Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

LOL he he.

Haystack, you are scratching round for solace, there isn't any...


Cameron is a loser, he couldn't even win against Broon, not that Comrade Millibum is any better.


It's just that Cameroon is useless, and people can see it, and wont vote for a loser.

Clegg wants cancellation of bedroom tax.

Up yours IDS and Cameron!

Cameron is looking more confident by the day.

If any of this is true, it wont matter anyway.


http://www.gold-eagle.com/article/germany-pivoting-east

This just goes to show why you can’t trust a word the Lib Dems say - it is clear the only way to cancel the bedroom tax is to elect a Labour government next year - Rachel Reeves

Rachel Reeves MP, Labour’s Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary, said:

"This is unbelievable hypocrisy from Nick Clegg. The Lib Dems voted for the bedroom tax. There wouldn’t be a bedroom tax if it wasn’t for the Lib Dems. And in February when Labour tabled a bill to scrap the bedroom tax, the Lib Dems were nowhere to be seen. This just goes to show why you can’t trust a word the Lib Dems say - it is clear the only way to cancel the bedroom tax is to elect a Labour government next year."

Ends


JULY 16, 2014 (11:17 PM)

Rachel Reeves ‏@RachelReevesMP 2h

Labour will look to call a vote in parliament on the #bedroomtax. Lib Dems could cancel this cruel policy now by voting with Labour.

Fat chance of that no doubt Clegg or one of his fellow hangers on will water down what was first said.

They always do as they have no balls.

It really must be the silly season.

Posted by Aleman on afn...the real economy, not in the newspapers.



Aleman
16 Jul'14 - 15:57 - 64614 of 64617 0 0


Shocking employment numbers. The government seems to have boosted the economy by throwing open the immigration doors. Over 900k jobs were created in the last year (full and part-time) but, of the 739k full-time-equivalent jobs created, 39.5% went to people born outside the UK. That's 292k full-time-equivalent which means the actual number of non-uk born people getting jobs was probably close to 400k. This suggests that UK GDP growth is coming from immigration rather than increasing productivity. GDP per capita could be falling. This is reinforced by average total earnings which only rose from £476 per week to £478 in the year to May. (May CPI was 1.5% and RPI 2.4% so real weekly average total earnings fell.)

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_367199.pdf

And where would we be if they were not blowing a pre-election housing bubble?

film investment tax avoidance
like most if not everyone here, i thought these schemes were very aggressive and no more than just a cynical wheeze to shelter from tax.

however, on reading further this morning, it may well be that HMRC is not on such solid ground after all.

a good few years ago, the gov't of the time (labour as it happens, but it's actually not important) promoted this concept as a way of supporting and encouraging the british film industry.

one of the major promoters for whom HMRC is gunning actually invested in a good number of films that were genuine box office successes, though of course they must have their share of duds as well

it may be, and it's not for me to judge, that the company in question made the avoidance "aggressive" by the way they leveraged investments from individuals.

nevertheless, there seems to have been no suggestion over the years that the scheme was sailing far too close to the wind.

so not quite as black and white as first appears

RUBBISH.

Ill get you the right facts not that waffle above.

Im trying to find it and an eye opener it is.

i prefer the BBC news and comment which is rather less partisan than the stuff you cherry pick

It was from the BBC, having difficulty finding it.

Expected millions will be paid back to HMRC although cheats can appeal.

Il find it later on.

Ive got the lawn mower chugging away.

from my bbc news app ...... try bbc.co.uk/news/uk - and read the whole article

you may also care to read what i posted rather more carefully instead of just shooting from the hip

===========

if a "cheat" appeals and wins, he isn't a cheat, though you won't like that concept i'm sure

The BBC "less partisan" - you are having a laugh Cynic !

you too - read the article instead of just guessing!

Here we are.........Accelerated Payment Notices.

MP Andrew Mitchell invested in scheme HMRC says avoided tax
Andrew Mitchell


Former government chief whip Andrew Mitchell has invested in a high-profile film financing company considered to be a tax avoidance scheme by HMRC.

Tax collectors say the scheme's investors can expect to receive big tax bills in the coming months.

Mr Mitchell is best known for resigning from the government in October 2012 over an argument with some Downing Street policemen - later dubbed "Plebgate" - a chain of events that has left him locked in a series of high profile libel actions.

In the mid-2000s he invested in a vehicle called Ingenious Film Partners 2.

According to its promoters, this was a scheme that encouraged people to invest in British film. But, according to the Revenue, it was designed to generate inappropriate amounts of tax relief for its investors.

HMRC
Tax avoidance: What are the rules?

This week, HMRC listed Ingenious Film Partners 2 as one of 1,200 candidates for "accelerated payment notices".

This is a power that takes effect this week, meaning that investors can be asked to repay all tax that HMRC thinks they should have paid before going to court. Upon receiving the notice, the bill must be settled within 90 days.

Tax enforcement is now a very high political priority.

That is why the coalition has given HMRC more money for enforcement and new powers. Experts say that schemes that were left alone in previous years - some long-established - are now being caught in the HMRC dragnet.

Other senior establishment figures to invest in the scheme include Lord Waldegrave, the former chief secretary to the Treasury, and Lord Grade, the former chairman of the BBC.

Lord Grade
Lord Grade was chairman of the BBC between 2004 and 2006
All said they had invested in the scheme to support the film industry.

Ingenious, the company that runs Ingenious Film Partners 2, said: "HMRC has failed to distinguish between commercial businesses and tax avoidance schemes and have, without proper consideration, deemed all film arrangements to be tax schemes."

As a minimum, investors in Ingenious Film Partners 2 could put in £36,000. If they put in that much, Ingenious would then loan them a further £64,000 to invest, taking their stake up to £100,000. That would be used to buy shares in film productions which, in their first year, created a roughly £90,000 loss.

Top-rate taxpayers who invested in the scheme could choose to write off that loss against their taxes.

'Wholly unfair'
So in return for putting in £36,000 in cash, they would get about the same amount in tax relief very fast - and end up owning a £100,000 stake in a group of films.

So long as the films made enough to service the debt, Ingenious's structure would allow people to make a long-term investment without locking up their cash.

According to court documents from January this year, HMRC disputed "that the activities of the partnerships constituted the carrying on of a trade and dispute that expenses incurred in the course of their businesses related wholly and exclusively to the carrying on of any trade".

If it is challenged and HMRC wins a subsequent case, the revenue can keep the money. If it loses, it must refund investors. Ingenious said: "A tax tribunal called at Ingenious' request… is now scheduled for November. Ingenious remains confident of the outcome."

Ingenious is well-known in British media. It really does support films. Mr Mitchell invested in films including X-Men: The Last Stand, Garfield: A Tale of Two Kitties and Sunshine. He also backed a less well known film called Virgin Territories.

Ingenious has also, through other vehicles, invested in Avatar, the Best Exotic Marigold Hotel, Girl with a Pearl Earring, Vera Drake, Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz and Hotel Rwanda.

Furthermore, the structure of the scheme means that investors do pay tax on any income they receive from the films.

Ingenious says its schemes have generated a £1bn of such income. Ingenious said: "There has been a major change of position by the government driven by a rather crude attempt to generate cash for the Exchequer in a wholly unfair and unjust manner."

Newsnight asked how much Mr Mitchell, Lord Waldegrave and Lord Grade invested, but they did not respond. It is possible that they have already reached a settlement with HMRC to repay tax reliefs. They may never have actually used the relief. But they might also be facing bills for tens of thousands of pounds of tax.

Lord Waldegrave was MP for Bristol West from 1979 to 1997

Lord Waldegrave
Lord Waldegrave was MP for Bristol West from 1979 to 1997
Either way, it is likely to be embarrassing - particularly for a politician like Mr Mitchell who still wants a big job. He had been touted as a candidate to be Britain's European Commissioner.

Mr Mitchell said: "When the last Labour government introduced tax incentives to invest in the British film industry, along with many other investors I did so through Ingenious Films. I resigned from Ingenious when I was in government and always pay all tax when due."

Lord Grade said: "I can confirm that I am one of the original investors in the Ingenious Film Partners 2 LLP Fund. The Labour government at the time promoted a policy to stimulate investment in the British film industry through tax incentives. The Ingenious Fund gave effect to this policy…"

Lord Waldegrave said: "It was presented as a genuine film investment partnership. I was told they'd financed Avatar and other films. It never occurred to me it was tax avoidance. The Revenue haven't been in touch yet. If the Revenue contact me then I would pay it back."

CORRECTION a tax tribunal as been arranged NOT individual appeals.

This Film company imo dont have a cat in hells chance of winning. Giddeon will see to that and HE WILL APPEAL the decision if it were to go against him.