• 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!

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.

Previously on "Minister in charge of offshore clampdown ran tax haven firm"

Collapse

  • Coalman
    replied
    Originally posted by Ruprect View Post
    This might sound like a basic statement but isn't someone who know hows to play the system the sort of person that could potentally have the most effect in attempting to change it? A bit like the US military employing those who manage to hack it to close the vunerabilities?

    You bugger - I was just about to say the same thing.
    Poacher turned gate keeper sounds like a good idea to me in this instance.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ruprect
    replied
    This might sound like a basic statement but isn't someone who know hows to play the system the sort of person that could potentally have the most effect in attempting to change it? A bit like the US military employing those who manage to hack it to close the vunerabilities?

    Leave a comment:


  • AlfredJPruffock
    replied
    Originally posted by TykeMerc View Post
    In that very specific case it's probably a no, but in the overall context of the thread hypocrisy and corrupt behaviour isn't party specific.

    Members of all parties jam their snouts in the trough whether in power or not, the ones in power just get to the trough earlier and deeper than the rest.

    "Now we find that the man charged with getting City institutions to pay all their tax is in fact an expert in how to avoid tax. The government has put a fox in charge of the chicken coop.”

    Ah - but you're wrong there - hes not a Fox - he's a Piggy ... he ha a snout after all.

    Did anybody really ever think that they were anything else but self-serving Piggies ?


    Have you see the Little Piggies ?
    Crawling in the Dirt
    Always have clean shirts
    Just to Eat their bacon
    Last edited by AlfredJPruffock; 23 March 2009, 10:16.

    Leave a comment:


  • TykeMerc
    replied
    Originally posted by Doggy Styles View Post
    I take that as a no then, they haven't.
    In that very specific case it's probably a no, but in the overall context of the thread hypocrisy and corrupt behaviour isn't party specific.

    Members of all parties jam their snouts in the trough whether in power or not, the ones in power just get to the trough earlier and deeper than the rest.

    Leave a comment:


  • Doggy Styles
    replied
    Originally posted by TykeMerc View Post
    I clearly recall an interview with Michael Hesseltine where he admitted that a major stepping stone to his first million was late or absurdly late payment of invoices, this was at the time when the Tories were considering measures to ensure prompt payment.
    "Do as I say and not as I do" is an approach of all politicians irrespective of their party affiliation. Classic examples being expenses rules, licensing hours and smoking laws that differ immensely from those outside the Palace of Westminster.

    I realised a long time ago that all politicians are corrupt and hypocritical, their party affiliation makes naff all difference to how bent they are.
    I take that as a no then, they haven't.

    Leave a comment:


  • TykeMerc
    replied
    Originally posted by Doggy Styles View Post
    I doubt it. The issue here is the hypocrisy. Have the tories who use tax havens ever tried to close them down for everyone else?
    I clearly recall an interview with Michael Hesseltine where he admitted that a major stepping stone to his first million was late or absurdly late payment of invoices, this was at the time when the Tories were considering measures to ensure prompt payment.
    "Do as I say and not as I do" is an approach of all politicians irrespective of their party affiliation. Classic examples being expenses rules, licensing hours and smoking laws that differ immensely from those outside the Palace of Westminster.

    I realised a long time ago that all politicians are corrupt and hypocritical, their party affiliation makes naff all difference to how bent they are.

    Leave a comment:


  • Doggy Styles
    replied
    Originally posted by TykeMerc View Post
    I'm not at all surprised by this, it's the sort of thing that MP's from all parties are involved in.

    If it had been the Tories or Lib Dems in power instead of Labour then odds are there would have been a similar story.
    I doubt it. The issue here is the hypocrisy. Have the tories who use tax havens ever tried to close them down for everyone else?

    Leave a comment:


  • minestrone
    replied
    Originally posted by Cyberman View Post
    The real problem with public sector pensions is that they are mostly unfunded with regard to future requirements. The fact that most private sector schemes have now closed to new members bears out this point and it is a major scandal that HMG simply ignores the costs in the hope that the Tories will tackle the problem and thus reap the wrath of the unions rather than taking the flak themselves, for a problem largely of their own making.
    Why is it you continually regurgitate common knowledge and think it is some outstanding bit of insightful social commentary?

    Leave a comment:


  • Cyberman
    replied
    Originally posted by threaded View Post
    This might well sound quite daft to people like us; as an engineer you'd be tempted to say, why bother even taxing these people if the losses are greater than the gains? Well, the point is, in simplistic terms, not that they want the tax, they just don't want you to have the money.


    It's just socialist spite and hypocrisy as we can tell by their own selfish acts in thieving off of the taxpayer with regard to second homes etc. At least we earn our own money !!

    Leave a comment:


  • Cyberman
    replied
    Originally posted by minestrone View Post
    Stand down cybertory, it was a joke.

    I was speaking with my Mother (retired teacher) earlier today and the topic of public sector pensions came up, she said that her teacher's pension are not from a fund but paid with current teacher's contributions. My first thought was Ponzi scheme, she then said that older teachers always demand that class sizes get reduced so more teachers get jobs to fund the pension.


    The real problem with public sector pensions is that they are mostly unfunded with regard to future requirements. The fact that most private sector schemes have now closed to new members bears out this point and it is a major scandal that HMG simply ignores the costs in the hope that the Tories will tackle the problem and thus reap the wrath of the unions rather than taking the flak themselves, for a problem largely of their own making.

    Leave a comment:


  • threaded
    replied
    Originally posted by minestrone View Post
    I wonder how much money the country would gain if all IT contractors fell into line with IR35? I wonder how much money and how many tax men chase IT contractors down under IR35 'rules'? It would make an interesting comparison to how much the Government's bank RBS make from Tax avoidance and how many are working on reclaiming that tax sum.
    IIRC small business', 1 or 2 man bands, corner shops, etc. etc., the tax actually costs significantly more to collect than it takes. And that's before you figure in the cost of 'compliance'.

    I can well imagine the amount spent on chasing IR35 is substantially more than the amount they deem all contractors should pay in tax anyway.

    This might well sound quite daft to people like us; as an engineer you'd be tempted to say, why bother even taxing these people if the losses are greater than the gains? Well, the point is, in simplistic terms, not that they want the tax, they just don't want you to have the money.

    Leave a comment:


  • minestrone
    replied
    Originally posted by Cyberman View Post
    I take it that that is a joke bearing in mind that public sector wages come from the taxes paid in the private sector. Without a private sector, all funds would have to be borrowed to finance the parasitic public sector. This is something that socialists just do not seem to understand.
    Stand down cybertory, it was a joke.

    I was speaking with my Mother (retired teacher) earlier today and the topic of public sector pensions came up, she said that her teacher's pension are not from a fund but paid with current teacher's contributions. My first thought was Ponzi scheme, she then said that older teachers always demand that class sizes get reduced so more teachers get jobs to fund the pension.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cyberman
    replied
    Originally posted by TykeMerc View Post
    I'm not at all surprised by this, it's the sort of thing that MP's from all parties are involved in.

    If it had been the Tories or Lib Dems in power instead of Labour then odds are there would have been a similar story.


    That's the problem with you ignorant people. You just do not understand the obvious differences between the parties, and that is why we are now in the complete economic mess that we are now in.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cyberman
    replied
    Originally posted by minestrone View Post
    The government does not want big business corporation tax, we get enough from public sector PAYE to run the country, we top the rest up with borrowing.

    I take it that that is a joke bearing in mind that public sector wages come from the taxes paid in the private sector. Without a private sector, all funds would have to be borrowed to finance the parasitic public sector. This is something that socialists just do not seem to understand.

    Leave a comment:


  • minestrone
    replied
    I wonder how much money the country would gain if all IT contractors fell into line with IR35? I wonder how much money and how many tax men chase IT contractors down under IR35 'rules'? It would make an interesting comparison to how much the Government's bank RBS make from Tax avoidance and how many are working on reclaiming that tax sum.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X