• 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 "“Catch all” law to stop tax avoidance could be introduced in spring."

Collapse

  • DodgyAgent
    replied
    They will never get it to stick

    Leave a comment:


  • d000hg
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW View Post
    If you were 50% taxpayer [crud removed] you'd think differently!
    No, disliking paying more doesn't mean you disapprove of the system. I'd rather I didn't have to pay any tax... but this is the real world.

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by Incognito View Post
    So if SKA decided to lease some extra servers for a year to provide extra grunt you'd be quite happy having to pay interest on the loaned amount as well as paying income tax on the loaned amount?
    Whoever leases does not get in debt (I rent a flat but I don't have mortgage obligations), the object of lease is owned by some company.

    I was referring to personal loans anyway.

    By the way at the moment when SKA Inc buys servers up front we still have to pay corp tax on the amounts spend over annual investment allowance (it gets cut 4 times next FY).

    Leave a comment:


  • Incognito
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW View Post
    Good ideas - treating any loans other than single mortgage as income and taxing it accordingly should help deal with problem of getting in debt nicely.
    So if SKA decided to lease some extra servers for a year to provide extra grunt you'd be quite happy having to pay interest on the loaned amount as well as paying income tax on the loaned amount?

    Again if you decide you're going to buy a new couch on HP, you'd be happy at paying interest and income tax on such?

    It's easy to say just do this to fix the problem when doing this has such a snowball effect on other normal things.

    Leave a comment:


  • BlasterBates
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW View Post
    Good ideas - treating any loans other than single mortgage as income and taxing it accordingly should help deal with problem of getting in debt nicely.
    Obviously loans from a tax avoidance scheme. Interest free loans that don't get paid back, or loans that have no purpose other than to avoid tax. i.e. loans to you from a trust with which you're a beneficiary for example.

    In fact I suspect it'll be more general than that, using terms such as "artificial" or "for the purpose of avoiding tax" and leave it to the judge's discretion.

    So for example you get a loan from a bank to buy a car, and you pay it back with interest, it's clear that there is a business purpose in this transaction. But you get an interest free loan that you never pay back from a trust, and the trust is there to act in your best interests. It's pretty clear that this is for the purpose of avoiding tax.
    Last edited by BlasterBates; 9 January 2012, 17:00.

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by d000hg View Post
    I actually don't mind it - better to have a 50% "very high" bracket than increase the higher rate threshold which has happened in the past.
    If you were 50% taxpayer (over 60% if amounts just over £100k due to personal allowance robbery) you'd think differently!

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by BlasterBates View Post
    If you have an outstanding loan would that be taxed?
    Good ideas - treating any loans other than single mortgage as income and taxing it accordingly should help deal with problem of getting in debt nicely.

    Leave a comment:


  • BlasterBates
    replied
    What does this mean for loan schemes?

    If you have an outstanding loan would that be taxed?

    Leave a comment:


  • d000hg
    replied
    Just another tax that will eventually become part of the norm? I actually don't mind it - better to have a 50% "very high" bracket than increase the higher rate threshold which has happened in the past.

    Leave a comment:


  • “Catch all” law to stop tax avoidance could be introduced in spring.



    Source: Downing Street: broadest shoulders must carry tax burden - Telegraph
Working...
X