Thought I'd start a new thread as this is going to be a major talking point this year...have not made up my mind yet...(unlike bucksfizz)....but thinking of voting for an exit as Europe is not doing Britain any good at all it seems....

Oh give over CT, you sound like Ken Livingstone. What is a "fair share" and a real days work? Define them. Living off the labours of the 95% ... struth. Nothing to do with investment, risk taking, entrepreneurship, management, scientific, artistic, sporting or technical skills etc then.
The top 1%, those earning more than £165k before tax, already contribute 27% of all income tax, up from 11% in the seventies, while the top 10%, pay almost 60% of all income tax collected. Do you want them to pay more and to drive them away?
Mike Ashley is worth more than 3 billion, they say. Is he living off his workers or are they living off him? Maybe they both benefit, his wealth largely being dependent upon keeping the business attractive and profitable. If you invest in his companies do you complain when the share price goes up and he is worth more on paper? The same can be said of Dyson and many other companies that started off private and went public. Without such people where would we be?

Dindinho - I never said there was anything wrong about all top 5% - all I suggested to cynic was that he should not begrudge those that choose to milk the system and not work.

As for those who`s income is more than £165k pa I bet they do not really pay 27% as a huge number of them do not declare there true income as they filter it in a various ways, including offshore trusts etc.

If the truth were known I bet the rich pay little more than 5% tax, and as for VAT - it is the everyday worker that pays the most as the rich claim it back one way or another.

If you want to know how to pay less tax legally - get good advice.

"Eductaion can be a sore subject to some"

Clearly.

China re-education school seems to be one of those very sore subjects CNG to some.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-sh/China_hidden_camps

Are Europeans more safe than Chinese citizens in their respective countries?

Is not the Euopean Parliament just as bureaucratic and only a few steps away from that of the Politburo?

food and clothes in particular
education is provided by the system

9782 - i wish i only paid 5% or even just 27% tax ...... leaving aside pensions, whose limits are already quite restricted, it is nothing like as easy as you might think to avoid tax, and certainly not to the degree you imply

cynic - bar VAT - it is very easy to pay very little by way of income tax, I can assure you, when you earn considerable sums cynic.

Just go and set up a company in the Channel Islands, and pay Zero tax on the income/profits.

so you really think it that easy do you?
well either you have done or, much more likely, you don't know what you're talking about

even if you go through that long rigmarole and worse and actually succeed, any money brought back to uk is most assuredly taxed

LOL cynic - I said nothing about bringing money back into the UK (the Channel Island are part of the UK by the way) - why would one want to do that anyway?

https://soundcloud.com/marc-mitchell/churchill-2014-our-dear-channel-islands

Slowdown in Eurozone

The purchasing managers’ index, or PMI, fell to a four-month low of 54.2 in September, down from 54.5 in August on weaker export sales, according to a poll released on Friday. Separate readings showed that new orders fell to a two-year low and firms have become reluctant to take on new staff.
The poll of business sentiment, which is seen as a barometer of economic activity by policymakers, is the latest sign that a combination of tensions between the world’s two largest economies and broader retrenchment from globalisation presents a risk to the outlook for the eurozone economy.
Chris Williamson, chief business economist at data firm IHS Markit, which compiles the index, reported a “near stagnation of exports”.
“Trade wars, Brexit, waning global demand, growing risk aversion, destocking and rising political uncertainty both within the eurozone and further afield all fuelled the slowdown in business activity,” he said.

Hardly the time to cut-off or hinder one of the eurozone's biggest trading partner and further increase unemployment, is it?

assuming there isn't forced repatriation of overseas funds, the beneficiary of same or his successors will want to use the money sooner or later

certainly trust fund regs change about every 5 years, and are exceedingly complex
thus, the cost of maintaining a trust overseas may no longer even be worthwhile

Not liked by outers on here and extremists in the States https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45949737

I agree with what you are saying about Trusts cynic, except for the mega rich but the use of companies is something completely different. For example: Channel Island companies own a large amount of property in England (London mainly) - I ask you, have the funds been transfered or do they remain with the Channel Island Company?

in the past, buying property through an offshore company avoided (evaded!) stamp duty
i think that loophole has now been stopped

it wasn't me Stan honest.

Bedtime reading for Manuel, 241. Dil,

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/23/the-guardian-view-on-the-daily-mail-and-brexit-a-very-public-shift
The Guardian view

Daily Mail
The Guardian view on the Daily Mail and Brexit: a very public shift
Editorial
A new editor has abandoned the aggressive tone with which the Mail campaigned for Brexit. This reflects a change in the public mood

Tue 23 Oct 2018 18.32 BST Last modified on Wed 24 Oct 2018 14.50 BST
Shares
3,071
Comments
2,344
Copies of the Daily Mail
Copies of the Daily Mail. ‘Former Mail heroes like Iain Duncan Smith … were dismissed as ‘vulgar bit-part players’.’ Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA
As a rule, it is a mistake for the press to write about itself. Journalists will always find journalism fascinating. But readers are not nearly so interested in media navel-gazing. If newspapers spent each day analysing one another, readers would rapidly lose interest, and rightly so. Yet the editorial in today’s Daily Mail about the Tory party and Brexit is such a striking change of course that an exception to normal self-restraint is in order.

The headline on its leader – “Saboteurs endangering the nation” – may have seemed like normal Daily Mail fare. This was the newspaper, after all, which in its “Who will speak for England?” headline in 2016 pushed David Cameron aside and placed itself firmly at the head of the leave campaign; which used stories like “Plans to let 1.5m Turks into Britain” to make leave’s final push explicitly anti-migrant; which charged Britain’s impartial judges with being “Enemies of the people” for ruling that parliament was sovereign in the Brexit process; which welcomed Theresa May’s 2017 election launch with a call to “Crush the saboteurs”; and which, under the snarling headline “Proud of yourselves?”, excoriated 11 Tory MPs who backed a meaningful vote on Brexit for their “treachery”.

Advertisement

Yet the tone and, in particular, the focus of this morning’s leader were, in fact, very different from that confident in-your-face era. Instead of firing up the Brexiters for yet another act of anti-European contempt and defiance, as it had done for so long, the Mail this week turned its fire on them instead. It denounced the “arch-Brexiteers” for their “self-promotion and peacocking” and their efforts to undermine Mrs May. Former Mail heroes like Iain Duncan Smith, David Davis and Mr Johnson were dismissed as “vulgar bit-part players” and “back-stabbing plotters”, compared unfavourably with Brexit secretary Dominic Raab – “grown in stature” – and above all Mrs May, “the only person” who can secure an “acceptable outcome” and “sensible deal”.


Sign up to the Media Briefing: news for the news-makers
Read more
Such language is not just a media milestone. It is also a political one. The Mail is in many ways what it was from the start in 1896: a very brilliant newspaper. But at many points in its history – from Lord Northcliffe’s warmongering before and after 1914, through its publication of the Zinoviev letter forgery in the 1920s to discredit Labour, to its support for fascism under Lord Rothermere in the 1930s, it has also been a reckless political protagonist. So it has been, once again, in our own time. The Mail has been a propagandist for Brexit and for a radical reactionary Tory tradition that looks back to empire and Margaret Thatcher as its guiding lights. The rage and aggression that marked its advocacy of Brexit were absolutely in the Northcliffe tradition. But, like him, they left an indelible mark for the worse in politics and public life. The shockingly violent remarks by Tory MPs about Mrs May this week are part of this legacy. So is the gross Brexit-derived insult to the family of a seriously sick child by Mr Davis’s former chief of staff this week.

The easy explanation for this shift would be to attribute it to the new editor, Geordie Greig, who replaced Paul Dacre last month after a 26-year reign. That is a big factor. But the deeper reason is that the national mood is changing. Brexit is becoming a burden on Britain. Doubts about the future are deepening. Last Saturday, parts of middle Britain to which the Mail does not speak took to the streets against Brexit. Today, police leaders, medicine distributors and scientists were the latest to voice Brexit concerns. Meanwhile the cabinet went on squabbling at home and Liam Fox continued chasing a fantasy trade deal with Donald Trump abroad.

Fanatics are often the last to see that their dreams have turned to nightmares. But the British public, who are not fanatics, get it. So, belatedly, does a Mail that drove so hard to the cliff edge. The message has yet to reach many Tories. But they risk being swept aside if it doesn’t. The hard Brexiters are on the run.

I don't read any papers Fred so they can write whatever they want as far as I'm concerned.

Does Labour want Brexit or not Fred?

Does Labour want to remain in the EU?

Oh, its one of those questions you and your leader have a problem answering - as they are not sure what their labour voters would do if they jumped or should I say put a toe in the water let alone jumping one way or another.

JC is such a wet anyway so keeps clear of all water.

Dil,

P 9797

That seems fairly obvious.

Yesterday's news Fred