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.

Hey what about Tarzan,

Sorry that honest upright gentleman Boris.

Ken Livingstone has gone on Russia Today to call for Cameron to be jailed over his taxes. That is the same Ken Livingstone who sheltered his earnings in a company so he could save £1,000-a-week in tax. Ken paid 21% corporation tax rate on £319,478 of earnings by invoicing to Silveta Ltd, instead of paying the 50% top rate of income tax. He also owned 99% of a similar company twice prosecuted for non-payment of taxes. Ken’s effective tax rate in 2012 was 14.5%.

Dear Freda is there actually anyone on this Planet that you approve of . I hate Ken Livingston another who should be shot .

VIC Fred hates the UK same as his hero Corbyn .

Ken Livingstone ,the less said the better.

I think his misses locks him in the cellar , with drink .

Hays,

Livingston seems to adhere to your standards.

JB.

Mind reading again.

You must Psychic or a Psycho------.

Hays
Yes Cameron just as bad as Livingston. We're pissed with Cameron because he did nothing to stop the offshoring and tax evasion. Avoiding taxes effect government funds back home. It reflects especially bad on the UK because our government knowingly allows the BVI etc to host tax avoiders from around the world. Cameron said he would act where Labour didn't. He's now caught with his pants down. Just a lying bastard.

a truism - the more complex the tax rules, the more loopholes

i don't think it's quite as easy to stop offshoring as you might imagine, and there are often perfectly legit reasons for doing so
i see no problem with this as long as these assets are declared, which i believe is mandatory both in uk and usa
however, it should not be forgotten that most if not all offshore havens are sovereign states or at least autonomous and will have their own rules with regard to client confidentiality, disclosure and similar

Manuel.

I thought, at the time, that the membership of the EU was expanded too rapidly rather than letting it bed down and some of the political and administration problems to be sorted out.

(I posted such at the time.)

If you go back and have a look at the period, have a look at who was one of the most vociferous members pushing for the expansion.

Also, question what were the probable reasons for wishing the "expansion".

-=====

Immigration to Germany will benefit its economy as it did in the 70 and 80s. Many of the immigrants settle down and integrated into the economy and society remaining there. Some returned to their respective countries.

Immigrants in the 50s, 60s and 70s and since then, has benefitted the UK economy and when you see the second and third generations integrating and providing a large percentage of professionals and skilled labour in the UK again you see the benefit.

Asked your daughter, how many of her colleagues are "second or third generation" immigrants.

But I can still remember the racist chants and obnoxious behaviour of some of the indigenous population.

Many of the postings on this thread remind me of the rants and behaviour over that period.

-=-=-=-=

Not all politicians are crooks, but there are a few too many crooks who are MPs.

.

We could stop BVI being used and it would not change anything. There are lots of other places that are not under our control. Cameron has done nothing wrong. All the necessary taxes were paid. The overseas trust that Cameron had shares in was not set up to avoid tax and it did not. A lot of fuss about nothing.

You sure it's the computer .

Cynic
Just because it may not be easy doen't make it OK.
People worldwide are pissed when they see the greed of the those that have lost their moral compass. We want our politicians to do something.

69866 - times and circumstances change .......

the eu legislature or whatever less polite name you wish to call it, is far too cumbersome and unwieldy ........ more importantly, because it makes it own rules, sets its own salaries and benefits and everything else, it has not the slightest interest (or intent) of upsetting the cosy status quo

Hays
Not true. The UK could clean up a big chunk of off shoring.The overseas trust was set up as a means to avoid taxes if an individual wanted. Many did/do. Dave boy maybe didn't (the jury is still out) but the off shore trust was set up to allow tax avoidance. It was left up to individuals to do it or not. Cameron and others Labour governments before, could close it down. The public will demand it in time.

wil - uk trust rules and laws change regularly ....... for a great many decades and even a century or 3, trusts have been a legit way of shielding family money from the taxman

however, trusts are awkward and expensive to set up and administer and i think are becoming less efficient and therefore less popular
goody goody, you may think

however, there are plenty of other ways of legitimately avoiding the taxman as a great many very ordinary people already do ..... and as outlined in a post of mine a day or two ago

The trust was set up to trade in US stocks after deregulation. It had nothing to do with tax avoidance.

There are are more trusts set up here than abroad to avoid tax. It s very common for well of people to set up trusts in favour of their children and are perfectly legal. You can give any amount to anyone if you survive the gift by 7 years. That is essentially what a trust is.

Panama Papers:

David Cameron's approval ratings drop below Jeremy Corbyn's as he faces inquiry into undeclared stake in offshore trust



David Cameron, pictured in Oxfordshire today, has seen his approval ratings fall below those of Jeremy Corbyn, inset Credit: David Hartley




By Ben Riley-Smith and
Michael Wilkinson
8 April 2016 • 5:33pm


Exclusive: David Cameron's 'hypocrisy' after he ordered all parliamentary candidates to reveal their tax affairs




David Cameron has been accused of “hypocrisy” by Tory MPs after it emerged he ordered all parliamentary candidates to reveal their tax affairs just months after selling off his stake in an offshore trust for £30,000.

The Telegraph has learnt that all of the Conservative Party’s candidates for the 2010 general election were told to reveal private details of their financial situation and promise to pay full UK tax while in Parliament.

The document was circulated in March 2010 – just two months after Mr Cameron has now revealed he sold off a stake of the Bahamas trust set up by his father.

It is not clear whether Mr Cameron, leader of the opposition at the time, filled out the form or detailed the money he had made from the offshore trust at the time.

Three Tory MPs confirmed to this newspaper they signed the declaration with one saying it was made clear not agreeing to do so would be “career-ending”.

It is understood to have been circulated in the wake of a row over Tory donor Lord Ashcroft's "non-domiciled" tax status in the UK.

There is frustration in some quarters about the demand, circulated by Conservative Campaign Headquarters (CCHQ), given what is now known about Mr Cameron’s offshore arrangements.

“It is hypocrisy”, said one Tory MP, adding: “What other definition do you have for when you tell people they've got to do one thing and do the exactly opposite yourself."



More:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/08/panama-papers--david-cameron-admits-he-profited-from-fathers-off/

cynic
I'm not complaining about pensions allowances, sipps, sass, capital gain allowances and such, these are available, transparent and accepted by hmrc. We all know about them and they are legal. Even with these some people have to have more and more and more....

Hays
Uk trusst are set up under hmrc rules. The 7 year inheritance gift is transparent and open to all.
Cameron seniors off shore trust was a facility set up to allow those that wished to avoid uk taxes on the profits made by the trust. The trust paid no uk tax and operated in the Bahamas with a zero corporate tax. The trust operations were controlled by the uk directors. As an off shore company they did not have to inform hmrc who their investors were. They would have a good idea that the clients might take profits back to the uk and not declare capital gain profits. Note. Davy boys capital gains just fell under the allowance. Investors could go to the Bahamas take out profits and do what they wanted, no tax payable. This is a classic tax avoidance scam. And Davey boy knows it. The sort of off shore trust Cameron promised to close down.