Originally posted by AtW
View Post
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Collapse
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
- You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
- You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
- If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Logging in...
Previously on "Panama Papers: David Cameron to publish six years of tax returns"
Collapse
-
TL;DR
But has anyone actually said why he has to publish them? Its not like it will show anything dodgy as if he is "avoiding" tax it won't show up, I would be more interested in where an MP's additional income comes from which I believe already exists in the register of interests.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by NickFitz View Post
"Watch and learn, class, watch and learn. This is how it's done. Note how he sounds apologetic, but doesn't actually say sorry. Note how he makes himself look honourable by telling his audience not to blame his advisers, even though nobody was blaming them, they were blaming him… self-preservation dressed up expertly as candid mea culpa."
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by NickFitz View PostCracking sketch in the Telegraph by Michael Deacon: How a sorry-looking David Cameron gave a masterclass in political spin
"Watch and learn, class, watch and learn. This is how it's done. Note how he sounds apologetic, but doesn't actually say sorry. Note how he makes himself look honourable by telling his audience not to blame his advisers, even though nobody was blaming them, they were blaming him… self-preservation dressed up expertly as candid mea culpa."
Leave a comment:
-
Cracking sketch in the Telegraph by Michael Deacon: How a sorry-looking David Cameron gave a masterclass in political spin
"Watch and learn, class, watch and learn. This is how it's done. Note how he sounds apologetic, but doesn't actually say sorry. Note how he makes himself look honourable by telling his audience not to blame his advisers, even though nobody was blaming them, they were blaming him… self-preservation dressed up expertly as candid mea culpa."
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by DodgyAgent View PostAnd replace it with who precisely. There are rather a lot of people in this world who really do not see how consequences of actions play out
Leave a comment:
-
So Cameron's tax returns have been published...
... but surely if he was EVADING tax, that particular income would NOT be on his tax return...
Or am I missing something?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by AtW View PostNo, that's rubbish - Tory party needs to be out of power unless they cut taxes, that should be super clear to them - no tax cuts then fook right arf.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by PurpleGorilla View PostThis is a bit like the difference between an rolls and a bentley.
Completely different makes, but in the eyes of the public both owned and run by rich elite arseholes.
For Cameron to say Carr is abhorrent for driving a bentley, whilst he drives a rolls, is absurd.
Cameron earnt 130 grand say paid 40 grand in tax and invested 30 grand from the remaining 90 grand in a fund.
The fund pays him a 5% dividend which Cameron taxes at Uk tax rates. At the end of several years he gets a pay out and declares this in the UK.
The investors don't avoid any tax whatsoever. The fund itself avoids tax.
A better comparison would be buying a coffee at Starbucks. When you buy a coffee at Starbucks you don't avoid tax, but Starbucks does. It is exactly the same. Cameron avoided no tax, but the fund company did. You could compare Cameron's father to Jimmy Carr, perhaps depending on how he set up the fund, though I suspect strongly it is above board, but not Cameron.
Jimmy Carr in contrast earnt 200 grand and paid no tax at all. This is completely different.
I didn't vote for Cameron, but on this he's completely innocent and in no way a hypocrite.Last edited by BlasterBates; 10 April 2016, 10:17.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by minestrone View PostHAs anyone noticed how quiet the SNP has been over this?
Leave a comment:
-
One might suggest that their biggest donors have been named in the papers...
oh wait..
Leave a comment:
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Expert Accounting for Contractors: Trusted by thousands Today 14:47
- Finish the song lyric Today 12:05
- A quick read of the taxman’s Spotlight 67 may not be enough Today 09:27
- Contractor MVL Solution from SFP Yesterday 12:53
- Gary Lineker and HMRC broker IR35 settlement on the hush Yesterday 09:10
- IT contractor jobs market sinks to four-year low in November Dec 10 09:30
- Joke of the Day Dec 9 14:57
- How company directors can offset employer NIC rising to 15% Dec 9 10:30
- Contractors, seen Halifax’s 18-month fixed rate remortgage? Dec 5 09:59
- Contractors, don’t be fooled by HMRC Spotlight 67 on MSCs Dec 4 09:20
Leave a comment: