Why should my MP worry about retrospective taxation on avoiders?

[fckvwls]

I was right with until the last two sentences.

Could this not be settled down in Bridgewater or on skype with aussielong as referee?

[speling bee]

No, you said you paid 'the fair amount', and queried how you come to it being the fair amount; lets not get these discussions wrong now.

There is a difference, but, when does it become fair; you're telling me it is fair, which is subjective and done to cover what you are actually doing, as it really isn't fair to minimise your NIC's: this is what you are missing; if you don't see it, then that's OK too.

So, here is the difference. A Ltd (operated properly by someone outside IR35) is a legitimate vehicle intended by Parliament (or possibly existing on the basis of common law in the dim and distant pass - but you get the point). I pay myself within that structure and pay taxes accordingly. I reckon about 30% of my day rate will go on tax.

I happen to believe that operating in such a way is fair. I would like to see a different tax structure, and if we get one will operate within that structure.

I also happen to think that using offshore trusts and loan to pat 3 to 5% tax (if that is indeed the level) is not fair. I think there is a differnce between the two.

And I didn't even call you a cock or a tulip, while explaining it.

[Old Hack]

I was right with until the last two sentences.

Fair enough, too harsh?

[speling bee]

Fair enough, too harsh?

Projection.

[porrker]

And you are welcome to that opinion.

Of course it would be hypocrisy, if I had said, 'You deserve retrospective legislation because you use tax planning.'

I would be careful about wish retrospective legislation on anyone. I recently read hmrc could consider using the GAAR post April 2013 to enforce IR35.

[Old Hack]

So, here is the difference. A Ltd (operated properly by someone outside IR35) is a legitimate vehicle intended by Parliament (or possibly existing on the basis of common law in the dim and distant pass - but you get the point). I pay myself within that structure and pay taxes accordingly. I reckon about 30% of my day rate will go on tax.

I happen to believe that operating in such a way is fair. I would like to see a different tax structure, and if we get one will operate within that structure.

I also happen to think that using offshore trusts and loan to pat 3 to 5% tax (if that is indeed the level) is not fair. I think there is a differnce between the two.

And I didn't even call you a cock or a tulip, while explaining it.

You're deliberately masking your earnings, you are deliberately paying yourself minimum wage, you are deliberately avoiding NIC's, you have made your wife a shareholder to minimise tax, not as she takes a risk, for we know she doesn't.

But you have the temerity to call it fair?

I believe that's tulipe, as I do the same, and know precisely it is all done to minimise my outgoings, and maximise my earnigns. Whether it is 2/5%, or 20%, it's still minimising your obligations, and masking your true obligations.

You;re trying to justify to yourself, that you are paying a fair amount, but we all know it isn't.

[speling bee]

I would be careful about wish retrospective legislation on anyone. I recently read hmrc could consider using the GAAR post April 2013 to enforce IR35.

And that is a different issue. There are some laws I support and some I don't.

Going a few pages back the tyranny point of Robbie's, or abuse of power I would prefer to say, is the one thing about this that still has me wondering about whether it is the right thing or not.

[vetran]

So, here is the difference. A Ltd (operated properly by someone outside IR35) is a legitimate vehicle intended by Parliament (or possibly existing on the basis of common law in the dim and distant pass - but you get the point). I pay myself within that structure and pay taxes accordingly. I reckon about 30% of my day rate will go on tax.

I happen to believe that operating in such a way is fair. I would like to see a different tax structure, and if we get one will operate within that structure.

I also happen to think that using offshore trusts and loan to pat 3 to 5% tax (if that is indeed the level) is not fair. I think there is a differnce between the two.

And I didn't even call you a cock or a tulip, while explaining it.

But as a permie I pay 40%+ of my earnings and you EARN so much more than me, please Mr Taxman can you sort this out.

Hector - of course, now any single person (or with spouse as cosec) in IT is a tax evader and has been for the last 10 years. they can claim 5% of expenses, its full employer & employee tax on the rest. I deem you IR35 caught.

MPs - sounds sensible to me I have to pay full tax on MY salary (the rest is either fiddled expenses or paid offshore) so be it.

Hector - Spelling Bee you are a filthy tax evader pay up for the last 10 years , what do you mean you spent 40% of your turnover on tools & travel tough pay up or the Bailiff will be round

Spelling Bee - Oh woe is me the tax man is being Unfair

yes the offshore deal was morally dodgy, but it was legal, ban it in future, move on, its not like it is a new problem I was being offered offshore schemes in year 2000.

[Old Hack]

But as a permie I pay 40%+ of my earnings and you EARN so much more than me, please Mr Taxman can you sort this out.

Hector - of course, now any single person (or with spouse as cosec) in IT is a tax evader and has been for the last 10 years. they can claim 5% of expenses, its full employer & employee tax on the rest. I deem you IR35 caught.

MPs - sounds sensible to me I have to pay full tax on MY salary (the rest is either fiddled expenses or paid offshore) so be it.

Hector - Spelling Bee you are a filthy tax evader pay up for the last 10 years , what do you mean you spent 40% of your turnover on tools & travel tough pay up or the Bailiff will be round

Spelling Bee - Oh woe is me the tax man is being Unfair

yes the offshore deal was morally dodgy, but it was legal [just like not paying much NIC's and Income tax], ban it in future, move on, its not like it is a new problem I was being offered offshore schemes in year 2000.

Amen

[speling bee]

But as a permie I pay 40%+ of my earnings and you EARN so much more than me, please Mr Taxman can you sort this out.

Hector - of course, now any single person (or with spouse as cosec) in IT is a tax evader and has been for the last 10 years. they can claim 5% of expenses, its full employer & employee tax on the rest. I deem you IR35 caught.

MPs - sounds sensible to me I have to pay full tax on MY salary (the rest is either fiddled expenses or paid offshore) so be it.

Hector - Spelling Bee you are a filthy tax evader pay up for the last 10 years , what do you mean you spent 40% of your turnover on tools & travel tough pay up or the Bailiff will be round

Spelling Bee - Oh woe is me the tax man is being Unfair

yes the offshore deal was morally dodgy, but it was legal, ban it in future, move on, its not like it is a new problem I was being offered offshore schemes in year 2000.

For the reasons I explained above, I do not think Ltd's and offshore vehicles are equivalent.