The official Sunday Times report

[jamesbrown]

Pre-2010 is over 6 years ago so they can say they don't have the records.

True, but I doubt that will wash TBH. The 2009/10 record keeping requirement for self-employed income is 31 Jan 2016, but much shorter in the absence of self-employed income (22 mo). However, he'd be taking a risk to deny that they were available, or the raw data. Also, there will be specific questions about offshore income ("do you deny this?" Etc.). He's in a tough spot if there's anything dodgy. Pretty silly though, IMO; where does it end? Nothing is going to satisfy Labour and the Brexit press.

[AtW]

Pre-2010 is over 6 years ago so they can say they don't have the records.

But he is releasing summaries (not even details) of tax returns - those are kept by HMRC, I can access mine I think as far back as 2002!

Notice how he gave summaries only, that's to hide amount of dividends he was receiving, even the total amount was given away I think!

[SueEllen]

I actually expect the front bench to be clean and the only dirty person has already resigned citing something else.

[AtW]

I actually expect the front bench to be clean and the only dirty person has already resigned citing something else.

But the Great Leader isn't...

[SueEllen]

But the Great Leader isn't...

Sorry I should have put "clean" in quotes as I mean successfully hidden. I wonder what their wives tax returns look like....

[Forgotmylogin]

I doubt there's any way to please some people. No matter how much information is released - full access to all bank details for all years for his whole family, some would still accuse him of hiding something.

Why don't you put up or shut up? Publicly accuse him of tax evasion and let him sue you for libel.

No, much easier to make snarky comments, and throw in a large portion of ignorance to whit.

[AtW]

some would still accuse him of hiding something.

At the moment accusations look pretty credible and denials ain't.

Why don't you put up or shut up? Publicly accuse him of tax evasion and let him sue you for libel.

No, much easier to make snarky comments, and throw in a large portion of ignorance to whit.

He is PM of a country with massive budget deficit, he (and chancellor) make up a lot from dealing with aggressive tax avoidance, yet it turns out his dad used offshore and PM benefited from it - he gives some summaries from tax returns which conveniently hide data about dividends he received during years before he sold, so we don't know for sure if his sale price of £30k (him and his wife) is true market price at the time.

Personally I find it hard to believe that his shares would be worth so little in what appears to be multi-million offshore fund, did his father hate him or what? £30k worth of shares implies annual dividend of £1500 for 5% yield, or £3000 for 10% yield - are you seriously saying that he was only getting £3k dividend owning those shares??? If that was the case he'd publish and everybody would relax - £3k is nothing, but I reckon the figure is at least 10 times higher.

[jamesbrown]

You couldn't make it up:

HMRC chief was partner at law firm that acted for Cameron offshore fund | Politics | The Guardian

[AtW]

You couldn't make it up:

HMRC chief was partner at law firm that acted for Cameron offshore fund | Politics | The Guardian

They are all in it together... at the same time those feckers increase taxes on us

[SueEllen]

You couldn't make it up:

HMRC chief was partner at law firm that acted for Cameron offshore fund | Politics | The Guardian

Yes you could.

I'm surprised there isn't a film or TV series about this already.