Panama Papers

[Zizouz]

14 minutes ago, dub said:

You can't though, can you? No one's gonna look good publicly talking about how they deserve a higher percentage of their own money to keep than people who earn less than them.

study needs to be done to see what levels of tax they should be paying if they were all to actually pay

I'm guessing it's lower than the current level

[dub]

It probably would be but one would assume people wouldn't go with it.

Would also be interesting to see how well our country would we had the gains from the tax people from our country pay to the tax havens.

Seems crazy how no one has come up with a valid law to fight against this issue though.

[VENOM]

3 hours ago, Ulysses said:

lol you can walk and chew gum at the same time you know. Also that's simply not true, for example every week on question time you'll get 'banker bashing', or articles in guardian deriding private schooling. There is a general hostility to privilege and wealth in this country - the fact that you were lucky to be born in very fortunate circumstances, and your parents were smart and made good decisions in life, and made sure you had the best education possible is a politically disadvantageous in the times we live. And more generally the emergence of people like sanders, trump, corbyn etc is the public voicing their discontent with an international moneyed elite. When has there ever been a Negative programme about benefit scroungers or immigrants on the BBC, which by far has the most influence on British political discourse, on the contrary the BBC's output has always been favourable to the people

thats rubbish. people do not fear success. i agree that the UK does frown at some levels of success especially when they are the ones who helped propel said people into fame and success in the first place. 

The other set you talk about is not 'feared'. what is despised is those who by reason of a social elite tend to carve out everything for themselves including power and influence, yet they seem to be above the law. Banker bashing is justified, but is as you say..just now relegated to those scoring points on a tv show like questiontime or some other programme that has zero influence. as for the guardian bashing them in some long Ulysses type article...again no one is really reading that and its not got any real influence on the general populace. 

But when it comes to benefits and imimgrants, these lot get primetime TV slots, a constant barage of political manipulation. 

another thing people like you do is to always point to Labour or some labour MP when we accuse someone in the tories as a fraud... fact is that i coudlnt care if Ummunna used offshore stuff or Tony Benn..cos i am very aware that these are the same..tories and new labour have very little differentiating them..and even with the so called Old labour they are still members of the same boys and girls clubs as any other political party influence ANYWHERE in the west. their agenda of deceit and manipulation in the name of democracy is the same. i just know which matter i would focus on more in this pic

 

 

 

[Yuri]

Ulysses i can't agree with you there brother

Pasaively benefiting from the fund is bad enough but he also held personal shares in the fund which was avoiding tax. That might not be illegal but as Obama said - the fact that it's not illegal is the problem. Cameron isn't just a bit of a hypocrite,  he's a barefaced liar.   On Monday he had nothing to do with his father's fund. On tuesday he suddenly remembered that he might have actually held personal shares in it but he didn't benefit from any more off shore assets. On Wednesday a carefully crafted statement came out saying "the Cameron family won't be benefitting from offshore funds IN THE FUTURE" ?? 

The guy clearly knows he's got cash buried in every tax haven out there. As I said , if I was wealthy I would also try to avoid paying tax...but its something else do become PM and make statements about poor people stealing benefits and try to slash the benefits of deserving disabled people.

[Supermalt]

4 hours ago, Yuri said:

I dont have a problem with tax evaders per se, but you cant be a politician and lecture people about morals and demonize people claiming JSA they're not entitled to...while living off money that is for all intents and purposes fradulent.

This and this.

[Mame Biram Diouf]

 

 

[Drift]

Quote

David Cameron had previously criticised the comedian Jimmy Carr, describing him as “morally wrong” for seeking to avoid taxes. However, today the PM has made a surprise u-turn describing Carr’s tax affairs as ‘nothing illegal’.

pmsl

 

[QPR Dee]

8 hours ago, Ulysses said:

You really do not understand the Trump phenomenon

-disagrees with point

-proceeds to say "you don't get it"

-doesn't explain.

Yup, we got an Internet intellectual 

[Supermalt]

42 minutes ago, QPR Dee said:

-disagrees with point

-proceeds to say "you don't get it"

-doesn't explain.

Yup, we got an Internet intellectual 

Lol I hate shit like that too. 

[Mame Biram Diouf]

Thunism

[time_bomb]

Ulyses is the epitome of 'internet intellectual'

[Ulysses]

5 hours ago, QPR Dee said:

-disagrees with point

-proceeds to say "you don't get it"

-doesn't explain.

Yup, we got an Internet intellectual 

Lol. 

Do you want me to write an essay for you? Don't be embarrassed to ask me next time. I'm always happy to help those who lack insight and understanding. 

Many people who support trump are not supporting him because they are 'temporarily-embarrased millionaires'. They support him because globalisation has not worked out for them. He promises to undo the washington consensus. His economics is positively old labour.

[Ulysses]

1 hour ago, time_bomb said:

Ulyses is the epitome of 'internet intellectual'

I think every time we've engaged in a topic here I've embarrassed you. So if I'm an internet intellectual, what does that make you? 

[Ulysses]

23 hours ago, Yuri said:

Ulysses i can't agree with you there brother

Pasaively benefiting from the fund is bad enough but he also held personal shares in the fund which was avoiding tax. That might not be illegal but as Obama said - the fact that it's not illegal is the problem. Cameron isn't just a bit of a hypocrite,  he's a barefaced liar.   On Monday he had nothing to do with his father's fund. On tuesday he suddenly remembered that he might have actually held personal shares in it but he didn't benefit from any more off shore assets. On Wednesday a carefully crafted statement came out saying "the Cameron family won't be benefitting from offshore funds IN THE FUTURE" ?? 

The guy clearly knows he's got cash buried in every tax haven out there. As I said , if I was wealthy I would also try to avoid paying tax...but its something else do become PM and make statements about poor people stealing benefits and try to slash the benefits of deserving disabled people.

As I said before, he hasn't done anything wrong, the shares were sold before he became PM, and he seems to have paid all relevant taxes. His fathers fund cannot be termed as tax avoidance either. Moreover, the type of offshore unit trust his family set up was perfectly commonplace and legal - a lot of pension funds invest in them. As far as I know benefit fraud has always been a criminal offence. What is the link between the two issues?

Politicians always spin, unsuprisingly. But of all things to crucify cameron for, and there are many things, this is not it. 

[VENOM]

why are offshore funds set up? for the main purpose of exploiting the loopholes in country A to hide profits and taxes in country B.

many benefit claimers actually work but dont delcare it for reasons exactly similar to those investing in offshore accounts

off course benefit fraud will be criminal and offshore tax evasion wont be, 

but then who writes the laws........

 

[Ulysses]

17 minutes ago, VENOM said:

why are offshore funds set up? for the main purpose of exploiting the loopholes in country A to hide profits and taxes in country B.

many benefit claimers actually work but dont delcare it for reasons exactly similar to those investing in offshore accounts

off course benefit fraud will be criminal and offshore tax evasion wont be, 

but then who writes the laws........

 

I'm failing to see the moral equivalence of minimizing the amount of tax you pay, from money you've earned, to taking money which you are not entitled to, and have not earned. 

Tax havens will always be with unfortunately. Unless there is total international harmornisation of tax. And that would prove to be an infinitely worse situation that the situation we currently find ourselves in.

[dub]

you don't make a direct comparison to see the morality issue though

if tax avoidance is causing the country a higher loss than fraud is, and you're partaking in tax avoidance while reducing expenditure on services to people who aren't in the position to take advantage of loopholes to keep more of their earnings - then you're a bit shitty

it doesn't seem as ridiculous as the deliberate pisstake shown in the expenses scandal (which you could arguably call "fraud"), but if you're justifying cuts through phrases like "it has to come from somewhere" - then its a bit immoral to take it from the little people when you know your own family is part of the bigger issue

or no?

[Ulysses]

44 minutes ago, dub said:

you don't make a direct comparison to see the morality issue though

if tax avoidance is causing the country a higher loss than fraud is, and you're partaking in tax avoidance while reducing expenditure on services to people who aren't in the position to take advantage of loopholes to keep more of their earnings - then you're a bit shitty

it doesn't seem as ridiculous as the deliberate pisstake shown in the expenses scandal (which you could arguably call "fraud"), but if you're justifying cuts through phrases like "it has to come from somewhere" - then its a bit immoral to take it from the little people when you know your own family is part of the bigger issue

or no?

Well again the terms tax avoidance or tax evasion don't apply to the investment trust that Camerons family set up. If any of you have a pension it's likely to be invested in a similar scheme. 

The fact that states are slaves to capital means that no serious PM can clamp down on offshore financial centres and enact direct rule on the UK's crown dependencies. Unless there are capital controls and international tax harmonisation it simply will not happen. Besides our country's wealth depends solely on us being an international financial centre. These crown dependencies are also basically extensions of the city of london. We do not produce anything else. Any PM is severely constrained in this regard. Even if we successfully repatriated every pound currently in an offshore financial centre, it still wouldn't be sufficient enough to sort out this country's finances, our economic problems are structural. Cuts will still have to be made.

Take what from the little people? The richest 3,000 britons pay more tax than the poorest 9 million put together. 

[O Fenomeno]

Female journalist who leaked this has been blown up.

[Bruno Di Gradi]

7 minutes ago, O Fenomeno said:

Female journalist who leaked this has been blown up.

was looking for this topic to post

 

fuckree boy. blew the car to ashes

[QPR Dee]

Quote

Her most recent revelations pointed the finger at Malta’s prime minister, Joseph Muscat, and two of his closest aides, connecting offshore companies linked to the three men with the sale of Maltese passports and payments from the government of Azerbaijan.

them ones

RIP, she did the work everyone else was shook to do

[Drift]

Fucked up

RIP

[Da Luv Doc]

In the main media?.......... Nooooooooooooooooooooooo............ SMH