Tax Avoidance 101: Investing in British film

[Lateralthinking1]

I think you'll find that those MPs who fiddled their expenses, and were caught, did break the law which is why some went to prison!

Yes indeed. Was it four out of 600? I think there were 50 saints.

I really don't know what you mean by 'a cross court volley' in this instance........it's not people like Carr that should be hounded, but Cameron for having the power to do something about his sudden and politically-convenient 'moral' concern about the rich 'dodging their tax responsibilities'.

Carr was the "exposed by the media" opponent. Others said that Cameron was the real opponent and sitting at the net. They were - and are - trying to turn the court at right angles. Both are equally opponents in my book.

The private sector argues that it is capable of self-regulation and hence doesn't need excessive regulating. We used to see in my line of work how explosives were placed in packaging that went far beyond the legal requirements because it was in the industry's own interests to do so. We need to get to the same state of affairs in light entertainment. That won't happen as long as the general public find downright perverse examples of victimhood and plead on their behalves.

I had to google 'Lily Allen'

I wouldn't be paid to own one of her records. However, I'm pleased to see that she has inherited some of her father's maverick malevolence. It is more often than not well placed and dodgy types wouldn't want to bump into him on a dark night (or her).

steal

....awful, genuinely, but given the amounts involved, they are mostly not involved in indirect premeditated murder. There is no poetic licence in the last sentence. People are dying because of insufficient money for our support services.

[scottycelt]

Yes indeed. Was it four out of 600? I think there were 50 saints.



Carr was the "exposed by the media" opponent. Others said that Cameron was the real opponent and sitting at the net. They were - and are - trying to turn the court at right angles. Both are equally opponents in my book.

The private sector argues that it is capable of self-regulation and hence doesn't need excessive regulating. We used to see in my line of work how explosives were placed in packaging that went far beyond the legal requirements because it was in the industry's own interests to do so. We need to get to the same state of affairs in light entertainment. That won't happen as long as the general public find downright perverse examples of victimhood and plead on their behalves.



I wouldn't be paid to own one of her records. However, I'm pleased to see that she has inherited some of her father's maverick malevolence. It is more often than not well placed and dodgy types wouldn't want to bump into him on a dark night (or her).



....awful, genuinely, but given the amounts involved, they are mostly not involved in indirect premeditated murder. There is no poetic licence in the last sentence. People are dying because of insufficient money for our support services.

So now these perfectly legal 'tax-avoidance' schemes are akin to 'indirect premeditated murder' ..?

Best leave it at that, I think, Lat ...

[Lateralthinking1]

So now these perfectly legal 'tax-avoidance' schemes are akin to 'indirect premeditated murder' ..?

Yes absolutely. There isn't a shadow of doubt in my mind.

Tax avoiders who vehemently oppose tax evasion need to ask themselves whether their vehemence on the awfulness of evasion is:

(a) purely about other people breaking the law, just like dropping a sweet wrapper on the pavement or

(b) also about the human importance of protecting hospitals, schools, the disabled, the elderly, the poor etc.

If there is any element of (b) at all, then the rigid and exclusive defence of avoidance on strictly legal grounds is tripe.

(I pledge here that if I win £5m on the lottery, I will immediately hand over voluntarily £3m to the Government with no strings attached. They may well use some of the money for all kinds of terrible things but, on balance, it would also help the severely disadvantaged through the prism of democracy, so far as we have it. And it would be devoid of selfishness and ego. Incidentally, I have no handed down religion although I have my own version of a faith. In some ways, it is basic common sense.)

[Vile Consort]

I would be very surprised if the K2 scheme that Carr was using is found to be legal. It involved lying about the nature of the payment being made - i.e. saying it was a loan when clearly it was nothing of the kind.

[french frank]

If any sort of method of paying less tax is legal it is a bit rich (sorry!) to then accuse someone taking advantage of that as being 'immoral'.

But morality and legality aren't the same thing: there's no general law against telling lies or deceiving people, for instance. However, in this case it probably has more to do with stupidity than immorality: he really didn't realise it was a dodgy tax avoidance scheme.

[Lateralthinking1]

But morality and legality aren't the same thing: there's no general law against telling lies or deceiving people, for instance. However, in this case it probably has more to do with stupidity than immorality: he really didn't realise it was a dodgy tax avoidance scheme.

Yes, I haven't commented on this forum specifically about the K2 scheme, of which I know little, or what knowledge of that scheme Carr had or didn't have, or any cause or effect of those specific dealings. I know that I find him morally repugnant in any case. On the basis of what we have heard this week in the media and from the Prime Minister, together with an absence of denial of the facts as presented, that perception has felt fully justified.

Clearly the events surrounding Carr have been a natural springboard for discussion about what we know to be tax avoiding schemes - what was described in an earlier post as 'these schemes', the extent of entertainers' values and principles, and integrity in the round. More broadly, since I left employment, we have all acquired more of a sense of the scale of avoidance. I feel that I was in a different world there. We were hoodwinked and I'm thoroughly appalled.

I said that I'd hand lottery winnings to the Government with no strings attached. What I'd do is hold a press conference first. I'd say that my wish would be for the spending to be on the disadvantaged but that MPs had the choice. I'd also express the hope that they would later produce a statement on what the money was spent on but, again, no obligations. There would be another press conference at the end of the year. The process would be presented as having been an opportunity for MPs and others to show that they could clean up their act and start to see themselves as giving to, as well as taking from, their community.

My tax was deducted at source in 1985-2010 and for approximately another two years earlier. In my one year of self-assessment, 2010-2011, I estimate that I consciously paid slightly more tax than necessary while facing a future of no further income.

[handsomefortune]

someone's responded to marina hyde's article that "hypocrisy is the vaseline of political intercourse".

is lip balm the same?

[Serial_Apologist]

someone's responded to marina hyde's article that "hypocrisy is the vaseline of political intercourse".

is lip balm the same?

It used to be called lip salve...

[Resurrection Man]

......
I'm not supporting these tax schemes, of course they should be made illegal, and Cameron, instead of pontificating about other people's 'morality', has the real power to do something about them!

Which tax schemes? What is the difference between these and an ISA? Both avoid paying tax within the letter of the law.

[Resurrection Man]

....People are dying because of insufficient money for our support services.

Do you actually have any hard, unbiased evidence to support this statement?