Eleven million tax avoiding documents..

[I1L2T3]

Still all legal.

 

It's just been revealed that the Parliamentary Pension Scheme (the MPs pension scheme, for all MPs) is managed, amongst others, by Blackrock UK Property Fund which is HQ'd in Jersey.

 

So indirectly, no MP is clean from profiting from tax havens. I wouldn't be surprised if virtually every public sector pension scheme in the UK had some sort of off shore dealings to reduce tax overheads.

 

Edit: Following in from that last point, it seems the BBC pension fund has at least £84m off shore in Bermuda.

 

Maybe we should all be looking at our pension funds and any other savings funds to see how and where they are managed before being so critical of MPs, else we're also running the risk of being hypocrites.

 

The legality is not really the point. It's pretty much accepted, even if you listen to Cameron/Osborne, that offshore tax abuse is an issue.

 

I put it to you that how can the two at the top be trusted to tackle such abuse when they both are or have been beneficiaries of offshore schemes?

 

You can't just switch it back on the rest of the population with an ISAs argument, and now an argument about how we all benefit from offshore pensions. The pension argument itself is poor because of the woeful performance and administration of pension funds down the years. Just how have we benefitted?

 

---------- Post added 12-04-2016 at 07:31 ----------

 

You've been given the details. You don't need any more. Now you are just muckraking for the sake of it.

 

---------- Post added 12-04-2016 at 00:28 ----------

 

 

How much of what?

 

"There is no suggestion the Chancellor, or Osborne & Little avoided any tax in the deal, or that they or offshore property developer Nightingale Mews Inc. did anything illegal."

 

So nothing untoward then. More muckraking from you. Move along.

 

Details of what? We've been given a print off of a spreadsheet.

 

For Osborne he has only given us one year. But, thinking about it he did claim a couple of years ago when criticised for giving himself a tax break that he wasn't a £150k+ earner. Now we learn he earns nearly £200k!!! Wouldn't want to be caught lying would he?

 

Let's muckrake away. These are our elected representatives. Are you saying no one is allowed to ask questions? If Labour were in power you would want to wouldn't you? Or would you afford them similar leniency and try to bully other posters off the subject?

[RonJeremy]

The legality is not really the point. It's pretty much accepted, even if you listen to Cameron/Osborne, that offshore tax abuse is an issue.

 

I put it to you that how can the two at the top be trusted to tackle such abuse when they both are or have been beneficiaries of offshore schemes?

 

You can't just switch it back on the rest of the population with an ISAs argument, and now an argument about how we all benefit from offshore pensions. The pension argument itself is poor because of the woeful performance and administration of pension funds down the years. Just how have we benefitted?

 

Oh my god. You're like a dog without a bone. Running around as if you had a bone. Yap yap yap.

[I1L2T3]

Oh my god. You're like a dog without a bone. Running around as if you had a bone. Yap yap yap.

 

Are you prepared to debate this in any kind of civil way?

 

---------- Post added 12-04-2016 at 07:38 ----------

 

The best thing about this whole affair is that nothing has implicated the upper echelons of the tory party in any wrongdoing whatsoever, yet Tory High Command is scrambling to contain a rapidly deteriorating situation. What they've managed to create is a slo-mo PR trainwreck that has given traction to the nasty party tag all over again. Now, whatever the Tory party does, like publishing key tax returns in a big hurry, they look like they're hiding something. Like how fabulously wealthy some of them are. Why they would want to hide this is beyond me - surely a Tory should be proud of their wealth, whether it's earned, collected or inherited?

 

Boris Johnson is pretty open about it, and pays nigh on a million quid in tax. In my opinion he can be justfiably proud of that single fact. Doesn't really cancel out any of the egregious folderol he visits upon us the rest of the time though.

 

David Cameron knows a thing or two about PR, and is going to find this a major distraction. If that means he trips, and falls flat on his face on some other issue, the hope is that it will pancake into an omni-shambles. The danger is that he resigns and we get Osborne, May or Johnson.

 

Generally, be careful what you wish for.

 

They are rapidly getting re-toxified for sure. So many issues now.

 

I just wish the opposition wasn't so weak.

 

Toxic government. Pitiful opposition. Terrible for Britain.

[milquetoast1]

Times Front Page: George Osborne's firm hand him £45,000 in dividends but give taxman not a penny in Corporation Tax https://t.co/aHuvEfp5Ra

 

Do you know what dividends actually are?

[Bob Arctor]

The best thing about this whole affair is that nothing has implicated the upper echelons of the tory party in any wrongdoing whatsoever, yet Tory High Command is scrambling to contain a rapidly deteriorating situation. What they've managed to create is a slo-mo PR trainwreck that has given traction to the nasty party tag all over again. Now, whatever the Tory party does, like publishing key tax returns in a big hurry, they look like they're hiding something. Like how fabulously wealthy some of them are. Why they would want to hide this is beyond me - surely a Tory should be proud of their wealth, whether it's earned, collected or inherited?

 

Boris Johnson is pretty open about it, and pays nigh on a million quid in tax. In my opinion he can be justfiably proud of that single fact. Doesn't really cancel out any of the egregious folderol he visits upon us the rest of the time though.

 

David Cameron knows a thing or two about PR, and is going to find this a major distraction. If that means he trips, and falls flat on his face on some other issue, the hope is that it will pancake into an omni-shambles. The danger is that he resigns and we get Osborne, May or Johnson.

 

Generally, be careful what you wish for.

 

It probably says a lot about public attitudes to tax avoidance and Cameron's own ethics that his natural response was to look guilty. Suddenly, no-one would buy a used Daimler from him!

[I1L2T3]

Do you know what dividends actually are?

 

Yes. I have quite a few shares in one of former employers. I get dividends from those sharez twice a year.

 

Don't try and distract from the discussion and twist it onto me.

[milquetoast1]

Yes. I have quite a few shares in one of former employers. I get dividends from those sharez twice a year.

 

Don't try and distract from the discussion and twist it onto me.

 

Well you seem to be unaware that they are distributions of TAXED reserves, and they can be distributed irrespective of the profit/loss in one particular accounting period.

 

If you are aware of that then you are being deliberately dishonest in your slurs against Osborne (who I dislike) with respect to the dividends he received.

[ricgem2002]

Do you know what dividends actually are?

are they just another way to pay people without paying tax on the money perhaps:huh:

[Bob Arctor]

are they just another way to pay people without paying tax on the money perhaps:huh:

 

No, the idea is that corporation tax is paid on the profits and some of the remaining profit is distributed to shareholders as dividends.

 

The problem is, too many firms are not paying the corporation tax they should be. The shareholders directly benefit from this.

Edited April 12, 2016 by Bob Arctor

[I1L2T3]

Well you seem to be unaware that they are distributions of TAXED reserves, and they can be distributed irrespective of the profit/loss in one particular accounting period.

 

If you are aware of that then you are being deliberately dishonest in your slurs against Osborne (who I dislike) with respect to the dividends he received.

 

I am totally aware that they can be distributed even if a loss is made. There are several issues, and these are not slurs but questions that need answering.

 

Firstly, we need to see tax returns from previous years for Osborne. I think he should at least match what his leadership rival, Johnson, has provided. We then need to understand what dividends were received in previous years.

 

Secondly, we need to test Osborne's assertion that he did not personally benefit from the tax changes for £150k+ earners. He said at the time he wasn't a £150k+ earner so I would like to know if that is true. If he wasn't over the earning level fair enough but he has over it last year (and would have benefitted from his own change) so...........

 

Thirdly, if the dividends for last year were unusually large then was that as a result of the offshore property deal where it is possible substantial amounts of tax were avoided. If Osborne benefitted from that tax avoidance then we need to question his suitability for shaping policy on tax avoidance.

 

Again, these are questions not slurs. You should understand the difference.