[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Then where are these figures? And don't you think it's a bit hypocritical to shoot down my experiences as evidence but then offer your own in the next sentence?

I also like how everyone who is defending the tax evaders yet are dragging people on benefits are have conveniently ignored my post about the benefit cap and how much you can actually earn on benefits just because it blows up their whole argument that people on benefits are just as bad.

At the end of the day, Tax evaders who are using Tax Havens are costing this country more than people on benefits are. There's no denying this.

The principal of tax evasion remains the same whether it's 100.00 or 100,000, if a shop lifter steals a tin of peas or 10 tins of peas they are still shoplifting.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Cherie

The principal of tax evasion remains the same whether it's 100.00 or 100,000, if a shop lifter steals a tin of peas or 10 tins of peas they are still shoplifting.

But that doesn't reflect real life, it's all well and good on paper but if millions of pounds of taxable money is being hidden away then that's going to have more of an effect than the average joe doing it (which isn't that likely since most people don't have the means to open offshore accounts).

Everyone else has to pay their taxes so why are you defending people with the means to do so but don't due to their own greed?

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

But that doesn't reflect real life, it's all well and good on paper but if millions of pounds of taxable money is being hidden away then that's going to have more of an effect than the average joe doing it (which isn't that likely since most people don't have the means to open offshore accounts).

Everyone else has to pay their taxes so why are you defending people with the means to do so but don't due to their own greed?

I've just heard a tax lawyer talking about this, he was of the view that off shore investments brings more into HMRC coffers than local investments, so not sure where that leaves your argument


The amount the PM had invested in share offshore was 12,000, not exactly millions is it, I reckon a lot of average joes with a stocks and shares isa would have that much invested

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Cherie

I've just heard a tax lawyer talking about this, he was of the view that off shore investments brings more into HMRC coffers than local investments, so not sure where that leaves your argument


The amount the PM had invested in share offshore was 12,000, not exactly millions is it, I reckon a lot of average joes with a stocks and shares isa would have that much invested

Tax Havens tend to be used for the opposite reason, dear.

It's not just about Cameron and I don't think I've based any of this argument on him so I don't know why you're throwing out that strawman to discredit me. I also doubt that there's many 'Average Joes' that have such an involvement in the stock market that offshore accounts and Tax Havens are much of an option for them...

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Tax Havens tend to be used for the opposite reason, dear.

It's not just about Cameron and I don't think I've based any of this argument on him so I don't know why you're throwing out that strawman to discredit me. I also doubt that there's many 'Average Joes' that have such an involvement in the stock market that offshore accounts and Tax Havens are much of an option for them...

You say discredit, I say counter argument, you asked for debate last night

[smudgie]

Originally Posted by Cherie

I've just heard a tax lawyer talking about this, he was of the view that off shore investments brings more into HMRC coffers than local investments, so not sure where that leaves your argument


The amount the PM had invested in share offshore was 12,000, not exactly millions is it, I reckon a lot of average joes with a stocks and shares isa would have that much invested

Something to do with the fact that there are three layers of tax to it all, going offshore means you can avoid tax on investing into other companies or forming new companies.
Any profits made are still taxed at the country you live in rate.
Mr Cameron didn't even make enough profit to warrant paying capital gains tax.
If the £30k was between both him and Mrs Cameronthen it pales into insignificance on the tax. he does have to pay.
His wage alone will be taxed at roughly £48k, plus anther £6k or so on national nsurance. No tax free allowance for such high earners.

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by smudgie

Something to do with the fact that there are three layers of tax to it all, going offshore means you can avoid tax on investing into other companies or forming new companies.
Any profits made are still taxed at the country you live in rate.
Mr Cameron didn't even make enough profit to warrant paying capital gains tax.
If the £30k was between both him and Mrs Cameronthen it pales into insignificance on the tax. he does have to pay.
His wage alone will be taxed at roughly £48k, plus anther £6k or so on national nsurance. No tax free allowance for such high earners.

Agree with this smudgie,well said.