naming and shaming these individuals and smearing them all over the pages? OR would they be screaming hell about incompetent government departments?

Yes I do know it does not work like that which is why I am commenting against all these people who are seemingly celebrating that a leak of said documentation has been put out there for all and sundry to see, despite the fact that none of the people involved have YET been found guilty of any wrong doing.

Fair enough. Cant argue with that. When will you be publishing details for your income, expenditure, all your passwords, all your bank account details, your statements, copy wage slips and your receipts for the past 6 months please. I mean, you got nothing to hide so what's the problem.

What about it? What's the number of documents prove. The law firm involved is a large commercial firm with 40 offices around the globe. It has a huge sector with lawyers specialising with trusts and tax. It could have hundreds of thousands of client's whom it represents for such affairs. Just because the newspaper has headlined the key names does not mean that there aren't others. Have you any idea how many "documents" your average corporate law firm holds on its systems. 11 million doesn't shock me. ---------- Post added 04-04-2016 at 00:20 ---------- You do. WHEN it has been formally confirmed that illegal activity has taken place. Until such time as that happens why should ANY of these people, no matter high profile they are, be smeared across the newspapers and having their confidential data spread around for activity which they are perfectly entitled to do and is perfectly legal. Do I have a right to get your bank statement and spread it across the papers and internet because I SUSPECT you are engaging in undeclared work???

Yep, you are correct. The HMRC can refer a person or scheme to the Tribunal and its up to a Judge to deem whether or not a scheme is aggressive and a recoupment sought. I have no problem with that. What I do have a problem with though is these so called do gooders leaking and whistleblowing to the press about perfectly legal activities, damaging people's reputations in the process. If they have suspicions then they should be reported through the proper channels. As far as I'm concerned, until a Judge has deemed such activity is illegal its none of our business. It is totally unacceptable for people to put to trial by media. Innocent until PROVEN guilty. Its not up to the Guardian to decide. ---------- Post added 04-04-2016 at 00:11 ---------- See above. Until the relevant authorities decide that an activity is "aggressive avoidance" its none of our business.

Hope that law firm is ready for its negligence claim. It better have a good insurance policy. Confidential and legally privileged papers "leaked" from their offices. Those named deemed to be conducting in perfectly legal activity will be perfectly entitled to sue. All these people rubbing their hands about this "exposure" better watch out. If its supposedly good to expose the rich and powerful for their PERFECTLY LEGAL activity, perhaps everyone who utilised trust funds, pension offsets, ISA accounts, grants and share schemes to legally avoid tax liabilities should be named and shamed too.