David Cameron, secrecy and tax avoidance

[RonJeremy]

Does a couple with combined earnings of say £500k need that financial support?

 

And here we are moving the goalposts...

[unbeliever]

Does a couple with combined earnings of say £500k need that financial support?

 

No but then they don't need much.

Having collected over £200k from them in taxes, what else do you plan to deny them?

NHS treatment?

State schooling for their children?

 

Can you just be clear. Are you advocating that all benefits should be means tested? Would you extend this to the use of public services?

[El Cid]

Quite.

 

If not El Cid. Give me his name and I'll report him for you.

 

It happened a quite a few years ago, I didnt know him then.

[I1L2T3]

No you cant can you.

And neither can HMRC who dont try to run a business.

How can a business know the thoughts behind legislation?

Governments give all sorts of tax incentives to encourage certain behaviour.

There were forestry investments a few years ago that Saint Terry Wogan fell foul of. there were some breaks for the British Film industry for some reason. Capital allowances have been held over for a few years now. There was a bit of a break on employer's NI recently. I think if you take on appentices there's a bit of incentive somewhere. And I think if you invest heavily in R&D you get something too. And there are a great deal more. Amortisation, relief on this and that.

It doesn't appear to be black and white.

 

I'm fairly confident you don't run a business. In fact I'd be amazed if you had ever gone out and earned your pay. Paid wages, no doubt, but not actually gone and got it yourself.

 

Sorry Ron but unfortunately it isn't always black and white. Aggressive tax avoiders try and target those grey spaces, and sometimes they fall foul of HMRC.

 

That's got nothing to do with what I do personally.

[RonJeremy]

Sorry Ron but unfortunately it isn't always black and white. Aggressive tax avoiders try and target those grey spaces, and sometimes they fall foul of HMRC.

 

That's got nothing to do with what I do personally.

 

It has. You don't understand.

[unbeliever]

Sorry Ron but unfortunately it isn't always black and white. Aggressive tax avoiders try and target those grey spaces, and sometimes they fall foul of HMRC.

 

That's got nothing to do with what I do personally.

 

 

This dodging that you're doing now, to basically every challenge that comes your way. This is somehow different from when other people do it I suppose?

[I1L2T3]

It has. You don't understand.

 

No it hasn't but please explain....

 

---------- Post added 10-04-2016 at 19:58 ----------

 

No but then they don't need much.

Having collected over £200k from them in taxes, what else do you plan to deny them?

NHS treatment?

State schooling for their children?

 

Can you just be clear. Are you advocating that all benefits should be means tested? Would you extend this to the use of public services?

 

No, I just want to understand the Cameron's financial status pre-2010

 

I don't think many people would begrudge them state support and expertise for helping care for their son. I'm just wondering how the Camerons' experience flavoured policy on disabled benefits since. It's more a moral thing than a legal thing.

 

---------- Post added 10-04-2016 at 19:59 ----------

 

This dodging that you're doing now, to basically every challenge that comes your way. This is somehow different from when other people do it I suppose?

 

I'm not dodging anything. I want Ron to explain his argument.

Edited April 10, 2016 by I1L2T3

[mort]

The personal attacks can cease now or I will be suspending accounts.

[Berberis]

On the Bahamas fund he did.

 

OK so which other fund did he not pay any tax? Or are you assuming there is more to this that is currently in the news?

[milquetoast1]

I think he's hoping there's more to this than is currently in the news.