Tom Bailey Posted August 20, 2012 Author Share Posted August 20, 2012 I made a mistake earlier, it isn't £Billions that the rich have stashed away around the world it's £Trillions. And people on here still argue in support of them when I point out that the measerly £800 million give or take a few million that the smokescreen 200 named and shamed is peanuts compared to what the upper, super rich can get away with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted August 20, 2012 Share Posted August 20, 2012 Has anyone noticed the disclosure by the goverment of 200 tax evaders (altogether less than 1 billion) doesn't contain any top earners. Is this just a smoke screen to take attention away from the top earners who with their accountants are the real cuprits who are legaly able to cost this country Billions each year? You've answered your own question, haven't you? Tax Evader - Law breaker. What he does is illegal. Tax Avoider - Not a law breaker. What he does is legal (though perhaps it shouldn't be.) Why would rich people (many of whom are actually quite smart) choose to break laws (and risk severe penalties) when they can comply with poorly-written inadequate laws and still keep the majority of their money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Bailey Posted August 21, 2012 Author Share Posted August 21, 2012 You've answered your own question, haven't you? Tax Evader - Law breaker. What he does is illegal. Tax Avoider - Not a law breaker. What he does is legal (though perhaps it shouldn't be.) Why would rich people (many of whom are actually quite smart) choose to break laws (and risk severe penalties) when they can comply with poorly-written inadequate laws and still keep the majority of their money? The government really has won with people like you arguing over trivial points. Instead of addressing the point of the issue, tax avoider, tax avader both of which have a severe affect on our economy you'd rather argue over trivialities. Tax avoidance may be legal but tell us which section of society benefits most from being in a position to avoid tax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Bailey Posted August 21, 2012 Author Share Posted August 21, 2012 Why would rich people (many of whom are actually quite smart) choose to break laws (and risk severe penalties) when they can comply with poorly-written inadequate laws and still keep the majority of their money? The point is that you've walked right into the smoke screen trap set by the government. By publishing shots of 200 tax evaders who cost the country around £800million they've thrown you off the scent of those who realy get away with £Billions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted August 21, 2012 Share Posted August 21, 2012 By publishing shots of 200 tax evaders who cost the country around £800million they've thrown you off the scent of those who realy get away with £Billions. No- by publishing shots of 200 tax evaders who cost the country around £800million, HMG/HMRC have made it effectively impossible for those people to receive a fair trial (if not already convicted of tax evasion). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Bailey Posted August 21, 2012 Author Share Posted August 21, 2012 No- by publishing shots of 200 tax evaders who cost the country around £800million, HMG/HMRC have made it effectively impossible for those people to receive a fair trial (if not already convicted of tax evasion). I don't think so, it seems by your logic that Asil Nadir didn't receive a fair trial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted August 21, 2012 Share Posted August 21, 2012 The government really has won with people like you arguing over trivial points. Instead of addressing the point of the issue, tax avoider, tax avader both of which have a severe affect on our economy you'd rather argue over trivialities. Tax avoidance may be legal but tell us which section of society benefits most from being in a position to avoid tax. I assume that, if you want people to pay more than they are legally obliged to, you send HMG an extra cheque each month... ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Bailey Posted August 21, 2012 Author Share Posted August 21, 2012 I assume that, if you want people to pay more than they are legally obliged to, you send HMG an extra cheque each month... ?So you're happy that an elite few can avoid tax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted August 21, 2012 Share Posted August 21, 2012 So you're happy that an elite few can avoid tax. I'd be happy if everyone paid what they legally have to...I take it from your reply that's all you do...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted August 21, 2012 Share Posted August 21, 2012 I don't think so, it seems by your logic that Asil Nadir didn't receive a fair trial. I have no idea; but he escaped the country yet was not on the HMRC Name/Shame list. He returned voluntarily, as I think you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.