Liechtenstein to give UK tax information

Caporegime
Joined
22 Jun 2004
Posts
26,684
Location
Deep England
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8194532.stm

The UK is expected to sign a deal to recover lost tax from Britons holding bank accounts in Liechtenstein.

HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) has agreed with the Alpine tax haven to start exchanging information.

Up to 5,000 British investors have an estimated £3bn stashed away in secret accounts in the country.

Investors are expected to be offered the chance to volunteer details of their deposits in return for limited penalties and low risk of prosecution.

Hope for his sake that this wasn't how mattheman's was hiding his hard earned cash from UK.gov.

Really though, it's about time these parasite city states got stomped on hard, shame it's taken an economic catastrophe for the political will to be there.
 
I would say the reason your so called 'parasite' city state exists is simply because of the £3 billion of parasite cash deposited by parasite British tax evaders ;)

If it wasn't for them and the billions of others from other rich countries - there wouldnt be a problem.

You'll find that our great gov is also giving them 5 years from 2010 to disclose any savings and pay the tax owed at a reduced rate on any savings - which makes the whole thing totally worthless.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps HMRC should take a look at why people try to take advtange of such jurisdictions? Tax avoison vs tax evastion = whatever HMRC decides.
 
Really though, it's about time these parasite city states got stomped on hard
I know what you mean, but I really hope this doesn't signal the start of government saddling the rich with the world’s problems. Tax havens serve a useful threat to governments that if they raise taxes to high, the money will go off shore.
 
Perhaps the government should sort out their wasteful expenditure before they start harrassing other countries to reveal personal information...
 
Perhaps HMRC should take a look at why people try to take advtange of such jurisdictions? Tax avoison vs tax evastion = whatever HMRC decides.

That has absolutely nothing to do with HMRC's as a decision. It is given a brief as a whitehall department and simple has to get on with it, one of the main missions being to close the Tax gap.

Please educate yourself on these matters before you pass comment. If you are unhappy with taxation policy write to your MP before running down a GD for no reason.

One thing I can say, is from what I've heard internally is that HMRC is really going out on a limb to reach agreements to this effect. This is the fourth or fifth this year.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps the government should sort out their wasteful expenditure before they start harrassing other countries to reveal personal information...

Exactly.

Strikes me as jealousy in all honesty. If you're smart enough to earn that amount of money, then it's nothing but obvious you want to keep as much as possible.

The rich pay more on income and VAT (buying more goods?) anyway.
 
Perhaps the government should sort out their wasteful expenditure before they start harrassing other countries to reveal personal information...

I'm not at all suprised you taking that one to be honest.

Yes I too love to promote big business and theft from the public purse. :rolleyes:
 
Exactly.

Strikes me as jealousy in all honesty. If you're smart enough to earn that amount of money, then it's nothing but obvious you want to keep as much as possible.

The rich pay more on income and VAT (buying more goods?) anyway.

Thats if they actually spend the money and don't hoard it.
 
"The UK government has signed an arrangement with the Cayman Islands that will enable tax information to be exchanged to international standards of transparency.

It was signed yesterday (15 June) by financial secretary to the Treasury Stephen Timms and the Caribbean territory’s leader of government business W McKeeva Bush.

Mr Timms said the arrangement included “unprecedented provisions for tax information exchange”.

He added: “Information exchange is a vital tool in ensuring that governments receive the revenues they need to resource the essential public services on which we all depend.”

The new arrangement means information relating to direct taxes and VAT can be exchanged in a way that meets standards set down by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

Arrangements of this kind, known as Double Taxation Arrangements (DTAs), aim to stop people being taxed twice if they live in one territory but earn income in another.

Permanent secretary for tax, Dave Hartnett, added: “Information exchange enables us to confront effectively tax avoidance and money laundering whilst ensuring that we all make the right contribution to our public services.”

The text of the arrangements can be accessed on the internet (web, PDF). The arrangement will enter into force as soon as both governments have completed the necessary legislative procedures.

The UK currently has 113 DTAs in force and has also signed tax information exchange agreements with Guernsey, Jersey, Bermuda, the Isle of Man and the British Virgin Islands"

and

"HMRC has shut down a £1 billion tax avoidance scheme used by clients of one of the UK’s most prestigious banks.

Nearly 300 customers of Coutts, which caters for the super-wealthy, will have to repay up to £400 million in tax following an independent ruling.



...This is an excellent result in a complex and difficult case...

Marie-Claire Uhart
Details of the Castle Trust scheme have been reported in the Sunday Times and Guardian newspapers. It follows the publication of a decision by the Special Commissioners who are an independent tribunal on tax matters (and who were subsumed into the new First-tier Tribunal from April 1 2009).

Castle Trust had made a deliberate loss of more than £1 billion since it was set up back in 1997.

Losses incurred from transactions that spanned Germany, Pakistan and Guernsey meant investors were able to make deductions from their tax bills totalling almost £400 million.

Specialist Investigations director Marie-Claire Uhart said: “This is an excellent result in a complex and difficult case, and highlights the hard work and dedication of Specialist Investigations and the Anti-Avoidance Group teams working in partnership.”

Sarah Woodall, head of Anti-Avoidance Investigation, added: "Increasingly HMRC is working across directorates in cross tax teams, including staff recruited from the commercial world, to boost its effectiveness in challenging aggressive tax planning. This case illustrates how successful this is proving."

Coutts had no role in setting up Castle Trust."

Just two of many example from internal news. However it must be a lovely world you lot live in where you are happy to pay hand over fist on tax on your earnings and that your happy for those who earn the most to pay disproportionately less..
 
Last edited:
I'm not at all suprised you taking that one to be honest.

Yes I too love to promote big business and theft from the public purse. :rolleyes:

That's not what I promote at all. I promote small, efficient and unintrusive government.

We have none of the above, and this policy just goes to show that all those who claim taxation is not money taken by force or under duress aren't telling the truth at all.
 
Thats if they actually spend the money and don't hoard it.

Very true, I'm going for that they spend it..being rich and all.

I wouldn't imagine there's much in their own country anyway, so most of their purchases would probably be from e.g Germany. Either way, it'll end up on a French cheese farm anyway; (same applies if it was spent here ;))
 
That's not what I promote at all. I promote small, efficient and unintrusive government.

We have none of the above, and this policy just goes to show that all those who claim taxation is not money taken by force or under duress aren't telling the truth at all.

Yes I know your small government sound bite. What I am trying to say is that comment slaps of rich boy Tory.

Well I don't really see the point of this dolph, because its quite plain to see to every idiot out there taxation is forced. What do you suggest, the poor remain poor the rich richer and no mixing pot in the middle to try to alleviate?

Again, you must have some especially rosy life if thats the case.
 
Very true, I'm going for that they spend it..being rich and all.

I wouldn't imagine there's much in their own country anyway, so most of their purchases would probably be from e.g Germany. Either way, it'll end up on a French cheese farm anyway; (same applies if it was spent here ;))

My uncle is a millionaire, however his earnings and accruals on investments and cash exceed his spending. Even after losing a shed load on BoS apparently.

That is without taking in current earnings from his employment. I know not every seriously rich person would be the same, but I don't think its far off.

Rich people do not get rich by throwing money around like you think.

I'm not talking footballers or wags here, business people. Real people.

Also, it doesn't matter whether the money is kept in a mattress or on the moon, it is where the income was generated.
 
Last edited:
Yes I know your small government sound bite. What I am trying to say is that comment slaps of rich boy Tory.

Well I don't really see the point of this dolph, because its quite plain to see to every idiot out there taxation is forced. What do you suggest, the poor remain poor the rich richer and no mixing pot in the middle to try to alleviate?

Again, you must have some especially rosy life if thats the case.

There are plenty of people on this board who always object when I mention that taxation is money taken under threat of force.

I suggest that taxation needs to be open, fairly applied (same percentage on all income), or specifically targetted (taxation applied to products to address social harm of the product only, and only in the necssary amount), and that government spending needs to be fully open, fully transparent and run on a correct basis (no more ponzi schemes or murky 'general' accounting that says nothing of how the money taken from taxpayers is actually spent). Remember the hoo-ha about MP's expenses? It's nothing compared to what would happen if the taxpayers could see where their money is being spent generally in a fully open manner.

The government does not (and cannot) create wealth, government spending does not create wealth, as such productive economies are those with controlled government spending and minimal unnecessary government intervention.

I don't advocate removing the safety net (indeed, my preferred income tax proposal would make many people better off than they are now), but I believe that society should treat everyone equally, everyone gets the same benefit, and everyone pays the same percentage share on their income.

What is wrong with that?
 
Your losing track here a bit I think. Maybe its me..

If your proposed taxation policy would leave everyone better off, that would most certainly leave state out of pocket.

Is your plan going to fit in with current circumstances? Like it or not our GDP crippling debt is here to stay with us.

Government projects do create wealth, but again for the rich minority in a lot cases. PFI anyone?

I pay a lot more tax than the girl next to me four clerical grades lower. Having seen what my boss pays, well he pays a fair bit more. It really makes no difference to me because I can at least see it is proportional to my earnings, and is on sliding scale. One shoe fits all wouldn’t work imo, although I admit to not staying up late drawing up my own manifestos and budgets!. I think its got more to do with the 'scum' end, but even then I couldn't comment further on a 'whole' taxation summery. I know top earners are a small percentage but it is the system we adopted. I don't agree with many many things in this country, but taxation is inevitable and tbh would you really want this government to tinker anymore?

Has income tax always been on a sliding scale since the war?
 
Last edited:
Strikes me as jealousy in all honesty. If you're smart enough to earn that amount of money, then it's nothing but obvious you want to keep as much as possible.

The rich pay more on income and VAT (buying more goods?) anyway.

If you're smart enough to earn that amount of money, then it's ok to break the law? Have I got that right?

VAT is a regressive tax, which means that the poor are the most affected by it (and why the Conservatives want to put it up to 20%).
 
If you're smart enough to earn that amount of money, then it's ok to break the law? Have I got that right?

VAT is a regressive tax, which means that the poor are the most affected by it (and why the Conservatives want to put it up to 20%).

No you haven't got my point right.

Edit - actually I've misread the article. :o I thought these were people hoarding money away into limitless tax free accounts as opposed to those that have shipped it out and not (for the majority) paid 50% UK income tax. My bad.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom