donuticus Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Not true. I currently pay £60 per annum more than I need to. To not pay the £60 would take me three hours of work. I'm not that cheap:D Righty-ho smarty points but you see my point. As long as the company uses LEGAL (I can't stress that enough) means to lower its tax liabilities then go for it. I was self employed for several years and always used legitimate means to lower my tax threshold. As fast as you close tax loopholes the wording of the law can be used to exploit new loopholes. Presumably those complaining about companies not paying their taxes wilfully volunteer to pay tax that they're not liable for out of the goodness of their own heart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxman Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Mr Taxman, how do you feel when you see your superiors leaving the service to work for said big business and showing them the loops? This must surely be soul destroying? Not quite "soul destroying" but it does make our job harder when the 1% of very senior civil servants can do what they want, take the **** and feather their nests. Most civil servants work in local DWP, HMRC, Job centre offices etc and so don't get the opportunity to smooze with the rich and powerful, don't own bowler hats or umbrellas, don't have expenses paid dinners with Ministers and don't live in London. They try to do their jobs as best they can but have no faith in the Senior Leadership...much like a lot of employees in the private sector I'd guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sibon Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Righty-ho smarty points but you see my point. As long as the company uses LEGAL (I can't stress that enough) means to lower its tax liabilities then go for it. I was self employed for several years and always used legitimate means to lower my tax threshold. As fast as you close tax loopholes the wording of the law can be used to exploit new loopholes. Presumably those complaining about companies not paying their taxes wilfully volunteer to pay tax that they're not liable for out of the goodness of their own heart. I know what you mean. I was being slightly facetious:) The salient point is that most people don't get a choice because they are on PAYE. Then, when you see huge companies like Vodaphone, Boots and Starbucks doing what they do, it builds frustration. That begs an important question: If they can't act in a moral way, why should the rest of us? That way, anarchy lies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 If there are 'crafty accountants' who are smart enough to discover the holes[defects] in the laws, why are there not smart MPs who can write laws which are not defective? [The Queen in] Parliament is the sovereign lawmaker in the United Kingdom. Parliament is responsible for the laws - the bad and poorly-written ones along with the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 If there are 'crafty accountants' who are smart enough to discover the holes[defects] in the laws, why are there not smart MPs who can write laws which are not defective? [The Queen in] Parliament is the sovereign lawmaker in the United Kingdom. Parliament is responsible for the laws - the bad and poorly-written ones along with the rest. Not very often you see those two words next to each other... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donuticus Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 I know what you mean. I was being slightly facetious:) The salient point is that most people don't get a choice because they are on PAYE. Then, when you see huge companies like Vodaphone, Boots and Starbucks doing what they do, it builds frustration. That begs an important question: If they can't act in a moral way, why should the rest of us? That way, anarchy lies. I agree but then how many of those people will also pay a tradesman less if he does the job for "cash"? Also wouldn't Starbucks be liable for the VAT on it's £3b sales? 20% of 3b isn't exactly nothing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sibon Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 I agree but then how many of those people will also pay a tradesman less if he does the job for "cash"? Also wouldn't Starbucks be liable for the VAT on it's £3b sales? 20% of 3b isn't exactly nothing? You are correct, of course. Although paying the washing machine repairman in cash isn't on the same scale as Starbuck/Boots/Vodaphone pretending that they make a loss in the UK. Maybe we should identify companies who use this particular dodge and increase VAT on their sales, rather than expecting them to behave honourably. Should be easy, once we've left the EU, or it has imploded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donuticus Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 You are correct, of course. Although paying the washing machine repairman in cash isn't on the same scale as Starbuck/Boots/Vodaphone pretending that they make a loss in the UK. Maybe we should identify companies who use this particular dodge and increase VAT on their sales, rather than expecting them to behave honourably. Should be easy, once we've left the EU, or it has imploded. I've always felt VAT is the one of the fairest taxes as it targets luxury goods and as its based on the sales value of something then it applies to all equally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 I've always felt VAT is the one of the fairest taxes as it targets luxury goods and as its based on the sales value of something then it applies to all equally. Luxury goods as in gas and electricity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sibon Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 I've always felt VAT is the one of the fairest taxes as it targets luxury goods and as its based on the sales value of something then it applies to all equally. I'm more and more persuaded that Vat is the way forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.