Cam girl millionaires

[hauxwell]

I have often got on the bus when secondary comprehensive school pupils or going home in different parts of the North East. 

 

Depending on the area there is a significant difference how these pupils behave.   When they get on the bus near Morpeth in Northumberland, a nice area, they are noisy but very rarely do you hear then using bad language or misbehaving on the bus. They appear to be grown up how they talk and full of ambition for there future. They are simply better behaved than pupils who go to a compromise school at Heworth in Gateshead a deprived area. There language is atrocious they appear to have no ambition, they are more intent on who can be the most disruptive on public transport, I wonder if these pupils are being let down by the education system, peer pressure or their parents.

[geared]

16 hours ago, ECCOnoob said:

 

The company or the creators? 

 

If you are talking of the companies then they are taxed by the jurisdiction. They're registered, just the same as any other. Onlyfans for an example is a British company so will be subject to our tax laws. 

 

If you are talking of the creators, well they are self-employed. Second income for many so it's on the individual to follow the rules. If they choose not to engage well, that's the risk they take and that's on their consciousness. Very similar to all these second business operators buying and reselling through eBay or doing paid Twitch live streams or YouTube channels.  They should be registered self-employed. They should be declaring their income but human nature and all that.  

 

The company is now reporting individuals earnings over a certain threshold to HMRC now I believe, a few were made to do it to reduce tax dodging as people somehow didn't think they needed to pay tax on the money they earnt.

Twitch and I think TikTok are also required to do the same. 

 

Nasty surprise for some, as they'd be classing it as a second job, but also making quite alot of money.

[carosio]

On 30/05/2024 at 17:23, ECCOnoob said:

 

The company or the creators? 

 

If you are talking of the companies then they are taxed by the jurisdiction. They're registered, just the same as any other. Onlyfans for an example is a British company so will be subject to our tax laws. 

 

If you are talking of the creators, well they are self-employed. Second income for many so it's on the individual to follow the rules. If they choose not to engage well, that's the risk they take and that's on their consciousness. Very similar to all these second business operators buying and reselling through eBay or doing paid Twitch live streams or YouTube channels.  They should be registered self-employed. They should be declaring their income but human nature and all that.  

I read that an accountant advises to go limited co. when earning above 35k on youtube. Here we go, tax avoidance.......

[ECCOnoob]

10 minutes ago, carosio said:

I read that an accountant advises to go limited co. when earning above 35k on youtube. Here we go, tax avoidance.......

So?  Accountant doing their job. Advising their clients of perfectly legal ways to make sure they don't pay more tax than they are  obligated to. 

 

Do you have an ISA?  Do you have a pension? Do you make charitable donations?  Do you utilise your personal allowance? Do you deduct expenses?

Edited June 3 by ECCOnoob

[carosio]

45 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

So?  Accountant doing their job. Advising their clients of perfectly legal ways to make sure they don't pay more tax than they are  obligated to. 

 

Do you have an ISA?  Do you have a pension? Do you make charitable donations?  Do you utilise your personal allowance? Do you deduct expenses?

All that and more! I avoid tax wherever and whenever. It's legal! However, some (not you) have an issue with it.

[geared]

1 hour ago, ECCOnoob said:

So?  Accountant doing their job. Advising their clients of perfectly legal ways to make sure they don't pay more tax than they are  obligated to. 

 

Do you have an ISA?  Do you have a pension? Do you make charitable donations?  Do you utilise your personal allowance? Do you deduct expenses?

 

Nothing wrong with it you are right.

 

Perhaps it's something for the incoming Government to work on, putting a framework in place to properly handle the tax liability for these kind of people?

[ECCOnoob]

22 minutes ago, carosio said:

 

 

Just now, geared said:

 

Nothing wrong with it you are right.

 

Perhaps it's something for the incoming Government to work on, putting a framework in place to properly handle the tax liability for these kind of people?

 

They won't need to put a frame work in place. 

 

"These kinds of people" as you call them are exactly the same as anyone else who works self-employed. They are under duty to declare their earnings either through self-assessment or if they have enough business turnover the sensible approach will be forming a limited company. 

 

Just because this technology is modern and new, the basic premise has been around for decades. They are self-employed people doing this job full time or as second income. It's exactly the same as anyone who has a side business reselling products or people who have rental properties or people who make and sell cakes in their spare time or people who get paid to do some singing or perform a gig with their band at some pub alongside there alongside their full-time work...   They are all subject to the tax rules, thresholds, boundaries and self-assessment procedures, just the same as the camera performers.

 

I don't get why people are finding this concept so difficult to understand.  It's income which is taxable through the existing rules. Whether they declare it is a different arguement but that too could easily apply to any of the types of jobs I've listed above.

 

I don't really see why a government need to be bringing in more layers of rules and regulations exclusively just for Cam performers.

 

Its nonsense.