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.

Remember this.

A nasty little man suitable for the Nasty party who care for themselves in front of all.




The problem they have is "themselves" are shrinking and "all" are growing!

i confess i find this rumpus about X,Y,Z,A,B and C of assorted hues having taken sensible tax avoidance measures, very entertaining indeed

if it's legal and "non aggressive" then it's common sense as any financial adviser will tell you
if your personal "moral stance" dictates otherwise and you'ld rather pour your money into the gov't coffers (for them to mis-use), then that is your call

meanwhile, in the world of mammon, AFR and Serco get the full treatment in ST

and an interesting snippet from yesterday's telegraph #2 ......

in essence .....
top 300,000 taxpayers will pay approx £150,000 each (income tax + other i'm sure) into the coffers this year = 27.3% of the nation's tax revenue against 25% when labour came to power in 1997

Manuel.

Post 56610.

Why not?

Could they have earned sufficient to pay that tax on without the rest of the population?

Do they "need" that "excess" of income more than somebody on a smaller income who is paying a smaller % or amount of tax?

Remember we are all in it together, but some can't swim in the deep end.


Latest YouGov / Sunday Times results 13th February - Con 32%, Lab 35%, LD 7%, UKIP 15%, GRN 7%; APP -21

i just thought it an interesting observation about the % of tax paid into the gov't coffers by the well-off

i was not remotely suggesting it was too much or anything else ...... you forget that i have always been a great promoter of profit-sharing with our employees, though it's a shame they don't share the pain when times are hard

What it does show is that the % tax take from the rich is greater under the Tories than it is under Labour, which makes a mockery of Labour claims that the Tories look after their rich friends.
2517

yes and no .... it could also demonstrate that there is a greater % of lower paid in the workforce

lies, damned lies etc :-)

Manuel.

I think profit sharing is sensible but sometimes difficult to practice.

The company my father was involved with did similar for a short while, in the 40s albeit when they went into profit.
As said difficult in "hard times", but what was interesting in the recent "recession" the number of firms with "union or workforce" agreement were prepared to accept standstill and some cases a cut in "wages" in order to stay in work and "save" the companies

Was sensible and suggests good working relationships.


=======

As far as Tax returns are concerned it depends on what "should" be the total "return".

The problem with the figures be thrown about is the fine print and background to them being produced.

Strange that Labour and their supporters are getting so worked up about so called tax avoidance now. Never seemed to occur to them in their thirteen years of government. Arise Sir Fred Goodwin!

Ed Balls refuses to back Ed Miliband tax loophole
Shadow Chancellor says he will look at 'systematic tax evasion' and refuses to rule out banning 'deed of variation'


By Holly Watt, Whitehall Editor10:30AM GMT 15 Feb 2015



Ed Balls has said that he might close a tax loophole used by Ed Miliband, after insisting he would crack down on "aggressive tax avoidance".
The Shadow Chancellor failed to back the Labour leader’s over his family’s use of a “deed of variation”, which changed his father’s will posthumously to minimise the amount paid in inheritance tax.
“I think Ed Miliband paid all the tax that was due,” said Mr Balls, during an appearance on the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show, refusing to comment any further.


Mr Balls said that he would launch a wide-ranging assessment of all tax loopholes used in financial planning if Labour wins the general election in May.
"I will look at every area. I will look at every area. The intention of Parliament must be delivered," he said.

He refused to rule out including deeds of variation in this assessment.
“I will not turn a blind eye,” insisted Mr Balls, accusing the Conservatives of allowing rich people to avoid paying “their fair share”.
Mr Balls said that Labour would crack down on “systematic tax evasion”. However, he defended a decision by the Labour party to accept a donation from the businessman John Mills, who gave the party £1.65m in shares in 2013. This reduced the tax paid on the donation.

Mr Balls called this "a tax efficiency" and "small beer compared with what the Tories are up to," speaking to John Pienaar on BBC Radio 5 live.
He also insisted he didn't "know the details of [the Mills donation] and it would be wrong for me to do so because as I think it is important that I can be objective on these matters."
However, he insisted that David Cameron should have carried out a more comprehensive analysis of Lord Green, the former HSBC chairman, before he was made a minister.
Grant Shapps, the Tory Chairman, said that "Labour say one thing on tax avoidance, but do another."
"Last week Ed Miliband criticised the practice, but today Ed Balls has admitted that the Party accepts 'tax efficient' donations because they 'need the money,'" said Mr Shapps.
Mr Miliband has become embroiled in a row over his inheritance, because he, his mother and his brother – the former Labour MP David Miliband – agreed to change the will of his father, the Marxist Ralph Miliband, in 1994.
The row centres on a house in Primrose Hill, where the Milibands grew up. When he died in 1994, Ralph Miliband originally left the whole house to his wife, Marion.
However, along with his mother and his brother – the former Labour MP David Miliband – Mr Miliband agreed to rewrite his father’s will using a deed of variation. Instead of the family home passing simply to his mother, each brother was given 20 per cent of the asset.
In order to change a will in this way, all the people involved have to agree.
The deed of variation would ultimately reduce the tax on Mrs Miliband’s estate, because inheritance tax would only be paid on 60 per cent of the asset rather than the whole value of the home.Mr Miliband has insisted he paid capital gains tax when he sold his share of the house.
The row blew up following allegations of tax evasion by HSBC customers. Mr Miliband went on the attack, criticising the Conservatives and their "dodgy donors".
The former party treasurer Lord Fink said that he had been smeared, although he admitted that he carried out what he called "vanilla" tax planning.
The former Conservative Chancellor Ken Clarke told the Observer that his party must end its dependency on rich individuals. He said that the tax row was "artificial and bogus", but said that the party leaders needed to resolve issues around party funding.
"I think the Conservative party will be strengthened if it is less dependent on having to raise money from wealthy individuals. But there is no way any leader can avoid raising funds from large gatherings of that kind," said Mr Clarke.


Mr Balls called this "a tax efficiency" and "small beer compared with what the Tories are up to," speaking to John Pienaar on BBC Radio 5 live.
He also insisted he didn't "know the details of [the Mills donation] and it would be wrong for me to do so because as I think it is important that I can be objective on these matters."
However, he insisted that David Cameron should have carried out a more comprehensive analysis of Lord Green, the former HSBC chairman, before he was made a minister.
Grant Shapps, the Tory Chairman, said that "Labour say one thing on tax avoidance, but do another."
"Last week Ed Miliband criticised the practice, but today Ed Balls has admitted that the Party accepts 'tax efficient' donations because they 'need the money,'" said Mr Shapps.
Mr Miliband has become embroiled in a row over his inheritance, because he, his mother and his brother – the former Labour MP David Miliband – agreed to change the will of his father, the Marxist Ralph Miliband, in 1994.
The row centres on a house in Primrose Hill, where the Milibands grew up. When he died in 1994, Ralph Miliband originally left the whole house to his wife, Marion.
However, along with his mother and his brother – the former Labour MP David Miliband – Mr Miliband agreed to rewrite his father’s will using a deed of variation. Instead of the family home passing simply to his mother, each brother was given 20 per cent of the asset.
In order to change a will in this way, all the people involved have to agree.
The deed of variation would ultimately reduce the tax on Mrs Miliband’s estate, because inheritance tax would only be paid on 60 per cent of the asset rather than the whole value of the home.Mr Miliband has insisted he paid capital gains tax when he sold his share of the house.
The row blew up following allegations of tax evasion by HSBC customers. Mr Miliband went on the attack, criticising the Conservatives and their "dodgy donors".
The former party treasurer Lord Fink said that he had been smeared, although he admitted that he carried out what he called "vanilla" tax planning.
The former Conservative Chancellor Ken Clarke told the Observer that his party must end its dependency on rich individuals. He said that the tax row was "artificial and bogus", but said that the party leaders needed to resolve issues around party funding.
"I think the Conservative party will be strengthened if it is less dependent on having to raise money from wealthy individuals. But there is no way any leader can avoid raising funds from large gatherings of that kind," said Mr Clarke.

fred - i know we're just a small company (about 20 employees), but we have had a profit share scheme in place for at least the last 15 years

i accept that the quantum is in the gift of the directors and could thus be accused of being parochial, but it most certainly works as is shown by the almost unknown loss of staff .... that we run a very relaxed company also helps, even if we would be seriously frowned upon by some for being not remotely pc!

At the end of the day it's about "trust on both sides", if there is that then things can work.

but thank goodness we don't have unions as inevitably they would insist on a written policy, and that automatically creates a possibility of problems

Not if there is "trust on both sides" so nothing inevitable at all.

I wouldn't trust Red ED and Mr No Balls with a Post Office Savings Account let alone the British economy :0)

Universal credit goes national tomorrow.

Anyone know how it works?


Also, they were interviewing people on the street, only saw one, looked like Sid Snot with pierced earings going through the center of his nose and his ear...he wasn't too happy about UC, but there again who is going to employ him anyway?

Manuel,

Worth reading.

The first article sums up the present tory party and what many think of it, while the second article gives other reasons:


If one thing will cost the Tories this election, it is their arrogance
Andrew Rawnsley

They know it is toxic to be seen as cronies of the super-rich but they threw their obscene fundraising ball anyway
.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/feb/15/tories-black-white-ball-fundraiser-rich-arrogance

and know how to spend a buck:



=-=-=-=

Is Mr Cameron the most parochial PM ever?

Nick Cohen
Sums up what Dodgy Dave is thought of in Europe and why:


http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/feb/14/is-mr-cameron-most-parochial-pm-ever

You couldn't make this up. Oh yes you could, another left wing cock up in waiting. Or how to lose votes! LOL! LOL!


Strip companies of government contracts, Labour policy chief says

Jon Cruddas, who is writing Labour's general election manifesto, says there should be “no more outsourcing” of public services to firms that seek to make money rather than achieving a “social purpose”



By Ben Riley-Smith, Political Correspondent

5:34PM GMT 15 Feb 2015

Follow

CommentsComments





Private companies motivated by profit should be stripped of billions of pounds worth of government contracts, Ed Miliband’s top policy chief has said.


Jon Cruddas, who is helping to write Labour's general election manifesto, said there should be “no more outsourcing” of public services to firms that seek to make money rather than achieving a “social purpose”.


The Labour frontbencher also said it was “staggering” that 20 companies receive £10 billion of government money to help deliver services in the public sector.


The comments undermine the Labour leadership’s attempts to prove it is not anti-business after weeks of public criticism from executives and top donors.


It raises the prospect of those companies with the biggest government contracts – among them Vodafone, BT, Hewlett-Packard and DHL – losing deals if Labour takes office, potentially affecting tens of thousands of j



Mr Cruddas made the remarks in a new book entitled ‘Blue Labour: Forging a new politics’, due out next month.

In a chapter seen by The Telegraph entitled ‘The Common Good in an Age of Austerity’, Mr Cruddas outlines how he wants the Labour Party to change in the wake of the 2008 financial crash.

“In this circumstance Labour’s politics of the common good requires three big changes,” Mr Cruddas writes. “First, no more top-down re-organisation. Instead, locally run and organised schools, hospitals, house-building programmes and habitats.

“Second, no more outsourcing of relational services to those parts of the private sector that are driven purely by corporate profit rather than a social purpose. It is quite staggering that some £10 billion of public contracts – of taxpayers’ money – are allocated to some 20 private companies.

“Rather, we need to forge cooperative ties with ethical enterprise – such as cooperatives, mutuals, and social businesses.” The third change proposed is to give councils more spending powers.

He calls on Labour to pursue "big reforms without big money" and "to contest the very foundations of economic liberalism" - the principle of individualism that underpins free trade and open markets.

The 20 private companies with the biggest government contracts are: Airwave, Amey, Atkins, Atos, Babcock, BT, Capita, CapGemini, CGI, DHL, G4S, HP, Interserve, Lockheed Martin, Mitie, Serco, Sodexo, Steria, Teleral Trillium, Vodafone.

Between them they employ hundreds of thousands of British workers and generate billions of pounds for the country’s economy.

Peter Bone, the Conservative MP for Wellingborough, said: "This Labour Party is one of the most Left-wing Labour parties we have ever seen. They put up a veneer of sensibility but what they really believe is in pure socialism.”

A Labour spokesman said: “Labour’s plan for creating wealth does not rely on just a few at the very top - unlike the Conservatives - but on boosting productivity in every business and sector of the British economy.”

Mr Miliband has been forced to defend himself in recent days following claims that his party is not on the side of big business following a public row with a series of company chiefs.

A number of the country’s most senior business leaders have accused Mr Miliband of attempting to shut down debate after the Labour leader rounded on Stefano Pessina, the chief executive of Boots, who said a Labour Government would be a “catastrophe” for Britain.

Labour will today [MONDAY] announce plans to support small businesses by putting them “first in line for tax cuts” and cutting and then freezing business rates.

Ed Balls, the shadow chancellor, will also announce plans to tack late payments to small firms by big businesses.

It came as Mr Balls said that he may close a tax loophole used by Mr Miliband, after insisting he would crack down on "aggressive tax avoidance".

The Shadow Chancellor failed to back the Labour leader’s over his family’s use of a “deed of variation”, which changed his father’s will posthumously to minimise the amount paid in inheritance tax.