Celebrity Tax Avoidance

  • Page

    of 9 First / Last

    Previous
  • gang_of_bitches 21 Jun 2012 10:01:43 5,633 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    So Jimmy Carr has accepted that this sort of thing is not cool, will be interesting to see if others follow suit. Better late than never I guess and a PR masterclass in defusing a situation that could have been pretty damaging.

    While the 250ish million said to be tied up in these schemes isn't exactly a drop in the ocean, it does look like a bit of a smokescreen (for doctors, Argentina, the Euro crisis- who knows?). And why single out, or at least highlight Carr, when Barlow et al are doing the same thing? I'm sure it has nothing to do with one presenting a satirical show that has a pretty obvious left wing bias and the other being a tory supporter.
  • Deleted user 21 June 2012 10:03:11
    Good luck to them, it'll be closed soon anyway.
  • Zomoniac 21 Jun 2012 10:05:30 7,852 posts
    Seen 43 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    I'm more disappointed at how easily he's backed down than anything to be honest. In his position I'd have just said "yeah, I've optimised my tax return for my personal gain, because I can. When your non-dom donor friends and the likes of Vodafone start paying their tax, come back to me and we can talk".
  • RedSparrows 21 Jun 2012 10:05:38 23,257 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Never liked Carr much. /pitchforks

    Still, Trident and corporate tax are the big money sinks.
  • craigy Staff 21 Jun 2012 10:06:48 7,718 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Related:
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9346081/Doctors-strike-live.html
  • gang_of_bitches 21 Jun 2012 10:07:15 5,633 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    @Zomoniac

    But when the 10 o'clock show spends half it's time giving people shit about not paying their taxes that's not a tenable position.
  • sport 21 Jun 2012 10:09:05 12,775 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Fuck the tax man! Fight the power!
  • Deleted user 21 June 2012 10:09:33
    He has been paying his taxes.
  • Deleted user 21 June 2012 10:11:44
    I find this whole situation laughable.

    Anyone that's self-employed hires an accountant to maximise their earnings through any legal means. That's all he's done.

    Fair play to him I say.
  • sport 21 Jun 2012 10:11:57 12,775 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    You can always spot whose self-employed when tax discussions arise :-)
  • TheSaint 21 Jun 2012 10:14:56 14,606 posts
    Seen 24 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    As far as I can tell Carr seems to have become the focus of the story due to the 'Twitter backlash'. I'd have much rather seen those smug cunts Take That brought down a peg or two.
  • Dougs 21 Jun 2012 10:17:18 68,380 posts
    Seen 37 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Ah, but the PM hasn't had time to look at that one. Of course he hasn't.
  • Fab4 21 Jun 2012 10:17:22 6,114 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Its always a dodgy path to take, making laws based on 'morality'. It was a legal method of avoiding tax, if HMRC deem it improper then let them close it and reclaim the tax that should have been paid. Until then, good luck to anyone who can get away with it.
  • Deleted user 21 June 2012 10:18:07
    sport wrote:
    You can always spot whose self-employed when tax discussions arise :-)
    I'm not self employed.
  • DaM 21 Jun 2012 10:19:06 13,329 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    CrispyXUK wrote:
    Good luck to them, it'll be closed soon anyway.
    You would hope so, but a lot of Rangers issues have come from a tax case hanging over them, that the HMRC was expected to win, where they were paying their players salary top ups via EBTs - Employee Benefit Trusts - essentially the same as this dodge, being given a tax-free "loan" by a trust.

    Rangers were doing this since the 90s. So I don't think it's a big shock to the authorities, they've known about it for years. It's as if they have to go after them one by one through the courts, instead of getting the law changed.
  • DaM 21 Jun 2012 10:21:31 13,329 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    HairyArse wrote:
    sport wrote:
    You can always spot whose self-employed when tax discussions arise :-)
    I'm not self employed.
    He's employed by an off-shore trust, which lends him money ;)
  • sport 21 Jun 2012 10:23:06 12,775 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    DaM wrote:
    HairyArse wrote:
    sport wrote:
    You can always spot whose self-employed when tax discussions arise :-)
    I'm not self employed.
    He's employed by an off-shore trust, which lends him money ;)
    HairyArse, you ol dog you!
  • mrpon 21 Jun 2012 10:24:42 29,184 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    AllAboutTheGains

    Give yourself 5 or gig, you're worth it.

  • gang_of_bitches 21 Jun 2012 10:27:40 5,633 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Fab4 wrote:
    Its always a dodgy path to take, making laws based on 'morality'. It was a legal method of avoiding tax, if HMRC deem it improper then let them close it and reclaim the tax that should have been paid. Until then, good luck to anyone who can get away with it.
    But as was said by some guy at the Telegraph, you shouldn't expect, or even want the government to legislate against everything that's immoral, he used the example of infidelity to make his point.

    It's very obvious that this is very sharp practice and is undertaken solely to avoid making a proportionate contribution.
  • Rusty_M 21 Jun 2012 10:28:23 4,762 posts
    Seen 9 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    He'd probably lose more money with the loss on public favour by staying in the scheme than he'll pay in tax coming out.

    Fair play

    The world is going mad. Me? I'm doing fine.

  • Zomoniac 21 Jun 2012 10:30:30 7,852 posts
    Seen 43 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    gang_of_bitches wrote:
    Fab4 wrote:
    Its always a dodgy path to take, making laws based on 'morality'. It was a legal method of avoiding tax, if HMRC deem it improper then let them close it and reclaim the tax that should have been paid. Until then, good luck to anyone who can get away with it.
    But as was said by some guy at the Telegraph, you shouldn't expect, or even want the government to legislate against everything that's immoral, he used the example of infidelity to make his point.

    It's very obvious that this is very sharp practice and is undertaken solely to avoid making a proportionate contribution.
    You would think that "making sure you pay the government what you owe" is something that could be justifiably legislated for.
  • Deleted user 21 June 2012 10:33:17
    mrpon wrote:
    AllAboutTheGains
    Ha. I wish.
  • Inertia 21 Jun 2012 10:34:23 677 posts
    Seen 2 months ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    @Fab4

    So slavery was great when it was legal. But unconscionable when illegal. I think someone earning more than 3 million should pay more than 3500 tax whether that is the law or not.

    By the way this scheme could be eligible to tax according to the government so it has been a case, maybe, of getting away with it rather than it being legal.

    This is the problem with a legal system that if the law doesn't prevent something it is ok to go ahead and do it. The law is constantly changing because things are constantly being exploited and is far from ok to keep doing.
  • gang_of_bitches 21 Jun 2012 10:35:27 5,633 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Zomoniac wrote:
    gang_of_bitches wrote:
    Fab4 wrote:
    Its always a dodgy path to take, making laws based on 'morality'. It was a legal method of avoiding tax, if HMRC deem it improper then let them close it and reclaim the tax that should have been paid. Until then, good luck to anyone who can get away with it.
    But as was said by some guy at the Telegraph, you shouldn't expect, or even want the government to legislate against everything that's immoral, he used the example of infidelity to make his point.

    It's very obvious that this is very sharp practice and is undertaken solely to avoid making a proportionate contribution.
    You would think that "making sure you pay the government what you owe" is something that could be justifiably legislated for.
    Do you have any idea how much time a legion of tax accountants spend trying to find loopholes in tax laws? It would take up a very large amount of time and money identifying and closing those loopholes, and as soon as one is found it will be on to the next. The only solution I can see is to say everyone is obliged to work within the standard tax framework unless they can demonstrate a clear reason why they should be allowed to act otherwise.

    Edited by gang_of_bitches at 10:37:12 21-06-2012
  • Dougs 21 Jun 2012 10:36:33 68,380 posts
    Seen 37 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Cameron's line is hilarious though. I look forward to him passing similar comment on all Tory party donors and that of his Cabinet.
  • THFourteen 21 Jun 2012 10:37:23 33,821 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    fucking tax

    why should i have to pay that much of my salary away so layabouts can get free houses and benefits.
  • Dougs 21 Jun 2012 10:39:27 68,380 posts
    Seen 37 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    /not biting
  • Deckard1 21 Jun 2012 10:40:32 28,704 posts
    Seen 42 minutes ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    Yeah fuck Take That!!!
  • glaeken 21 Jun 2012 10:41:53 11,221 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Zomoniac wrote:
    I'm more disappointed at how easily he's backed down than anything to be honest. In his position I'd have just said "yeah, I've optimised my tax return for my personal gain, because I can. When your non-dom donor friends and the likes of Vodafone start paying their tax, come back to me and we can talk".
    So we can only tackle one issue at a time? We can have a multi-pronged approach you know.

    Anyway from what they have been saying on this tax avoidance from the wealthy is actually the bulk of the revenue that is being lost. They were saying on Sky news 7 billion pounds is being lost through tax avoidance by the wealthy and businesses but of this over half is actually down to the wealthy. Yes as individuals no single one may be as big as something like Vodafone but as a whole they are more significant.
  • Page

    of 9 First / Last

    Previous
Log in or register to reply