Socialist tax efficiency

[original PM]

Which I think is exactly what the definition of tax planning is - using the law in the way it was intended. Tax avoidance is using the law in ways parliament did not intend.

But even if this definition is accepted - is using a deed of variation to redefine a will to reduce inheritance tax, or the use of offshore trusts to also reduce inheritance tax - is that really what parliament intended.

The thing is laws are written to be obeyed to the letter and not to the spirit.

If someone is not going to put the time and effort to think things through when creating or updating laws then people will take advantage.

Obviously bringing in a poorly worded law with a nod and a wink to your mates to take advantage before the loophole is closed is different but.....

[Zero Liability]

Which I think is exactly what the definition of tax planning is - using the law in the way it was intended. Tax avoidance is using the law in ways parliament did not intend.

But even if this definition is accepted - is using a deed of variation to redefine a will to reduce inheritance tax, or the use of offshore trusts to also reduce inheritance tax - is that really what parliament intended.

We can't divine their intentions. Like Original PM said, if they can't write them properly, it's their own fault. The rule of law can't rely on the subjective whims of parliament. They concocted this monstrously complex tax and benefit system, well sorry, this is one of the consequences of that. My only hope is that they are challenged at every step of the way through their own legal system.

[eek]

We can't divine their intentions. Like Original PM said, if they can't write them properly, it's their own fault. The rule of law can't rely on the subjective whims of parliament. They concocted this monstrously complex tax and benefit system, well sorry, this is one of the consequences of that. My only hope is that they are challenged at every step of the way through their own legal system.

You have to question whether a deed of variation is what the writer of the will intended...

[centurian]

We can't divine their intentions. Like Original PM said, if they can't write them properly, it's their own fault. The rule of law can't rely on the subjective whims of parliament. They concocted this monstrously complex tax and benefit system, well sorry, this is one of the consequences of that. My only hope is that they are challenged at every step of the way through their own legal system.

I think anyone approaching average intelligence can quite capably work out the difference

However, my point was that even accepting this distinction between tax planning and tax avoidance, both Miliband an Cameron can be accused of engaging in tax avoidance (not tax planning) in respect of inheritance gains

[Zero Liability]

Possibly, but it's not like they'll ever see any repercussions for it. MPs and high ranking bureaucrats operate in an orbit of their own, and are shielded from their own laws and policy proscriptions. It's a good point but I've never doubted that they're utter hypocrites, amongst other things.

In some cases the distinction is not clear at all, which is why courts have to be resorted to, to obtain clarification, and even following that it can remain muddied, and this is something Hector often has little issue with, as it allows them to continue doing what they do with challenges only arising on a case by case basis. Regardless of the level of intelligence it takes, if the spirit is not sufficiently enshrined in the letter of the law, it doesn't mean very much, and if they don't like that, they can always change it. I think they often want for there to be some room for interpretation, they just don't want the plebs (i.e. anyone outside the political class and its cronies) using it.

[SimonMac]

[DodgyAgent]

I cannot believe contractors are arguing about the morals of tax avoidance

It doesn't really matter if a tax avoidance scheme is simple or complex, aggressive or passive. Either you are due to pay tax on something or you are not. if complex schemes are "morally dubious" let us remember that if the tax system is in itself complex then avoidance schemes will also be complex.

Listening to contractors going down the road of trying to define the moralities between tax schemes must be a bit like listening to ISIS arguing about the moralities of different ways of killing people.

Of far more "moral" importance is what the government do with the tax we give them in the first place.

[vwdan]

I cannot believe contractors are arguing about the morals of tax avoidance

It doesn't really matter if a tax avoidance scheme is simple or complex, aggressive or passive. Either you are due to pay tax on something or you are not. if complex schemes are "morally dubious" let us remember that if the tax system is in itself complex then avoidance schemes will also be complex.

Listening to contractors going down the road of trying to define the moralities between tax schemes must be a bit like listening to ISIS arguing about the moralities of different ways of killing people.

Of far more "moral" importance is what the government do with the tax we give them in the first place.

Except this is a load of bollocks, and you know it. The vast majority of Ltd company contractors are using their companies in an extremely transparent way, in much the same way as the millions of Ltd Co. directors in the UK. HMRC would have no issue tracing money through my accounts and ensuring the correct amount of tax is paid (which it is). We're not using loopholes, complex or otherwise - we're using the vehicle exactly as intended. In fact, I'd argue that IR35 is about as close as you could get to a moral argument but I'm well outside so :shrug:

This is a whole world away from a complicated scheme that involves loans, off shore accounts and whatever the hell else these people can come up with. But, like I say, you know that.

[Project Monkey]

Tempted to share this on fb and await flak from militant socialist 'friend'

Do it! Does the friend have a pension fund?

[DodgyAgent]

Except this is a load of bollocks, and you know it. The vast majority of Ltd company contractors are using their companies in an extremely transparent way, in much the same way as the millions of Ltd Co. directors in the UK. HMRC would have no issue tracing money through my accounts and ensuring the correct amount of tax is paid (which it is). We're not using loopholes, complex or otherwise - we're using the vehicle exactly as intended. In fact, I'd argue that IR35 is about as close as you could get to a moral argument but I'm well outside so :shrug:

This is a whole world away from a complicated scheme that involves loans, off shore accounts and whatever the hell else these people can come up with. But, like I say, you know that.

You are not a proper business and therefore you should not be allowed to claim the tax friendly benefits of working as one. You do not employ people nor do you have any intention of doing so. I bet you pay little or no NI and I bet you also pay dividends. Your own position has been under considerable scrutiny from the revenue for many years and it still is. the fact that you call what you do "transparent" is neither here nor there. you are still avoiding tax using a loophole. The fact that it may be more legitimate than other schemes does not give you the right to judge others.