Panama Papers

He knew about Blairmore Holdings then...

£30k isn't a massive amount, though I do wonder if that's the end of it all. To be fair, it's no worse than George Osborne's family's business that hasn't paid tax in years despite turning a profit and paying dividends. Only difference is, David Cameron's family's tax dodging past is news.
 
Last edited:
Oh, juicy update!

I would love to read a comment from Jimmy Carr, to make up for Cameron's comments in 2012.
 
UTmaniac said:
Oh, juicy update!

I would love to read a comment from Jimmy Carr, to make up for Cameron's comments in 2012.
Click to expand...

Wish granted:

"It’s strange, because a few years ago the prime minister was quick to come out in public and criticise me about tax avoidance, but was seemingly unable to have that same conversation across the family dinner table.

“I can only think he was too embarrassed to talk to his relatives in the same critical terms he used with me.

“It must have been hell for him, having to just sit there listening to them talk about all the things they’d been doing with their lives, knowing full well that the money they were spending had been made thanks to offshore tax avoidance.

“I bet he even tried to raise it once or twice, explaining it would make him look bad – especially with his public crusade against tax avoidance – but he was probably just shut down and called a wannabe-pleb.

“Dave is the victim here, just remember that."

http://newsthump.com/2016/04/06/cameron-family-tax-affairs-morally-wrong-claims-jimmy-carr/ ;)
 
Corruption, fraud, and money laundering is rife in the world, no matter if you poor or rich you at it in one why or another. ;)
 
Mynight said:
Wh? It's not like they start thinking once they get into politics either :D.
Click to expand...

Strangely, I agree with Tom Watson on this: PMs have to lead by example. It's not so much a matter of family ties or the precise amounts, but the image it projects given his policy stances and promises. You don't have to be a dark lord of press relations to know the possible fallout implications in politics of anything to do with money, sex or hard drugs.
 
RaohNS said:
Another fair and socially moral concept. In my view people who have over £100,000,000 (to put that into perspective you would need to work an average job for 4,000years or a NMW wage job for 7,500+yrs or you would need 40-100 generations of your family to work) should have any money made subject to 100% tax. If they spend £2m in a year they can earn £2m up to that threshold.

That would go to great lengths to improving the true trickle down economics as effectively they are left with a hard choice: spend your earning to benefit others or have it taken off you to be distributed. I'm fine people having money, really, but what I am against is wealth so obscene it is more than morally unacceptable, it is a crime. To earn Bill Gates fortune on minimum wage you would have to live for 3m-5m years. Some people have no problem with that. I do.

These tax havens burrow away vast fortunes
Click to expand...

I agree in principle with a maximum wage, though can't see it ever working in reality.

There is also a problem with what you mean by to "have" a £100m though. Case in point, you mention Bill Gates but he doesn't physically 'have' half a trillion dollars in his bank account, he is worth that amount because that's what the total value of Microsoft shares he owns are said to be worth on the stock exchange.

You could own a £100m business, but making a short term loss and only paying yourself a modest income but by your rules you'd starve because all of your income would be taken by the tax man.
 
datalol-jack said:
Strangely, I agree with Tom Watson on this: PMs have to lead by example. It's not so much a matter of family ties or the precise amounts, but the image it projects given his policy stances and promises. You don't have to be a dark lord of press relations to know the possible fallout implications in politics of anything to do with money, sex or hard drugs.
Click to expand...

Quite. However let's be honest his words probably have little meaning outside of political point scoring.

If labour was in power and such a thing had happened I imagine the Tory MP would be saying exactly the same.
 
satchef1 said:
Wish granted:

"It’s strange, because a few years ago the prime minister was quick to come out in public and criticise me about tax avoidance, but was seemingly unable to have that same conversation across the family dinner table.

“I can only think he was too embarrassed to talk to his relatives in the same critical terms he used with me.

“It must have been hell for him, having to just sit there listening to them talk about all the things they’d been doing with their lives, knowing full well that the money they were spending had been made thanks to offshore tax avoidance.

“I bet he even tried to raise it once or twice, explaining it would make him look bad – especially with his public crusade against tax avoidance – but he was probably just shut down and called a wannabe-pleb.

“Dave is the victim here, just remember that."

http://newsthump.com/2016/04/06/cameron-family-tax-affairs-morally-wrong-claims-jimmy-carr/ ;)
Click to expand...

God, he's a sanctimonious little blankety blank beep beep... Glass houses Jimmy (and yes Cameron also needs someone to take his shovel away)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom