Panama Papers

[Dolph]

Define a genuine contribution.

Carers looking after family members, they are unpaid but save the state a fortune, that provide a huge contribution to society.

Someone earning £100,000 may pay more tax but it doesn't mean they contribute more.

We're talking about tax and tax avoidance, and hence there is a really simple way to mention contribution, which is net increase in state coffers from the economic activity. This would exclude tax paid with money that originates from the state coffers in the first place. An alternative way of looking at it would be if you removed the economic activity that generated the tax liability, is the state any worse off?

Using such a rule, we capture both private sector wealth creators and carers looking after family members, but exclude those who pay taxes exclusively from public funds.

 

[ron3003]

Finally we agree, as long as we agree that the morals are those of the majority of successful people and not those of the bottom scroungers

Those like yourself who have successfully passed through the bottom then?

 

[Hambut_Bulge]

The two situations are not even remotely comparable.

Yes they are, since John McDonnell has, repeatedly, been asking Cameron to state if he has "benefited directly or indirectly" (my emphasis) from offshore funds. Since he himself has benefited (and so do most of us), however indirectly, he can hardly call for others to be whiter than white on the issue.

As to the impossibility, with international cooperation it could be achieved. It was international cooperation that allowed the situation to develop so the same could be used to alter it. It would not devalue pension funds but make it more difficult to get the same level of returns in the future. I have every faith in the financial sector to come up with some other wheeze.

Making it more difficult for a pension fund to get the same level of return [as now?] will reduce the value in that fund! With the consequence that people, ordinary people, will be poorer in their retirement.

And as for international co-operation; among who precisely? Western countries? There'd be only one winner. China. Hong Kong is already the biggest tax haven in the world, and punitive measures against the Channel Islands et al will just mean the business will move. The 'communist' government in China will welcome it with open arms, and I can't really see any of our moralists being so gutsy as to challenge that.

 

[stewski]

Yes they are, since John McDonnell has, repeatedly, been asking Cameron to state if he has "benefited directly or indirectly" (my emphasis) from offshore funds. Since he himself has benefited (and so do most of us), however indirectly, he can hardly call for others to be whiter than white on the issue.



Making it more difficult for a pension fund to get the same level of return [as now?] will reduce the value in that fund! With the consequence that people, ordinary people, will be poorer in their retirement.

And as for international co-operation; among who precisely? Western countries? There'd be only one winner. China. Hong Kong is already the biggest tax haven in the world, and punitive measures against the Channel Islands et al will just mean the business will move. The 'communist' government in China will welcome it with open arms, and I can't really see any of our moralists being so gutsy as to challenge that.

Frankly private pensions are a risky joke anyway.

 

[Hambut_Bulge]

Frankly private pensions are a risky joke anyway.

Well yes, but then about the only people these days who get a gold plated final salary scheme are, oh surprise, MP's!

 

[Edward78]

Wait?! One Day After the Panama Papers: IRS Headquarters Closes then Catches Fire odd timing...

 

[joeyjojo]

Nearly 7 months bump...

The FT reports that about 40 high worth individuals in the UK identified in the Panama papers are currently being investigated by a special HMRC tax unit (see final paragraph):

One in three of the richest people in Britain is under investigation by HM Revenue & Customs over nearly £2bn of potentially underpaid tax, the government’s spending watchdog said on Tuesday.

The inquiries mostly concern avoidance and the legal interpretation of complex tax issues, rather than evasion, according to a report by the National Audit Office.

It found that a specialist unit set up to scrutinise the tax affairs of the super-rich secured an extra £416m of tax in 2015-16, up from £200m in 2011-12. The unit examines the tax affairs of 6,500 of the wealthiest people in the UK, with assets of more than £20m.

...

About 40 potential cases involving wealthy individuals have been identified from the Panama Papers, the leaked data on the use of shell companies released earlier this year. While it is possible that the Revenue has already been told about the offshore assets in the leaked data, the cases are being investigated by staff in the high net worth unit and the fraud investigation service.

 

[Gzero]

Nearly 7 months bump...

The FT reports that about 40 high worth individuals in the UK identified in the Panama papers are currently being investigated by a special HMRC tax unit (see final paragraph):

Yeah, but they've only ever caught like 1 person. They all must be legitimate.

 

[RaohNS]

I think the saying is: One rule for them and another for the rest of us

 

[Sankari]

Justice finally arrives for the murderers of Daphne Caruana Galizia.

Two brothers have each been jailed for 40 years for the car-bomb murder of a top investigative journalist in Malta.

George Degiorgio, 59, and sibling Alfred, 57, had denied killing Daphne Caruana Galizia in a blast as she drove home on 16 October, 2017. But they both dramatically changed their pleas hours after their trial began on Friday at a court in the capital Valletta.

Anti-corruption journalist Ms Caruana Galizia, 53, was reporting on suspected fraud in political and business circles in Malta when her car exploded in the town of Mosta.

The bomb, placed under the driver's seat, was detonated via a mobile phone by George Degiorgio, the court heard. It triggered an explosion powerful enough to send the car wreckage flying over a wall and into a field.

The Degiorgio brothers are said to have been hired by a top Maltese businessman who allegedly has ties to the government.

...A third defendant, Vincent Muscat, was earlier sentenced to 15 years in prison for his part in the plot to kill Ms Caruana Galizia.

...Mr Muscat was forced to resign after businessman Yorgen Fenech was arrested for allegedly being complicit in the plot in 2019, sparking a series of mass protests in Malta.

Fenech, who has connections with senior government officials, was charged with a number of offences including conspiracy to commit murder in 2021. He denies all the charges against him and a date has yet to be set for his trial.

A self-confessed middleman, taxi driver Melvin Theuma, was granted a presidential pardon in 2019 in exchange for giving evidence against Fenech and other suspects.

A further two men, Jamie Vella and Robert Agius, are due to face trial for allegedly supplying the bomb.

It would be nice if we could also see some justice arrive at the doorstep of the dodgy people stashing money overseas to avoid their tax obligations.

 

[Chris Wilson]

Justice finally arrives for the murderers of Daphne Caruana Galizia.



It would be nice if we could also see some justice arrive at the doorstep of the dodgy people stashing money overseas to avoid their tax obligations.

They are minimising their tax obligations, not avoiding them, which would be illegal.

 

[sigma]

They are minimising their tax obligations, not avoiding them, which would be illegal.

Is your name on the list?

 

[Mr Joshua]

They are minimising their tax obligations, not avoiding them, which would be illegal.

Point of fact, tax avoidance isn't illegal. Sankari is correct.

 

[Pudney]

Justice finally arrives for the murderers of Daphne Caruana Galizia.



It would be nice if we could also see some justice arrive at the doorstep of the dodgy people stashing money overseas to avoid their tax obligations.

Is your name on the list?

The simple fact is the UK doesn't impose a tax obligation on a foreign domicile individual on their non-UK source income. If you don't like it then it isn't "justice" you need, it's a reform of the UK tax rules.

 

[Chris Wilson]

Is your name on the list?

Unfortunately my income is far too meagre to make offshore accounts worth my while. But best of luck to those who are big earners, they (and their advisors) would be foolish or lax not to take advantage of such things.

 

[sigma]

The simple fact is the UK doesn't impose a tax obligation on a foreign domicile individual on their non-UK source income. If you don't like it then it isn't "justice" you need, it's a reform of the UK tax rules.

I'm not too clued up on it but aren't people buying houses through shell companies where the owner isn't easy to spot, in order to evade tax? Perhaps I'm mistaken.

And for your second point why would the politicians agree for reform where they end up paying more tax? Who said anything about justice?

 

[sigma]

Point of fact, tax avoidance isn't illegal. Sankari is correct.

Point of fact, shell companies are also used to launder money.

 

[Dj_Jestar]

It's a point of semantics. Avoiding tax is not illegal. Schemes like the R&D rebate/discount are a tax  avoidance scheme. They permit an organisation to avoid tax on profit so long as that money is used for R&D. Same for charitablw donations. It is actually profitable for a corp to make a donation and thus get a discount on corp tax.

Tax  evasion is using some means to withhold your tax contributions. Such as using a shell company to purchase property and  hide who the true owner of the captial gains and/or income from rent is .

 

[Pudney]

I'm not too clued up on it but aren't people buying houses through shell companies where the owner isn't easy to spot, in order to evade tax? Perhaps I'm mistaken.

And for your second point why would the politicians agree for reform where they end up paying more tax? Who said anything about justice?

You are mistaken. People use shell companies to launder money, which is a separate issue.

I also quoted two posts, which should answer where I was getting "justice" from.

It's a point of semantics. Avoiding tax is not illegal. Schemes like the R&D rebate/discount are a tax  avoidance scheme. They permit an organisation to avoid tax on profit so long as that money is used for R&D. Same for charitablw donations. It is actually profitable for a corp to make a donation and thus get a discount on corp tax.

Tax  evasion is using some means to withhold your tax contributions. Such as using a shell company to purchase property and  hide who the true owner of the captial gains and/or income from rent is .

Saying the R&D "rebate/discount" is a tax avoidance schemes is like saying ISAs are a tax avoidance scheme. No they're not, that's how the legislation works. Tax avoidance is the use of legislation in unintended, but potentially effective, manners to achieve reductions in tax. Things like R&D are far more likely to be used in an evasion manner (i.e. by claiming the relief when knowingly not entitled to it).

 

[Dj_Jestar]

The benefit to the corporation of said schemes is to avoid tax. The benefit, at least the intended benefit, to society is the investment in r&d.

That's a scheme. That avoids tax. Thus tax avoidance scheme.

ISAs are a tax avoidance scheme too. They literally are given tax discounts to encourage people to use them and... avoid the tax burden of other mechanisms.

The marketing of them won't call them "tax avoidance schemes" sure.