Bonzo77 Posted November 23, 2011 Author Share Posted November 23, 2011 I wouldn't know i don't drink You don't have to drink to know that alcohol kills more people every year than cocaine and heroin combined! It's common knowledge! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 There is no VAT on cakes. If you're paying tax on your cakes, then you're a mug, because none is required. Good point, I should have said biscuits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 Cake as a food is exempt from VAT-its called zero-rating,so its a poor analogy.Cake is not addictive and peddled by dealers,unless Marks and Spencers has undergone a culture change. I do eat cake occasionally but struggle with my weight so only eat it when I visit friends in HMPs There was nothing about the addictive quality of the drug in the post I replied to, it was purely that buying something that has any duty applied to it makes you a mug. Biscuits (now I've revised my analogy) or maybe petrol, as examples. The more mugs the better if they want to pay yet another voluntary regressive tax Yeah, look at those stupid biscuit eaters, paying a voluntary regressive tax, mugs. Look at the clever ones, only eating cake from within the EU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anywebsite Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 Good point, I should have said biscuits. Chocolate covered biscuits. Bourbon creams, choc chip cookies & other biscuits are zero rated too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnvqsos Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 There was nothing about the addictive quality of the drug in the post I replied to, it was purely that buying something that has any duty applied to it makes you a mug. Biscuits (now I've revised my analogy) or maybe petrol, as examples. Yeah, look at those stupid biscuit eaters, paying a voluntary regressive tax, mugs. Look at the clever ones, only eating cake from within the EU. Many biscuits are also exempt-sorry but I used to be a marketing director for Nabisco and was involved in numerous consultations with HMRC over the classification of food.Digestives with choc=food,cookies with choc chips=confectionery;all rather confusing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anywebsite Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 Many biscuits are also exempt-sorry but I used to be a marketing director for Nabisco and was involved in numerous consultations with HMRC over the classification of food.Digestives with choc=food,cookies with choc chips=confectionery;all rather confusing. It gets pretty confusing on the borderline between baked goods & confectionery. A chocolate coating is a factor, chocolate chips are ok according to current advice, by the look of it. If it can be successfully argued in court that it's actually a cake (like jaffa cakes), then the chocolate coating doesn't matter. http://customs.hmrc.gov.uk/channelsPortalWebApp/channelsPortalWebApp.portal?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=pageVAT_ShowContent&id=HMCE_CL_000118&propertyType=document#P199_8599 http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/vfoodmanual/vfood6200.htm Shortbread is interesting, normal shortbread is zero vat, shortbread with chocolate on top is liable for vat, but add some caramel (millionaires shortbread) & it's zero vat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upinwath Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 You don't have to drink to know that alcohol kills more people every year than cocaine and heroin combined! It's common knowledge! That's like saying walk down the slow lane of the M1 because more people are killed in lane 3. One of the dafter arguments for legalising drugs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 That's like saying walk down the slow lane of the M1 because more people are killed in lane 3. One of the dafter arguments for legalising drugs. What? It's nothing like saying that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 That's like saying walk down the slow lane of the M1 because more people are killed in lane 3. No, it isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upinwath Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 No, it isn't. The post suggested one thing that kills you causes more deaths than another things that often kills you. The argument usually goes, drugs are safer than alcohol so should be legalised. Daft at it's very best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.