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.

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.

Spot on Will,

The fact that their tax rate is lower in the 1st place and secondly shifting some/all of there gains out of the Country is what most reasonable people think is wrong.

If you earn the money within this Country then it's only right that you contribute to the running of it by paying your taxes in it.

No one likes a scrounger.. especially a nasty Tory scrounger.

to my mind, i am somewhat concerned as to why this trust fund was set up in panama in the first place
more importantly, DC should have stood up at the outset and simply told the truth ....... the fallout should then have been minimal, for why should the so-called sins of the father be visited upon the son
i reckon he must have had lousy advice, which he stupidly took

cynic

Lawyers were in Panama. Trust was in Bahamas. Cameron senior knew the lawyers were dodgy as shit and wanted his money somewhere that had some sort of uk connection. But not enough of a connection to pay his taxes. One smart old fucker.

Do you mean the sins shouldn't be, but the profits can be!

I think David Cameron's father should be canonised or something similar, if he was responsible Cameron's birth.

Do you mean the sins shouldn't be, but the profits can be!

I think David Cameron's father should be canonised or something similar, if he was responsible Cameron's birth.

Will
Why should they not go to the Bahamas and do what they want with the money. You only have to pay tax on Monies that you bring back to the UK. That is not a scam.

Depends on the country where you "earn" the "cash", reside, or have benefit from.

-=-===

Guess what?

More of Dodgy Dave's funds are turning up.

-=-==

Try St Helier.

Hays

No problem with people going to Bahamas with the money they have worked for, or from profits they made from investing. A morally responsible person would pay their taxes first. If you have off shored your money, invested in a trust controlled by uk directors taken the profit and not paid tax on it, that's tax avoidance. It is my understanding that even if you spent your profits out of the country you should have declared these profits in the capital gains section of your tax in the uk.

The whole point of off shoring is to avoid tax in your home country. If an African dictator cheats his country out of tax income we are pissed off. We should certainly be pissed if the uk allows Bahamas and Bvi to be a haven for tax avoidance.

If you owned a bar in Spain and lived in the UK, paid tax on the profits in Spain and spent your profits there then would that be fine?

Hays

Not the same thing.
Both in EU.
Tax paid on earnings.

UK stockbroker sets up off shore trust. No Bahamas tax on profits. Investor has the opportunity to avoid tax on profits. A tax scam

What has EU got to do with it. How about if you owned the bar in Monaco? What about in the US?

Stop dancing around the shit pile Haystack.

You are supposed to pay tax on your world wide income, less any tax paid locally.

Dave didn't do that, he hid it.

"normal" offshore trusts are not a scam
they are perfectly legit and approved by hmrc and have been for 2/3 centuries ..... by definition, they avoid taxation until any monies are repatriated ......

if trust law is to be changed again, as it regularly is, then that is a different matter, but until then, stop griping

Cameron did pay tax on the dividends and the corporation tax was below the payable limit,

So Amazon is ok. It is based in Luxembourg which is in EU. Google is fine as it is based in Ireland in the EU.

People want it both ways. They want Starbucks to pay tax here but they are based in the US, Google and Amazon are not based here but people want them go pay tax here. We have large corporations that are based in and owned in UK so we want tax paid here despite earning money across the world.

Cynic /Hays
In Cameron seniors day a UK stockbroker would purchase shares for his clients who would hold them in their accounts. The stockbroker would pay tax on the fees he earned and the client pay tax on his profits. By setting up an off shore trust the same stockbroker can offer other perks.
1 You can send off shore cash not declared in the uk
2. Any profits you make can be hidden from hmrc
3. Said stockbroker can deduct his fees overseas and not show on his UK earnings
4. Said off shore trust can invest in a range of investments not normally offered in UK
5. Said trust can launder money for dodgy clients who might be happy to pay a bit of tax.

No One has yet come up with a simple to understand reason why an off shore trust OF THIS TYPE exists. They exist to hide something or someone.and avoid tax payable in the country that the stockbroker operates in or his clients are liable to pay tax in.

The Amazon story is different not the same.

Wil.

Agreed!

The right can wriggle all they like.. but remain guilty as charged as usual.

Stan/Fred

Don't forget Blair and especially Brown could have closed the offending loopholes but did nowt. So on this subject (tax the tax evading bastards ) they let us all down too.