Eleven million tax avoiding documents..

[Anna B]

Precisely.

 

I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times I've ever been and bought anything in a Starbucks, since the year dot. Two of those times were in the US, and only for the free wifi/broadband.

 

I've never had a Vodafone phone, SIM or contract, and always exclude them from price comparison results.

 

I never accept Paypal on eBay listings (using SF and Gumtree more these days), use Paypal as a buyer and order from Amazon as least as possible (I order direct from CN sources and e.g. Alibaba instead, as I'd rather not fill Amazon's pockets and the pockets of small-scale importers dropshipping the exact same stuff from the exact same source with a 200%-and-a-bit mark up on it...and frequently as not forgetting to declare their e-tail income I'm sure ).

 

As a company director with authority on marketing spend, I have never once sanctioned, signed off on or otherwise authorised any spend -however minimal- on Google Ads, Adwords or Facebook ads.

 

In my line of work, I also regularly get asked to help set up corporate holding structures that are designed to emulate exactly what Starbucks (and so many others) are doing (i.e. siphon off EU profits in the form of 'arms-length' (ho-hum) trademark royalties to a low corpo tax rate jurisdiction, say Ireland). I'll do the due diligence on the IP rights, and there ends the service. If the client wants extra help for the corporate structure, agreement drafting, etc., they can ask the likes of Fonseca instead.

 

etc, etc.

 

Any new company, CEO, <etc.> caught in the "aggressive tax avoidance" or "tax evasion" headlights of serious investigative journalism with supporting evidence, gets added to my 'list'. Over time, it's gotten to be a long list, and probably makes my life marginally more complicated for it.

 

But if even a small majority of people -directors and not- did so as regularly and consistently, in the UK and elsewhere, by now you would have seen a significantly broader and faster adoption of ethical values in business contexts, including taxation matters. Critical mass is still a long way away.

News like the Panama Papers simply comfort me in continuing with the above. But I'm yet to be convinced that I should let them raise my blood pressure: the Panama Papers are nothing new, they're (usefully) just evidence of what has long been known

 

Good for you. But this is the bit that needs work. A lot of work....

 

---------- Post added 06-04-2016 at 12:26 ----------

 

I'd like to see these rich tax dodgers hounded and investigated with the same level of dogged scrutiny as someone who makes a mistake on their tax return does.

Stop making excuses and pay your taxes like the rest of us do!

 

Totally agree.

 

I'd particularly like to see the business dealings of multi-millionaire Tony Blair and his dodgy carbon trading companies investigated. And his wife.

[ECCOnoob]

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.

Edited April 6, 2016 by ECCOnoob

[El Cid]

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.

 

No? He hasn't... oh dear.

 

I thought unions were classed the same as charities?

 

Conservatives have unions too, so this should not be a political matter.

[ECCOnoob]

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.

Edited April 6, 2016 by ECCOnoob

[RonJeremy]

Its quite easy for poorer people to avoid any death taxes by sorting things out years before your death, I would have thought most people would sort things out years before their death, not sure how difficult that would be if you have multi-millions.

 

---------- Post added 06-04-2016 at 11:43 ----------

 

 

He had funds in a tax haven, so you would think there would be much more than a family home.

 

Sorting things out??? I think you mean avoiding tax. You wicked evil person you.

[Bob Arctor]

This is just a discussion, not sure smear is the correct word, it should be used in the context of jam, peanut butter and newspapers.

 

And Ivor Cutler and cervixes.

[El Cid]

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.

 

 

Perhaps unions do have investments that increases their funds, but unions are just the middle man; like when people complain about the Government wasting money, its not the Government money, its tax payers money.

 

Union money = union members money

[the_bloke]

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.

 

Remember John Mills of JML fame?

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10102190/Donor-John-Millss-gift-to-Labour-avoided-tax-bill-of-1.5m.html

[RonJeremy]

I thought unions were classed the same as charities?

 

Conservatives have unions too, so this should not be a political matter.

 

I didn't know this. Is this because they wish to AVOID TAX?

 

---------- Post added 06-04-2016 at 16:02 ----------

 

I've just read a tiny bit - it would appear they qualify for tax relief if they register. Therefore I assume the one that apply for registration are the ones that want to avoid tax.

There's no implication of evasion here, which is quite different.

[Penistone999]

Financial Times: Cameron must come clean over affairs and privacy is not an adequate defence

 

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/07aa13ca-fb1a-11e5-b3f6-11d5706b613b.html#ixzz44zlU0aYN

 

I agree. It seems this could get worse depending how he handles it.

 

Do you volunteer to pay more tax than you legally have to ?