Reply to: How easy is it to find out the tax arrangements of MPs

[TykeMerc]

STEPHEN POLLARD: Margaret Hodge

I can't say that shocks me in the slightest, but then I don't have a lot of respect for Politicians and I expect nothing other than corruption and hypocrisy from any of them.

[Not Losing Any Sleep]

What we all new about Hodge the hypocrit

STEPHEN POLLARD: Margaret Hodge

[dangerouswhensober]

MercladUK, DonkeyRhubarb - Are you guys psychic ?

If you dig up dirt on politicians, the press will be far more interested in this than anything you did or your motives for outing them.

From the front page article in the Times today (Wednesday 29th April):

Labour chief given £1.5m shares from tax haven

"Labour's fiercest critic of tax avoidence and 'secretive' offshore funds has received more than £1.5 million in shares from the tax haven of Liechtenstein. The money came through a controversial scheme that lets wealthy Britons move undeclared assets back to the UK without facing criminal action."

"Margaret Hodge, who made her name taking on tax avoiders as head of the Public Accounts Committee, was among the beneficiaries in 2011 of the winding-up of a Liechtenstein trust that held shares in the private steel-trading business set up by her father."

"The veteran Labour MP ... has repeatedly attacked big businesses and bankers who used offshore arrangements, but has never declared that she benefited from an offshore trust"

(From the "Analysis" on Page 4):

"The former Islington council leader who became Labour MP for Dagenham in 1994 has made more than a few enemies in her career in politics. ... She faces an intense battle to maintain her position".

My opinions:
(a) Excellent - let's wish her all the success she deserves in her 'battle', and
(b) Now what's that word that I'm trying to remember ? Hippocampus ? Hyperchromasia ? That it - HYPOCRITE !!

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Lol

I know this isn't a popularity contest but the only danger I see with outing those in charge is that we then become tarred with the same brush and what little public support we may have goes out the window?!?

Unless we know we'll never get any peace from all this so we're taking as many down with us as we can...

If you dig up dirt on politicians, the press will be far more interested in this than anything you did or your motives for outing them.

I spoke to a Sunday Times reporter a few years ago about our scheme and the retrospective legislation. All he was interested in was whether anyone famous had used the scheme. Once he realised it was just a bunch of nobodies he couldn't get rid of me fast enough.

[Axeman]

MPs exemption

There is also this from a few years ago...

The Chartered Institute of Taxation | Media and Politics | MPs, tax avoidance and sub-clause 554E (8) of the Finance Bill

...where a cluase in the Finance Bill specifically exempts MPs from the terms of the disguised remuneration clampdown

[squirrel]

Private detectives aren't that expensive.

Lol

I know this isn't a popularity contest but the only danger I see with outing those in charge is that we then become tarred with the same brush and what little public support we may have goes out the window?!?

Unless we know we'll never get any peace from all this so we're taking as many down with us as we can...

[DonkeyRhubarb]

Private detectives aren't that expensive.

BIG GROUP = THINK BIG

[carling]

I like your style! Count me in.
Never saying no to shining some sunglight onto these hypocritical vampires.

+1

[DotasScandal]

I like your style! Count me in.
Never saying no to shining some sunglight onto these hypocritical vampires.

[dangerouswhensober]

I think this could be a good long-term project for the future - especially for members & friends of "The Big Group".

What we could possibly do is:

(a) Look at the composition of the new Parliament - especially those MPs who were (and continue to be) prominent in bashing the small-time tax optimisers (steering clear of the 'a' word).
(b) Divvy up the target list of MPs between a group of 'investigators' amongst us - each investigator would probably end up with no more than 2-3 names to check out.
(c) Allow a period of time for each investigator to dig up the available facts (but pool sources of info, leads, cross-references, etc. on a regular basis).
(d) Then, on a target date, present the results and decide on further action.

Who knows - if a nice juicy piece of underhanded/hypocritical behaviour is uncovered, the media would probably be quite interested - and that exposure can only be good for the cause.

It seems to me that, with the development of 'Big Data', Data Warehouses & Data Analytics, uncovering facts about any individual or institution in the UK is geeting easier by the day.

BTW - Re: "Legally this is difficult" - to get the facts is not as difficult as you might think - what might be legally difficult is using those facts in a court ...

(OK - I'll 'fess up - in the technology world, I'm a data SME :-))

[foobar]

David Cameron MP Ltd

A quick check on companies house and I see a "David Cameron MP Ltd"...

[webberg]

I am talking family trusts, saving and investments, offshore holdings etc etc?

Name and shame is what I am after

Legally this is difficult.

Start with the Cabinet rules. I think if you are a member of the Cabinet, then aside from your salary the rest of your wealth is put into a blind trust?

When that happens there are sometimes details to be extracted.

Most often the tabloids and lefty papers seek guilt by association rather than direct. The current generation of MP's (all colours) are probably better at hiding their financial dealings than previous members having learnt the hard way.

[NotAllThere]

Step 1 - take out a subscription to Private Eye.

[DotasScandal]

How dare a normal joe on street uses it

Verily, that is the greatest sin.

Know where your place is (and stay there), or be destroyed.

[StrengthInNumbers]

But tax planning is only allowed in exclusive club ..... How dare a normal joe on street uses it