ChatterBank2 mins ago
B B C 2 Labour Conference......p M Key Note Speech Coming Up....who's Watching?
Use this for your observations......
Answers
"Interesting, he's going after "tax avoiders" not evaders!"
Yes, very interesting, Tora.
I, along with a fair proportion of the rest of the country, do eveything I can to avoid tax. Apart from being the sensible thing to do (after all, who would stand outside in the rain tearing up £10 notes?) I see it as my moral responsibility (and the new administration is getting high on "morals", it seems).
We have most of our cash and shares salted away in ISAs or other tax-exempt products. Mrs NJ and I balance our funds so as to make the most of all the tax free allowances we can. We still get hammered, but we do our best to keep that hammering to the absolute minimum.
Tax avoidance is not illegal. MPs are able to take take far greater advantage of it than most, so why should those seeking to avoid tax be pursued?
But it seems to be part of a pattern: the police are recording "non-crime" incidents? Why? They have trouble enough recording crimes and bringing the perpetrtors to book so why should they record incidents that are, strictly speaking, none of their business?
We're in for five years of this claptrap which will benefit nobody. But those who put their crosses against the candidates wearing the red rosettes cannot say they were not warned.
Many very wealthy people follow NJ’s philosophy in relation to tax avoidance – unfortunately this invariably results in the super-rich paying a lower tax rate than a tea-lady. And when the government threatens to take steps to curb this, the rich cry foul and threaten to leave the country.
If everyone was to set themselves up as a private company and have their employer pay the company (avoiding PAYE tax), and then extract the money from the private company (paying minimal/no tax) – the government would have to stop this, or lose a massive amount of tax.
While only a relatively small number of people use this method to minimise their tax bill, the government can stand the loss – but it is still unfair to those who otherwise pay a higher tax rate through PAYE.
//If everyone was to set themselves up as a private company and have their employer pay the company (avoiding PAYE tax), and then extract the money from the private company (paying minimal/no tax)//
I don't understand this. Are you referring to contractors who set themselves up as company? Doesn't a private company have to pay tax? Have you got a link to an example as a case study? I'm just curious.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.