Tax dodgers (n/g) | Page 3 | Vital Football

Tax dodgers (n/g)

If citizens can't be arsed to pay their dues, considering they are the ones that access the public services most, then why the hell should you expect big companies to do so?

Tax is something that people always think someone else needs to be paying more of. You can't shirk your civic responsibilities and then complain when the services are shite.
 
If citizens can't be arsed to pay their dues, considering they are the ones that access the public services most, then why the hell should you expect big companies to do so?

Tax is something that people always think someone else needs to be paying more of. You can't shirk your civic responsibilities and then complain when the services are shite.
Agreed. People seem.to want high quality services but not to pay for them.

My point about big companies was the power they wield compared to us little people. We are the low hanging fruit that are more easly picked off. Further, the money we have to spend is more likely to be circulated in the economy rather than syphoned into off shore accounts.
 
And even that seems small potatoes to the estimated £11billion that chancellor Sunak is expected to have cost UK taxpayers by simply failing to insure huge debt stocks against interest rate rises.
Please can you provide a link.
I'm genuinely interested.
I used to trade bonds and know a bit about "insuring against interest rate rises".

I suspect the problem with "insuring against interest rate rises" is that the amount borrowed by a large government is so huge (versus your average corporate) that it is almost un-insurable.

So the only practical "insurance against rate rises" is to borrow at longer maturities....
.....but these tend to be higher to start with. ("yield curve").

But I may be mistaken.
 
Yup, the governments make the rules after all, the corporations just exploit them to the nth degree.

in fact the government mostly make or change monetary rules to suite their backers, sponsors, corporations and special interest.
Last financial crisis's and collapses were driven by relaxation and changes to rules demanded by their own interests or that of their real masters.

irony is that they are exactly the same forces in or out of the EU lol.
 
Last edited:
in fact the government mostly make or change monetary rules to suite their backers, sponsors, corporations and special interest.
Last financial crisis's and collapses were driven by relaxation and changes to rules demanded by their own interests or that of their real masters.

irony is that they are exactly the same forces in or out of the EU lol.

Agreed.

But you know what? The solution isn’t palatable to Joe Public. The solution is:

* Stop all political donations
* Stop all second jobs for politicians
* Pay politicians in line with their market rates. For a PM, that’ll be in the millions/year.
* Stop all these silly expenses for second homes etc
* Have a proper HR function so politicians don’t give jobs to the boys/family
* Scrap parliamentary privilege
* Send politicians to prison / face criminal charges if they break the law / mislead.
 
Agreed.

But you know what? The solution isn’t palatable to Joe Public. The solution is:

* Stop all political donations
* Stop all second jobs for politicians
* Pay politicians in line with their market rates. For a PM, that’ll be in the millions/year.
* Stop all these silly expenses for second homes etc
* Have a proper HR function so politicians don’t give jobs to the boys/family
* Scrap parliamentary privilege
* Send politicians to prison / face criminal charges if they break the law / mislead.

Agree with all of that.

I've always found it bizarre that you can lie/mislead in the commons, but if you did the same in a court room you'd be committing perjury.
 
Agreed. People seem.to want high quality services but not to pay for them.

My point about big companies was the power they wield compared to us little people. We are the low hanging fruit that are more easly picked off. Further, the money we have to spend is more likely to be circulated in the economy rather than syphoned into off shore accounts.
Yeah agreed 👍
 
Please can you provide a link.
I'm genuinely interested.
I used to trade bonds and know a bit about "insuring against interest rate rises".

I suspect the problem with "insuring against interest rate rises" is that the amount borrowed by a large government is so huge (versus your average corporate) that it is almost un-insurable.

So the only practical "insurance against rate rises" is to borrow at longer maturities....
.....but these tend to be higher to start with. ("yield curve").

But I may be mistaken.

Here's the Reuters source
https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk...payers-11-billion-pounds-rate-hit-2022-06-10/

But just simple googling of 'Sunak and lost £billions' will bring up plenty others for you to dismiss or correct as you see fit.
 
I don’t want to talk for Jerry but I don’t think that was the point he was making, more so that tax evasion listed pales in to insignificance when compared to the legal routes of avoidance on an industrial scale deployed by massive multi-national companies (and not meant in a way to excuse the former).

More a question of ethics.
Absolutely.
The amounts in that list are peanuts compared to the tax amounts avoided by some corporates.
And " clamping down on (that) evasion" will do little to fund an NHS costing £ 145 billion p.a.


Some classics:
- Amazon booking customer purchases through Luxembourg (check some of your receipts)
Despite the goods being in a UK warehouse, handled by UK staff etc (almost zero going near Luxembourg)

- Starbucks reporting minimal profit in UK and RoI...yet still thinking it worth adding to their 1000s of outlets
...because Starbucks Grand Cayman (or wherever it is) charges Starbucks UK/RoI a Royalty for using the logo - and a commission on badged supplies.

- Large Care Home Corporations based in G.C. (or wherever) charging (e.g.) 8% interest on loans to their UK Homes, i.e. transferring profits.

- BMW selling its cars to a Luxembourg subsidiary at near cost - so minimal profit inside Germany. BMW Lux, selling to the Sole Importers of each other country.

There is a solution to this.
Look at the worldwide profits reported to shareholders - then allocate those profits to each country in proportion to that country's volume.
But of course the Corporates say:
"It isn't as simple as that. The costs in each country are different - as well as the treatment of those costs for tax."

Which is why scores Countries have signed up to implement "Country By Country Reporting", as set out by the OECD.
This should highlight inter-country transfer pricing (and therefore potential profit shifting).
OECD - Tax

I hope the above shows how one can be a supporter of Free Market Capitalism...
....while recognising that prior Rules that lead to unfairness need to change.
 
Agreed.

But you know what? The solution isn’t palatable to Joe Public. The solution is:

* Stop all political donations
* Stop all second jobs for politicians
* Pay politicians in line with their market rates. For a PM, that’ll be in the millions/year.
* Stop all these silly expenses for second homes etc
* Have a proper HR function so politicians don’t give jobs to the boys/family
* Scrap parliamentary privilege
* Send politicians to prison / face criminal charges if they break the law / mislead.
1) I don't want my taxes to fund a political Party
Which Parties will be funded ?
Those that the established Parties permit ???

2) I want my MP to have a 2nd job - to keep him/ her in touch.
They just have to declare at election time.
Also, the idea of Recall could be extended to cover new jobs by MPs, not declared at time of election.

4) Second Home expenses are OK. They just need to be in line with the Private Sector. e.g. No cherry-picking whether London or Constituency home is the 1st or 2nd (so no profiting at tax-payer expense)
(Note: I believe there is a rule that no MP with a Constituency in Greater London is allowed a "2nd Home" (on expenses).)

5) Agreed that a "proper HR function" should exist.
Banning family as staff is OTT. People employ who they trust.

6) Parliamentary Privilege is necessary to allow MPs to Whistleblow.
Whether the Rules needing tweaking is another matter.
Given that more info, is usually better than less info., another change might be to make it harder for Big Corporations to sue journalists, individuals and small businesses.

7) Define "break the law".
Some purists call Yellow Line infringements "law-breaking".
"Recall" should be extended.
 
UK tax avoidance by some of the big multi-nationals is unpalatable but without changing laws there`s probably not too much the authorities can do about it.

On the other hand, the list linked by Trashbat is just the tip of an iceberg and there would be something that could be done about it if HMG ensured there was sufficient investigative resource within HMR&C. The "defaulters", and i`m not talking about low level odd-job cash-in-hand "arrangements" (not condoning it, either), deprive the UK of many, many millions of pounds. Excluding the big global commercial "avoiders" etc., tax fraud by criminals in the UK is in the £billions.

The (linked) lists allude to "excise wrongdoing". In reality it`s not possible (hasn`t been for quite some time) to investigate most tax related "wrongdoers" to a level where much or most of the wrong-doing would fit into a more transparent criminal violation, resulting in significant asset seizures (to the public purse) and criminal convictions.

Because of long running, huge cuts to investigative staff, authorities are left with few options, other than publication of lists and other peripheral paper exercises, in the hope that some "wrong doers" find it in themselves to pay a token penalty.

I`m afraid it`s the same old story when it comes to crime generally and HMG - who say a lot, promise a lot, but in reality do naff-all ! Instead, they push blame and negativity downward on the shoulders of shamefully under-resourced public sector entities. Enforcement comes at a cost - oh, the irony !
 
1) I don't want my taxes to fund a political Party
Which Parties will be funded ?
Those that the established Parties permit ???
I was defining a principle only - not how it would be implemented. Clearly it would need careful consideration to ensure fairness / participation.

Party political donations create huge conflicts of interest. The Tory party is conflicted by business lobbying for their own interests. The Labour Party is conflicted by the unions. Both result in sub optimal decision for the benefit of the country. Paying a bit of extra tax is in the interests of greater democracy and better governance.

2) I want my MP to have a 2nd job - to keep him/ her in touch.
They just have to declare at election time.
Also, the idea of Recall could be extended to cover new jobs by MPs, not declared at time of election.
Being an MP is not a part-time job. You can’t be a nurse/doctor/QC all the while representing your constituents. Even though some/all of those jobs might be socially good, it not compatible with representing the electorate; and in some cases it creates huge conflicts of interest too.

4) Second Home expenses are OK. They just need to be in line with the Private Sector. e.g. No cherry-picking whether London or Constituency home is the 1st or 2nd (so no profiting at tax-payer expense)
(Note: I believe there is a rule that no MP with a Constituency in Greater London is allowed a "2nd Home" (on expenses).)
Nope. If they need to stay somewhere close to Westminster, stay in a hotel. Submit a receipt. Have it refunded.

5) Agreed that a "proper HR function" should exist.
Banning family as staff is OTT. People employ who they trust.
I wasn’t proposing banning family members as staff, but hiring needs to be a fair and transparent process. People getting the job need to be vetted for skills and not just because they’re shagging the boss.

6) Parliamentary Privilege is necessary to allow MPs to Whistleblow.
Whether the Rules needing tweaking is another matter.
Given that more info, is usually better than less info., another change might be to make it harder for Big Corporations to sue journalists, individuals and small businesses.


7) Define "break the law".
Some purists call Yellow Line infringements "law-breaking".
"Recall" should be extended.
That’s above my pay grade. The courts decide.
 
It’s not always black and white though people.

June last year I received a potential tax bill for over £2000.

It’s due to hitting the child benefit earnings threshold.

Now,
A - I wasn’t aware there WAS an upper earnings limit.

B- I had assumed that child benefit had replaced the old family allowance that our parents all got regardless.

C- as PAYE I would’ve thought the tax office would’ve known how much I earned, but apparently it is down to me to inform them, even though A applies.

So I wrote back with all my P60s for the previous 5 years. And gave as much information as I could. Then waited 11 months for a response. They finally replied a month ago.

Oh. And they are charging interest on the fee because I never told them.

Oh, and if I wanna pay back in instalments that incurs a daily interest fee too.

Absolute Fucking Bastards.
 
Reading through these past replies they make me feel inferior, I have too be completely honest I’ve been very lucky financially but I’m definitely not as clever as most people on this forum, I’m getting lost maybe because of my loss off confidence or maybe it’s the Alzheimer’s (3)

I agree with what I’ve read, plenty of people dodge tax, I am not one of them , not saying I would not have liked to, but then again I don’t fancy a knock from inspectors, be something else too get in the head.
 
It’s not always black and white though people.

June last year I received a potential tax bill for over £2000.

It’s due to hitting the child benefit earnings threshold.

Now,
A - I wasn’t aware there WAS an upper earnings limit.

B- I had assumed that child benefit had replaced the old family allowance that our parents all got regardless.

C- as PAYE I would’ve thought the tax office would’ve known how much I earned, but apparently it is down to me to inform them, even though A applies.

So I wrote back with all my P60s for the previous 5 years. And gave as much information as I could. Then waited 11 months for a response. They finally replied a month ago.

Oh. And they are charging interest on the fee because I never told them.

Oh, and if I wanna pay back in instalments that incurs a daily interest fee too.

Absolute Fucking Bastards.

Very common issue this Rob - but, to counteract it, make sure you’ve been getting higher-rate tax relief on any pension contributions you make - a friend of mine had the same issue - then I helped him claim back HRT pension relief and
turned out HMRC owed him…

Don’t get too excited as there’s probably a 60% chance you’ve had the relief on your payslip already, but many don’t…

(if you opted out of pension, of work for civil service/NHS then ignore this completely).

Happy to assist directly if you
 
Very common issue this Rob - but, to counteract it, make sure you’ve been getting higher-rate tax relief on any pension contributions you make - a friend of mine had the same issue - then I helped him claim back HRT pension relief and
turned out HMRC owed him…

Don’t get too excited as there’s probably a 60% chance you’ve had the relief on your payslip already, but many don’t…

(if you opted out of pension, of work for civil service/NHS then ignore this completely).

Happy to assist directly if you
Very interesting Nathan, thank you.
I would assume that as pension payments are an internal payroll matter I will have to speak to them about it.

I am ringing HMRC tomorrow (covid ravaged throat permitting) to try and discuss the unfair interest so will chuck that one in too. Thanks
 
UK tax avoidance by some of the big multi-nationals is unpalatable but without changing laws there`s probably not too much the authorities can do about it.

On the other hand, the list linked by Trashbat is just the tip of an iceberg and there would be something that could be done about it if HMG ensured there was sufficient investigative resource within HMR&C. The "defaulters", and i`m not talking about low level odd-job cash-in-hand "arrangements" (not condoning it, either), deprive the UK of many, many millions of pounds. Excluding the big global commercial "avoiders" etc., tax fraud by criminals in the UK is in the £billions.

The (linked) lists allude to "excise wrongdoing". In reality it`s not possible (hasn`t been for quite some time) to investigate most tax related "wrongdoers" to a level where much or most of the wrong-doing would fit into a more transparent criminal violation, resulting in significant asset seizures (to the public purse) and criminal convictions.

Because of long running, huge cuts to investigative staff, authorities are left with few options, other than publication of lists and other peripheral paper exercises, in the hope that some "wrong doers" find it in themselves to pay a token penalty.

I`m afraid it`s the same old story when it comes to crime generally and HMG - who say a lot, promise a lot, but in reality do naff-all ! Instead, they push blame and negativity downward on the shoulders of shamefully under-resourced public sector entities. Enforcement comes at a cost - oh, the irony !
Yes, well said Lancs. Cuts to "save money" when HMRC employees can easily cover the cost of their employment multiple times over. Madness. Can't employ civil servants to earn the Exchequer a fortune can we?
 
Very interesting Nathan, thank you.
I would assume that as pension payments are an internal payroll matter I will have to speak to them about it.

I am ringing HMRC tomorrow (covid ravaged throat permitting) to try and discuss the unfair interest so will chuck that one in too. Thanks

They won’t know about your pension situation, as that depends how it’s been set up - an easy check is your last couple of payslips - see if you can work out if your taxable pay reduces by the pension contribution - if it doesn’t, you’ll be due some extra relief. If it does, then you’ve already had the relief. There are a few million people out there not claiming their HRT relief on pension, make sure you’re not one of them. Same goes for everyone!