Originally posted by AtW
View Post
-
There's no tax on fantasy island..... -
What about divorces though?Originally posted by DimPrawn View Post
I assume you've insisted on formal prenup agreement before saying YES.
Comment
-
Unfortunately they tend to have a property in England and childrenOriginally posted by AtW View PostWhat about divorces though?
I assume you've insisted on formal prenup agreement before saying YES."You’re just a bad memory who doesn’t know when to go away" JRComment
-
Well I find myself wholeheartedly agreeing with Sas.
Other people have expressed more or less my entire argument. The case doesn't really affect me, however they should have done due diligence on the scheme before they entered. They can't say retrospection wasn't a possibility because the precedent was set with the Finance Act (No. 2) 1987. The intention of that legislation was that UK residents were not able to exploit double taxation treaties with regards to overseas 'partnerships'. Just because the scheme attempts to circumvent the law as written down with some constructive structuring of links in the chain, you can't deny that it is clearly subverting the intention of the law.
Another point, stop getting on at HMRC as if they have some vendetta against you, they are charged with collecting revenue for the UK as the laws of the land set out. If you have a beef then you have it with New Labour who enacted it, HMRC are purely the enforcement mechanism. Stop bleating on about your Human Rights as well, the ECHR was set up to enshrine the rights of humanity after the horrors of the first and second world wars. Preventing the persecution and genocide of a race of people is an example of protection of Human Rights, being used to argue a point that you should be paying less tax through an unregulated tax avoidance scheme is not. How on earth you can look at yourself in the mirror when you think your case compares to that of families being dragged from their homes, shipped off to concentration camps and then gassed as if they were no more than cattle really does gall me and is just a clear example of the 'me, me, me' culture that these schemes seem to thrive upon.
Incorrect, we do not have a codified system in the UK, we have a mixture of statutory and common law; the common law being developed through the Courts 'interpreting' the intention of Parliament.Originally posted by Arturo Bassick View Post"I hope Celtic realise that, if their team is good enough, they will win. If they're not good enough, they'll not win - and they can't look at anybody else, whether it is referees or any other influence." - Walter Smith
On them! On them! They fail!Comment
-
Retrospective taxation is really bad. When it gets applied elsewhere, people won't think "Oh, those BN66 guys were the first victims", they'll think "Oh, those bastards brought this calamity on us".Down with racism. Long live miscegenation!Comment
-
Sorry, what are your qualifications again?Originally posted by Incognito View PostWell I find myself wholeheartedly agreeing with Sas.
Other people have expressed more or less my entire argument. The case doesn't really affect me, however they should have done due diligence on the scheme before they entered. They can't say retrospection wasn't a possibility because the precedent was set with the Finance Act (No. 2) 1987. The intention of that legislation was that UK residents were not able to exploit double taxation treaties with regards to overseas 'partnerships'. Just because the scheme attempts to circumvent the law as written down with some constructive structuring of links in the chain, you can't deny that it is clearly subverting the intention of the law.
Another point, stop getting on at HMRC as if they have some vendetta against you, they are charged with collecting revenue for the UK as the laws of the land set out. If you have a beef then you have it with New Labour who enacted it, HMRC are purely the enforcement mechanism. Stop bleating on about your Human Rights as well, the ECHR was set up to enshrine the rights of humanity after the horrors of the first and second world wars. Preventing the persecution and genocide of a race of people is an example of protection of Human Rights, being used to argue a point that you should be paying less tax through an unregulated tax avoidance scheme is not. How on earth you can look at yourself in the mirror when you think your case compares to that of families being dragged from their homes, shipped off to concentration camps and then gassed as if they were no more than cattle really does gall me and is just a clear example of the 'me, me, me' culture that these schemes seem to thrive upon.
Incorrect, we do not have a codified system in the UK, we have a mixture of statutory and common law; the common law being developed through the Courts 'interpreting' the intention of Parliament.Comment
-
I'm a self-employed gynaecologist. Never had formal training but happy to have a bash at almost anything.Originally posted by Churchill View Post"I hope Celtic realise that, if their team is good enough, they will win. If they're not good enough, they'll not win - and they can't look at anybody else, whether it is referees or any other influence." - Walter Smith
On them! On them! They fail!Comment
-
Churchill asking someone for qualifications? How I laughed.Originally posted by Churchill View PostComment
-
The legislation is being tested under European Law (ECHR - Huitson and EU Treaty - Shiner) because it is the only means of challenging primary legislation of Parliament.
I can't speak for others but I certainly would not attempt to compare our situation with victims of torture etc.
On the other hand, EU Law has been used in arguably even less worthy causes than ours.
Jailed rapist forces PM to give prisoners vote within six months | The Sun |News
David Cameron is under pressure after judges rule that paedophiles and rapists can apply to have their names removed from the Sex Offenders Register | The Sun |NewsComment
-
Or cases like this oneOriginally posted by DonkeyRhubarb View Post
And while I don't agree with the BN66 group they like everyone else have the right to fight their case using the laws in UK and Europe."You’re just a bad memory who doesn’t know when to go away" JRComment
Comment