Margaret Hodge..

[Kid Sampson]

"Shock as Champagne Socialist is exposed as hypocrite."

[Manlinose]

Isn't this the family business founded by her father and run by her brother?

 

indeed it is - your point being?

 

apart from the fact that there are 14 directors, not just one, and there are over a hundred shareholders and over a hundred subsidiary companies around the world - so I'm not sure "family business" adequately covers it

 

my dad's "family business" is now run by my sister - I own 25% of the shares along with my brother and two sisters - I have no involvement in the day to day decision making process - my only involvement is to say thank you when I get my dividends twice a year

 

a "family business" doesn't mean all the family are involved in it

[mikem8634]

If the company has acted in the same way as those she has been criticising then she should at least have had the awareness to distance herself from the inevitable backlash. She should have severed her financial ties and even could have made a public statement.

 

It is not yet conclusive as to whether or these tax affairs are the same as Starbucks etc. but if proven so she has damaged her credibility.

[Manlinose]

It just seems hypocritical to me..she has shares in a family company which,reportedly, only pays a very small fraction of it's UK profits in taxes here,yet she chairs the comittee grilling other companies doing the same thing..

 

I can see why it seems hypocritical of her and, if the circumstances are the same, the company she has shares in should be criticised in the same way as Amazon, Starbucks etc

 

but she does not appear to have had anything to do with the company's policies and can't be blamed for what it does - I have shares in British Gas, but it's not my fault their bills are going up

 

but, as I said earlier, if the reports are true, it may be appropriate for her to sell her shares

[Anna Glypta]

indeed it is - your point being?

 

apart from the fact that there are 14 directors, not just one, and there are over a hundred shareholders and over a hundred subsidiary companies around the world - so I'm not sure "family business" adequately covers it

 

a "family business" doesn't mean all the family are involved in it

 

I am pretty aware of how a business is run. So wouldn't that put "her" family's business in the same tax avoiding category as the one's she is charged with investigating.

 

That would be like Ed Ball's commenting on the tax affairs & lifestyles of multi-millionaire investment bankers whilst ignoring those of his brother.

[Manlinose]

I am pretty aware of how a business is run. So wouldn't that put "her" family's business in the same tax avoiding category as the one's she is charged with investigating.

 

That would be like Ed Ball's commenting on the tax affairs & lifestyles of multi-millionaire investment bankers whilst ignoring those of his brother.

 

I agree - if the company of which she is a shareholder is doing the same things that she criticises other companies for doing.

 

But she doesn't have the power or influence to stop it doing it and cannot be blamed for things the company does - she can only distance herself from it by selling her shares and then treat it in the same way as Amazon etc, if it is avoiding tax in the same way

 

if the company is "guilty" and she doesn't sell her shares, then I agree she could be accused of hypocrisy.

 

although, having said all that, I don't know if the shares are traded anywhere, and I don't know how easy or difficult it might be to sell them

[ricgem2002]

It just seems hypocritical to me..she has shares in a family company which,reportedly, only pays a very small fraction of it's UK profits in taxes here,yet she chairs the comittee grilling other companies doing the same thing..

so do you agree that all these companies are not paing enough tax on their profits ?

[taxman]

There's a shorter one in the Mail..

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2230915/Margaret-Hodge-Multi-millionaire-Labour-MPs-family-business-paid-just-0-25-tax-profits.html

 

An older Telegraph link:

 

Margaret Hodge's family company pays just 0.01pc tax on £2.1bn of business generated in the UK

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/businesslatestnews/9668396/Margaret-Hodges-family-company-pays-just-0.01pc-tax-on-2.1bn-of-business-generated-in-the-UK.html

 

Strange, both links have an almost identical phrase

 

From the first one:

 

"However, it is not known whether the company – which made profits of £65million – used tax avoidance measures similar to those criticised in the past by Mrs Hodge."

 

and from the second link:

 

"However. it is not known whether the company – which made profits of £65m – used similar controversial tax avoidance measures criticised in the past by Mrs Hodge. "

[Kid Sampson]

Strange, both links have an almost identical phrase

 

From the first one:

 

"However, it is not known whether the company – which made profits of £65million – used tax avoidance measures similar to those criticised in the past by Mrs Hodge."

 

and from the second link:

 

"However. it is not known whether the company – which made profits of £65m – used similar controversial tax avoidance measures criticised in the past by Mrs Hodge. "

 

Churnalism.com agrees

 

http://churnalism.com/

[Guest sibon]

People in glass houses

 

shouldn't throw stones

 

They should. I'll be disappointed if she stops throwing them now.

 

As others have pointed out, she has no day to day influence over the firm. She really should have plenty to say, if it turns out that Stemcor are using similar avoidance mechanisms to Starbucks and Amazon.

 

Meanwhile, I intend to entertain myself watching all of the hypocriticaL right whingers jumping all over this. I thought that tax avoidance was ok in their book.