Dragons den last night

[Sockpuppet]

If you have turned over 180k, then in my book you shouldn't be on benefits, creative accounting was the only reason she still was

Its her duty to do the best she can. She did nothing illegal. She could have done nothing and stayed on benefits.

Do you apply IR35 to your limited? Of course you don't! If the government implified the rules and behaved fairly instead of squeezing us covertly for every penny - then they would get alot more tax revenue.

I don't like what she's doing but I can't fault her. She does have 4 kids here.

I had a mate who was on benefits and he openly admitted he was better off on benefits.

He worked 25 hours a week in a local shop then didn't do any more. Was offered the managers job but he couldn't take it as he was be worse off financially.

Benefits should be a sliding scale so that you get help when you need it but your never better off then when you are working.

[BrilloPad]

I don't like what she's doing but I can't fault her. She does have 4 kids here.

I had a mate who was on benefits and he openly admitted he was better off on benefits.

He worked 25 hours a week in a local shop then didn't do any more. Was offered the managers job but he couldn't take it as he was be worse off financially.

Benefits should be a sliding scale so that you get help when you need it but your never better off then when you are working.

SockPuppet for PM!

[Bagpuss]

She has a business from which she can take a salary, she didn't so she can remain on benefit. She had a business which she sold, and is taking the payment as installments so she can remain on benefits.
That is fraud on two counts or if not it's morally corrupt.

[DimPrawn]

I don't like what she's doing but I can't fault her. She does have 4 kids here.

I had a mate who was on benefits and he openly admitted he was better off on benefits.

He worked 25 hours a week in a local shop then didn't do any more. Was offered the managers job but he couldn't take it as he was be worse off financially.

Benefits should be a sliding scale so that you get help when you need it but your never better off then when you are working.

Or up national min wage to £40/hr and then no one is better of on benefits.

[BrilloPad]

She has a business from which she can take a salary, she didn't so she can remain on benefit. She had a business which she sold, and is taking the payment as installments so she can remain on benefits.
That is fraud on two counts or if not it's morally corrupt.

The DRagons (Theo/Peter) argued over the legality - came to conclusion it is legal.

Morally Corrupt? Not nearly as morally corrupt as current government.

[Sockpuppet]

She has a business from which she can take a salary, she didn't so she can remain on benefit. She had a business which she sold, and is taking the payment as installments so she can remain on benefits.
That is fraud on two counts or if not it's morally corrupt.

No more so than a private equity firm buying a company then transferring the debt to it as a CT offset.

[Bagpuss]

It may be lawful, but it shouldn't be, sounded like she had been at it for years. Benefits should be for the disabled and the old, i.e. those who can't work and need help. People like her are the sort who park in disabled bays. I guess it dooesn't matter that someone who needs the money might freeze this winter because the couldn't heat the house.

[dang65]

The DRagons (Theo/Peter) argued over the legality - came to conclusion it is legal.

Morally Corrupt? Not nearly as morally corrupt as current government.

I didn't see Dragon's Den, but it sounds like what she's doing would be similar to J K Rowling writing Harry Potter while on benefits. Or bands learning to play and writing their first album while on benefits.

[Bagpuss]

I didn't see Dragon's Den, but it sounds like what she's doing would be similar to J K Rowling writing Harry Potter while on benefits. Or bands learning to play and writing their first album while on benefits.

How can it be? they have generated no cash. By admission she had a significant turnover on ebay for a fair few years before going ltd but decided she would use the state as a free loans/subsidy for her business. She decided not to take money out of the business because she deemed the state to be her provider. This is not the intention of a social security safety net. It is the same as someone with significant money in the bank claiming benefits by signing it over to relative i.e. fraud

[DodgyAgent]

. Benefits should be for the disabled and the old, i.e. those who can't work and need help.