Like have you done any more for Vote Leave? We should get the official designation on Thursday.
I've made another donation. I'm looking forward to the designation decision on Thursday.
Farage was interestingly emollient on the radio this morning (apart from blowing at - I think Giles Cohen - who, TBF, launched into a rant about UKIP out of the blue).
Totally unbiased question ("are you going to go and hide if Vote Leave get the designation because they have made clear they don't want anything to do with you").
Response: We've had disagreements in the past, but they have some very senior Cabinet Ministers on board now. I've met with two of them in the last week (interesting) and we've had some very serious conversations. Whichever group gets the designation doesn't matter - we are both going to work together: Vote Leave understand that they need to be able to reach out beyond the Tories, to the working classes and the left. [I paraphrase from memory]
Gifted Skinner all the publicity he wanted, and Tw@tter thinks he (Bercow) is working for the Tories ! Unbelievable !
Most of twitter think half the Labour party work for the Tories too...it was more the sneering remarks from "just a junior minister" that made him look like a tool.
Blimey! Boris has paid £1m in tax in the last four years according to the Telegraph.
I wish I had.
I used to wind up my former senior partner by explaining one of my ambitions in life (still on the bucket list) was to pay CGT.
At the risk of sounding other than a tory yet again one of the reasons that the better paid in this country are paying a larger share of the tax revenue is because they are doing very well thank you very much. I have no problem with those doing well earning well but if Corbyn got one thing right it is that the fact that mugs like me get hammered for tax and the very well off are given a broad range of reliefs and benefits and allowances which result in a much lower rate of tax. It just isn't right.
Tax simplification, as explained by Cameron today, is really the way to go and progress is far too slow.
We should treat offshore wealth as terrorist finance - Paul Mason
“It’s over. There are no more respectable forms of tax avoidance and from now on offshore wealth will be treated the same way we treat terrorist finance.”
Like have you done any more for Vote Leave? We should get the official designation on Thursday.
I've made another donation. I'm looking forward to the designation decision on Thursday.
Farage was interestingly emollient on the radio this morning (apart from blowing at - I think Giles Cohen - who, TBF, launched into a rant about UKIP out of the blue).
Totally unbiased question ("are you going to go and hide if Vote Leave get the designation because they have made clear they don't want anything to do with you").
Response: We've had disagreements in the past, but they have some very senior Cabinet Ministers on board now. I've met with two of them in the last week (interesting) and we've had some very serious conversations. Whichever group gets the designation doesn't matter - we are both going to work together: Vote Leave understand that they need to be able to reach out beyond the Tories, to the working classes and the left. [I paraphrase from memory]
Sounds like there's a deal been done.
Thanks Charles. I'll certainly be very surprised if Vote Leave don't get it but, with how Aaron Banks has been acting in recent months, I still half-expect him to launch a legal challenge if Leave EU/GO don't get it. He filed papers against Matthew Elliot a couple of weeks ago if memory serves me correctly, and I don't see any news he's withdrawn that.
I don't have a problem with them operating a parallel campaign so long as it's coordinated and all the fire is directed on Remain, not on each other.
We should treat offshore wealth as terrorist finance - Paul Mason
“It’s over. There are no more respectable forms of tax avoidance and from now on offshore wealth will be treated the same way we treat terrorist finance.”
Missed all the action as in a meeting. Am I safe in assuming another utterly dire performance from Corbyn?
If you believe the commentators here, yes. If you believe the BBC local station that I'm listening to, no. Cameron was poor and Corbyn effectively put him in the spot. It will only get worse for the Government, they say.
We should treat offshore wealth as terrorist finance - Paul Mason
“It’s over. There are no more respectable forms of tax avoidance and from now on offshore wealth will be treated the same way we treat terrorist finance.”
I actually thought Angus Robertson made a sensible, measured and intelligent contribution, not for the first time. I thought his observations and questions were far more perceptive, interesting and relevant than anything said by Corbyn and I am not seeking to damn with faint praise.
Blimey! Boris has paid £1m in tax in the last four years according to the Telegraph.
I wish I had.
I used to wind up my former senior partner by explaining one of my ambitions in life (still on the bucket list) was to pay CGT.
At the risk of sounding other than a tory yet again one of the reasons that the better paid in this country are paying a larger share of the tax revenue is because they are doing very well thank you very much. I have no problem with those doing well earning well but if Corbyn got one thing right it is that the fact that mugs like me get hammered for tax and the very well off are given a broad range of reliefs and benefits and allowances which result in a much lower rate of tax. It just isn't right.
Tax simplification, as explained by Cameron today, is really the way to go and progress is far too slow.
Too often, in this country, there seems to be more real resentment at those who have successful careers and work hard to earn between £50k-£150k per year, and pay a lot of tax in the process, rather than the real super rich who pay a pittance.
I've adopted the Dennis Skinner approach in client meetings before now. I've seen that the client is heading in a catastrophic direction and so I've thrown myself still further out there to draw all enemy fire. It usually works well, though it does require steady nerve to execute it effectively.
Blimey! Boris has paid £1m in tax in the last four years according to the Telegraph.
I wish I had.
I used to wind up my former senior partner by explaining one of my ambitions in life (still on the bucket list) was to pay CGT.
At the risk of sounding other than a tory yet again one of the reasons that the better paid in this country are paying a larger share of the tax revenue is because they are doing very well thank you very much. I have no problem with those doing well earning well but if Corbyn got one thing right it is that the fact that mugs like me get hammered for tax and the very well off are given a broad range of reliefs and benefits and allowances which result in a much lower rate of tax. It just isn't right.
Tax simplification, as explained by Cameron today, is really the way to go and progress is far too slow.
Too often, in this country, there seems to be more real resentment at those who have successful careers and work hard to earn between £50k-£150k per year, and pay a lot of tax in the process, rather than the real super rich who pay a pittance.
Exactly so. Also those who earn their money rather than inherit it.
Talking of interest on deposits, has anyone got experience of Aldermore for business deposits? The interest rates look very good (too good?).
I've not used them (used Shawbrook instead) but what I've heard has been good.
Thanks (and thanks to others who replied).
I'd forgotten about Shawbrook, they look a useful option as well. I think we'll split the money into £75K chunks and spread it around to be sure of the FSCS protection.
Missed all the action as in a meeting. Am I safe in assuming another utterly dire performance from Corbyn?
If you believe the commentators here, yes. If you believe the BBC local station that I'm listening to, no. Cameron was poor and Corbyn effectively put him in the spot. It will only get worse for the Government, they say.
LOL...good old Beeb. Funny how they aren't very keen to repeat the interview with the tax expert they had on who rubbished all their outrage by explaining carefully and calmly what exactly Cameron had invested in and why he wouldn't even advice people to do so these days because it was actually pretty rubbish.
'Tax simplification, as explained by Cameron today, is really the way to go and progress is far too slow.'
Yes it is David, but we haven't had any for so very long now - nothing substantive since the 1980s to be honest.
Indeed things have been going in the opposite direction, with more complexity and endless fiddling. I'm sorry to say it but the supposed Conservative Chancellor Osborne has been as much of a culprit here as his Labour predecessors.
That is the first time I have heard a Tory complain that businesses are reinvesting in jobs and technology, driving forward some areas by leaps and bounds instead of taking fat profits for the shareholders. Are you sure you are in the right party ? Amazon might not pay any tax, but those ten of thousand of people it employs all over the world pay tax, those billions it spends with hardware companies and other suppliers, they all pay tax because of the money Amazon spends with them.
Well, it is unfair trading and unfair competition on those that do pay their taxes. I don't see anything Conservative about that. It reduces our tax base and allows capital appreciation as a result. All perfectly legal. All perfectly ridiculous.
Well I guess it could expand a lot more slowly, employ a lot less people, we could all hand back our Kindles, we could turn off half the cloud services used by businesses, forget about all that nice digital media investment, the half a dozen other companies they bought would probably not have made it, including Blue Origin, and we could pay for a couple of thousand extra dole cheques in the UK and up to a 100,000 world wide....
You are assuming that the business would not otherwise exist and would not employ others. You are assuming that these services would not be provided otherwise. I think if we had a variety of companies providing internet shopping based in the UK and paying tax in the UK we would have more employment, a better choice of services and considerably more tax paid for services in the society that provided those companies with their opportunities to make money.
The problem (well, a problem) is that for users it is actually a lot more convenient to interact with a single, giant company than lots of smaller ones.
Monopolies are always convenient until they are not.
@faisalislam: Government strategy now to use the Panama Papers fallout to attack LAbour for being "anti-aspiration" - on share ownership, Inheritance tax
Took them a week to work out the correct line but it is still the correct line.
Yeah, they should have done that earlier,
BUT
Didn't this kind of happen with the IDS/tax credit thing. A week of almost studied inaction, Labour frotted into incompetence and then a bravura performance in the house and the story deader than any cat, parrot, or related animal?~
Am I alone in thinking this is all getting a bit bonkers. Where does it end?
Yes...we are all just suffering nosey parker symdrome going ooohhh look Boris makes this, Osborne got that so much in dividends. None of which is dodgy or a conflict of interest etc.
That is the first time I have heard a Tory complain that businesses are reinvesting in jobs and technology, driving forward some areas by leaps and bounds instead of taking fat profits for the shareholders. Are you sure you are in the right party ? Amazon might not pay any tax, but those ten of thousand of people it employs all over the world pay tax, those billions it spends with hardware companies and other suppliers, they all pay tax because of the money Amazon spends with them.
Well, it is unfair trading and unfair competition on those that do pay their taxes. I don't see anything Conservative about that. It reduces our tax base and allows capital appreciation as a result. All perfectly legal. All perfectly ridiculous.
Well I guess it could expand a lot more slowly, employ a lot less people, we could all hand back our Kindles, we could turn off half the cloud services used by businesses, forget about all that nice digital media investment, the half a dozen other companies they bought would probably not have made it, including Blue Origin, and we could pay for a couple of thousand extra dole cheques in the UK and up to a 100,000 world wide....
You are assuming that the business would not otherwise exist and would not employ others. You are assuming that these services would not be provided otherwise. I think if we had a variety of companies providing internet shopping based in the UK and paying tax in the UK we would have more employment, a better choice of services and considerably more tax paid for services in the society that provided those companies with their opportunities to make money.
The problem (well, a problem) is that for users it is actually a lot more convenient to interact with a single, giant company than lots of smaller ones.
Monopolies are always convenient until they are not.
The EU generally does a very good job of investigating and controlling those organisations who have dominant positions. You don't even need to be in the EU to be subject to it....
That is the first time I have heard a Tory complain that businesses are reinvesting in jobs and technology, driving forward some areas by leaps and bounds instead of taking fat profits for the shareholders. Are you sure you are in the right party ? Amazon might not pay any tax, but those ten of thousand of people it employs all over the world pay tax, those billions it spends with hardware companies and other suppliers, they all pay tax because of the money Amazon spends with them.
Well, it is unfair trading and unfair competition on those that do pay their taxes. I don't see anything Conservative about that. It reduces our tax base and allows capital appreciation as a result. All perfectly legal. All perfectly ridiculous.
Well I guess it could expand a lot more slowly, employ a lot less people, we could all hand back our Kindles, we could turn off half the cloud services used by businesses, forget about all that nice digital media investment, the half a dozen other companies they bought would probably not have made it, including Blue Origin, and we could pay for a couple of thousand extra dole cheques in the UK and up to a 100,000 world wide....
You are assuming that the business would not otherwise exist and would not employ others. You are assuming that these services would not be provided otherwise. I think if we had a variety of companies providing internet shopping based in the UK and paying tax in the UK we would have more employment, a better choice of services and considerably more tax paid for services in the society that provided those companies with their opportunities to make money.
The problem (well, a problem) is that for users it is actually a lot more convenient to interact with a single, giant company than lots of smaller ones.
Monopolies are always convenient until they are not.
Indeed, that's why it's a problem. Online monopolies are convenient in ways that real world ones aren't though.
Gifted Skinner all the publicity he wanted, and Tw@tter thinks he (Bercow) is working for the Tories ! Unbelievable !
Most of twitter think half the Labour party work for the Tories too...it was more the sneering remarks from "just a junior minister" that made him look like a tool.
One of the ways the Speaker can keep order is by making disparaging remarks about MPs who speak out of turn.
Ministers or other MPs shouting out from a sedentary position can expect to be admonished. If the Speaker's cutting remark is good enough it will keep them quiet for a while.
'Tax simplification, as explained by Cameron today, is really the way to go and progress is far too slow.'
Yes it is David, but we haven't had any for so very long now - nothing substantive since the 1980s to be honest.
Indeed things have been going in the opposite direction, with more complexity and endless fiddling. I'm sorry to say it but the supposed Conservative Chancellor Osborne has been as much of a culprit here as his Labour predecessors.
He has focussed on reducing tax loopholes, hence Cameron boasting about the number of different anti avoidance steps taken today. But going down the route of closing loopholes is a never ending task. It is much better to simplify but it is much easier to do that when there is money to play with that can offset at least some of the losers.
Lawson did his best tax reforms when he had money pouring in from the north sea and the big bang. I remember his target of finding a tax to abolish every budget. Good times but much, much harder to do when you have a huge and obstinate deficit to deal with.
'Tax simplification, as explained by Cameron today, is really the way to go and progress is far too slow.'
Yes it is David, but we haven't had any for so very long now - nothing substantive since the 1980s to be honest.
Indeed things have been going in the opposite direction, with more complexity and endless fiddling. I'm sorry to say it but the supposed Conservative Chancellor Osborne has been as much of a culprit here as his Labour predecessors.
He has focussed on reducing tax loopholes, hence Cameron boasting about the number of different anti avoidance steps taken today. But going down the route of closing loopholes is a never ending task. It is much better to simplify but it is much easier to do that when there is money to play with that can offset at least some of the losers.
Lawson did his best tax reforms when he had money pouring in from the north sea and the big bang. I remember his target of finding a tax to abolish every budget. Good times but much, much harder to do when you have a huge and obstinate deficit to deal with.
There are lots of things you can do which are revenue neutral. But there is just no appetite for it. Politically-driven tinkering is totally dominant.
Tax simplification, as explained by Cameron today, is really the way to go and progress is far too slow.
Sorry, Mr. L. I haven't been keeping up today. Are you saying that Cameron has said he wants to simplify the tax code in this country?
"Wants to" is probably a bit strong. He did say that his ideal was low taxes that everybody paid. And I agree with that. I think these days they call it aspirational.
I've adopted the Dennis Skinner approach in client meetings before now. I've seen that the client is heading in a catastrophic direction and so I've thrown myself still further out there to draw all enemy fire. It usually works well, though it does require steady nerve to execute it effectively.
The dead cat approach. Lynton would no doubt be proud of Dennis - if he thought it was a deliberate ploy. I rather suspect it wasn't.
As an aside, Skinner would now be Father of the House had he shown a bit more urgency in 1970. We can be grateful for small mercies.
'Tax simplification, as explained by Cameron today, is really the way to go and progress is far too slow.'
Yes it is David, but we haven't had any for so very long now - nothing substantive since the 1980s to be honest.
Indeed things have been going in the opposite direction, with more complexity and endless fiddling. I'm sorry to say it but the supposed Conservative Chancellor Osborne has been as much of a culprit here as his Labour predecessors.
He has focussed on reducing tax loopholes, hence Cameron boasting about the number of different anti avoidance steps taken today. But going down the route of closing loopholes is a never ending task. It is much better to simplify but it is much easier to do that when there is money to play with that can offset at least some of the losers.
Lawson did his best tax reforms when he had money pouring in from the north sea and the big bang. I remember his target of finding a tax to abolish every budget. Good times but much, much harder to do when you have a huge and obstinate deficit to deal with.
There are lots of things you can do which are revenue neutral. But there is just no appetite for it. Politically-driven tinkering is totally dominant.
I'm not surprised if you end up having 2 Budgets a year as has been happening.
They've got to fill them with something. Far better to have lower taxes on everyone with very few exemptions at all. Simpler, cheaper to collect and fairer.
I actually thought Angus Robertson made a sensible, measured and intelligent contribution, not for the first time. I thought his observations and questions were far more perceptive, interesting and relevant than anything said by Corbyn and I am not seeking to damn with faint praise.
I've been quite impressed with Robertson. I thought he'd be overshadowed by Salmond returning to Westminster. Instead, in his quiet way, he's been the most effective opposition parliamentary leader.
I've been quite impressed with Robertson. I thought he'd be overshadowed by Salmond returning to Westminster. Instead, in his quiet way, he's been the most effective opposition parliamentary leader.
A fine example of damning with faint praise, David!
I actually thought Angus Robertson made a sensible, measured and intelligent contribution, not for the first time. I thought his observations and questions were far more perceptive, interesting and relevant than anything said by Corbyn and I am not seeking to damn with faint praise.
I've been quite impressed with Robertson. I thought he'd be overshadowed by Salmond returning to Westminster. Instead, in his quiet way, he's been the most effective opposition parliamentary leader.
'Tax simplification, as explained by Cameron today, is really the way to go and progress is far too slow.'
Yes it is David, but we haven't had any for so very long now - nothing substantive since the 1980s to be honest.
Indeed things have been going in the opposite direction, with more complexity and endless fiddling. I'm sorry to say it but the supposed Conservative Chancellor Osborne has been as much of a culprit here as his Labour predecessors.
How much would a simplified tax code cost, though.
The problem when you build an economy, in the long term, where tax avoidance is a mainstay of wealth accumulation and the complexity requires many relatively simple tax declarations to still benefit from paying an accountant, that a significant chunk of your economy is then based on this.
I would be unsurprised if various accountancy practices from basic year end prep to full scale avoidance schemes do not make up somewhere close to 5% of the UK economy.
Anecdotage. My missus, not very political and a teacher has expressed strong sympathy for call me Dave on this tax lark. Huffing in annoyance. at labour spokesmen demanding ever more info "oh for goodness sake!" "ridiculous withhunt"and "load of bollcks". Vox populi.
Tax simplification, as explained by Cameron today, is really the way to go and progress is far too slow.
Sorry, Mr. L. I haven't been keeping up today. Are you saying that Cameron has said he wants to simplify the tax code in this country?
"Wants to" is probably a bit strong. He did say that his ideal was low taxes that everybody paid. And I agree with that. I think these days they call it aspirational.
Thanks, Mr L, so just another meaningless soundbite from Cameron then.
@FattyBolger My other half held forth on this subject this morning. His view was that the amount of money didn't bother him but that he felt that David Cameron had only himself to blame for all the bad publicity given the way he'd handled it. He felt that he needed to get a grip.
Anecdotage. My missus, not very political and a teacher has expressed strong sympathy for call me Dave on this tax lark. Huffing in annoyance. at labour spokesmen demanding ever more info "oh for goodness sake!" "ridiculous withhunt"and "load of bollcks". Vox populi.
Talking of interest on deposits, has anyone got experience of Aldermore for business deposits? The interest rates look very good (too good?).
1.10 to 2.35% ?
Excellent rates for a business acount to my eyes, don't look "too good" to me.
Hell of a lot better than NatWest!
I've had a personal account with them and they've been very efficient.
I hope you don't mean tax efficient.....
you do mean tax efficient!
My dearest one: I believe in privacy. I can assure you - but, ssh, don't tell - I have paid tax on the few pounds of interest I have earned.
There is no justification to expect private citizens to declare their income publicly if it is entirely privately generated.
But there is absolutely no reason for Tax Consumers to be given the right to privacy over their consumption of tax. Indeed, anyone who consumes tax should be required to declare all their income so it is transparent that they are entitled to the tax they consume.
I've been quite impressed with Robertson. I thought he'd be overshadowed by Salmond returning to Westminster. Instead, in his quiet way, he's been the most effective opposition parliamentary leader.
A fine example of damning with faint praise, David!
I wasn't meaning to, although I take the point that the standard required to be the 'best' isn't high. Robertson is unlikely to make many headlines in the London media unless for the wrong reasons but he's been pretty effective in what's quite a difficult job given the SNP's unusual position (a large number of MPs with not a lot to do, and a party hierarchy focussed on Holyrood and which won't want overshadowing from Westminster.
Talking of interest on deposits, has anyone got experience of Aldermore for business deposits? The interest rates look very good (too good?).
1.10 to 2.35% ?
Excellent rates for a business acount to my eyes, don't look "too good" to me.
Hell of a lot better than NatWest!
I've had a personal account with them and they've been very efficient.
I hope you don't mean tax efficient.....
you do mean tax efficient!
My dearest one: I believe in privacy. I can assure you - but, ssh, don't tell - I have paid tax on the few pounds of interest I have earned.
There is no justification to expect private citizens to declare their income publicly if it is entirely privately generated.
But there is absolutely no reason for Tax Consumers to be given the right to privacy over their consumption of tax. Indeed, anyone who consumes tax should be required to declare all their income so it is transparent that they are entitled to the tax they consume.
That would cover a lot of people. Anyone in receipt of benefits for example.
@FattyBolger My other half held forth on this subject this morning. His view was that the amount of money didn't bother him but that he felt that David Cameron had only himself to blame for all the bad publicity given the way he'd handled it. He felt that he needed to get a grip.
I have to say I basically agree with him.
Not just the way he handled it at the time. But the way he created an open goal for his (competent) opponents by creating the completely undefined and ambiguous class of "Aggressive Tax Avoidance" when surely he knew it would come back to bite him.
@FattyBolger My other half held forth on this subject this morning. His view was that the amount of money didn't bother him but that he felt that David Cameron had only himself to blame for all the bad publicity given the way he'd handled it. He felt that he needed to get a grip.
I have to say I basically agree with him.
I've found the perception that Cameron wasn't honest about it and tried to cover his tracks in his first statements last week, has been more damaging than the actual tax affairs.
@FattyBolger My other half held forth on this subject this morning. His view was that the amount of money didn't bother him but that he felt that David Cameron had only himself to blame for all the bad publicity given the way he'd handled it. He felt that he needed to get a grip.
I have to say I basically agree with him.
Not just the way he handled it at the time. But the way he created an open goal for his (competent) opponents by creating the completely undefined and ambiguous class of "Aggressive Tax Avoidance" when surely he knew it would come back to bite him.
Of course, competent opponents excludes Corbyn.
Today Corbyn lost labour's case in a totally inept performance
'Tax simplification, as explained by Cameron today, is really the way to go and progress is far too slow.'
Yes it is David, but we haven't had any for so very long now - nothing substantive since the 1980s to be honest.
Indeed things have been going in the opposite direction, with more complexity and endless fiddling. I'm sorry to say it but the supposed Conservative Chancellor Osborne has been as much of a culprit here as his Labour predecessors.
He has focussed on reducing tax loopholes, hence Cameron boasting about the number of different anti avoidance steps taken today. But going down the route of closing loopholes is a never ending task. It is much better to simplify but it is much easier to do that when there is money to play with that can offset at least some of the losers.
Lawson did his best tax reforms when he had money pouring in from the north sea and the big bang. I remember his target of finding a tax to abolish every budget. Good times but much, much harder to do when you have a huge and obstinate deficit to deal with.
There are lots of things you can do which are revenue neutral. But there is just no appetite for it. Politically-driven tinkering is totally dominant.
I'm not surprised if you end up having 2 Budgets a year as has been happening.
They've got to fill them with something. Far better to have lower taxes on everyone with very few exemptions at all. Simpler, cheaper to collect and fairer.
I have been saying that for decades, Mrs Free. But it will never happen, politicians of whatever stripe, like to do things and when you have a CoE who wants to be prime minister as we have had for much of the past 20 years the problem is exacerbated.
Blimey! Boris has paid £1m in tax in the last four years according to the Telegraph.
I wish I had.
I used to wind up my former senior partner by explaining one of my ambitions in life (still on the bucket list) was to pay CGT.
At the risk of sounding other than a tory yet again one of the reasons that the better paid in this country are paying a larger share of the tax revenue is because they are doing very well thank you very much. I have no problem with those doing well earning well but if Corbyn got one thing right it is that the fact that mugs like me get hammered for tax and the very well off are given a broad range of reliefs and benefits and allowances which result in a much lower rate of tax. It just isn't right.
Tax simplification, as explained by Cameron today, is really the way to go and progress is far too slow.
Too often, in this country, there seems to be more real resentment at those who have successful careers and work hard to earn between £50k-£150k per year, and pay a lot of tax in the process, rather than the real super rich who pay a pittance.
Exactly so. Also those who earn their money rather than inherit it.
And those who work to earn their money rather than sit on rising asset values.
Conor McGinn MPVerified account @ConorMcGinn Tory MP after Tory MP now standing up in House of Commons to say if you aren't rich you aren't successful. Draw your own conclusions, folks.
Talking of interest on deposits, has anyone got experience of Aldermore for business deposits? The interest rates look very good (too good?).
1.10 to 2.35% ?
Excellent rates for a business acount to my eyes, don't look "too good" to me.
Hell of a lot better than NatWest!
I've had a personal account with them and they've been very efficient.
I hope you don't mean tax efficient.....
you do mean tax efficient!
My dearest one: I believe in privacy. I can assure you - but, ssh, don't tell - I have paid tax on the few pounds of interest I have earned.
There is no justification to expect private citizens to declare their income publicly if it is entirely privately generated.
But there is absolutely no reason for Tax Consumers to be given the right to privacy over their consumption of tax. Indeed, anyone who consumes tax should be required to declare all their income so it is transparent that they are entitled to the tax they consume.
That would cover a lot of people. Anyone in receipt of benefits for example.
Yes, that's the intention. Combine it with a modern form of Athenian naval funding for Tax Declarations and it could sort the system out quite sharpish.
@FattyBolger My other half held forth on this subject this morning. His view was that the amount of money didn't bother him but that he felt that David Cameron had only himself to blame for all the bad publicity given the way he'd handled it. He felt that he needed to get a grip.
I have to say I basically agree with him.
I've found the perception that Cameron wasn't honest about it and tried to cover his tracks in his first statements last week, has been more damaging than the actual tax affairs.
Yes. This would now largely be a non-story had Cameron just been upfront to begin with.
@FattyBolger My other half held forth on this subject this morning. His view was that the amount of money didn't bother him but that he felt that David Cameron had only himself to blame for all the bad publicity given the way he'd handled it. He felt that he needed to get a grip.
I have to say I basically agree with him.
I've found the perception that Cameron wasn't honest about it and tried to cover his tracks in his first statements last week, has been more damaging than the actual tax affairs.
Yep. There seems nothing much in it, but people now either think there is, or he acted like there was.
Conor McGinn MPVerified account @ConorMcGinn Tory MP after Tory MP now standing up in House of Commons to say if you aren't rich you aren't successful. Draw your own conclusions, folks.
Labour just doesn't get aspiration. Blair did and Labour has disowned him. People want to earn more and pay less tax, it is a very basic fact of life. I've come across very few people who want the opposite.
Ha!, I'll tell her that! Her views on Gove are unprintable although i believe she did vote Con last year as she thought Ed M as Pm was too absurd to contemplate.
Thanks Charles. I'll certainly be very surprised if Vote Leave don't get it but, with how Aaron Banks has been acting in recent months, I still half-expect him to launch a legal challenge if Leave EU/GO don't get it. He filed papers against Matthew Elliot a couple of weeks ago if memory serves me correctly, and I don't see any news he's withdrawn that.
I don't have a problem with them operating a parallel campaign so long as it's coordinated and all the fire is directed on Remain, not on each other.
Conor McGinn MPVerified account @ConorMcGinn Tory MP after Tory MP now standing up in House of Commons to say if you aren't rich you aren't successful. Draw your own conclusions, folks.
Labour just doesn't get aspiration. Blair did and Labour has disowned him. People want to earn more and pay less tax, it is a very basic fact of life. I've come across very few people who want the opposite.
I'm not watching BBC Parliament but I suspect Tory MPs are saying that being well-off isn't a crime and, more often than not, those who pay a lot of tax not are those who have worked very hard to become a success.
They are absolutely not saying the opposite, but I don't expect the Labour benches to understand that.
Talking of interest on deposits, has anyone got experience of Aldermore for business deposits? The interest rates look very good (too good?).
1.10 to 2.35% ?
Excellent rates for a business acount to my eyes, don't look "too good" to me.
Hell of a lot better than NatWest!
I've had a personal account with them and they've been very efficient.
I hope you don't mean tax efficient.....
you do mean tax efficient!
My dearest one: I believe in privacy. I can assure you - but, ssh, don't tell - I have paid tax on the few pounds of interest I have earned.
There is no justification to expect private citizens to declare their income publicly if it is entirely privately generated.
But there is absolutely no reason for Tax Consumers to be given the right to privacy over their consumption of tax. Indeed, anyone who consumes tax should be required to declare all their income so it is transparent that they are entitled to the tax they consume.
That may well be logical. But I'm afraid that I think the right to privacy is pretty fundamental. With no privacy we have no real freedom. I disagree with Mr Meeks over this. My financial affairs, like my medical affairs, indeed, like any sort of affairs, are private. I answer to HMRC for my financial affairs not to anyone else.
Talking of interest on deposits, has anyone got experience of Aldermore for business deposits? The interest rates look very good (too good?).
1.10 to 2.35% ?
Excellent rates for a business acount to my eyes, don't look "too good" to me.
Hell of a lot better than NatWest!
I've had a personal account with them and they've been very efficient.
I hope you don't mean tax efficient.....
you do mean tax efficient!
My dearest one: I believe in privacy. I can assure you - but, ssh, don't tell - I have paid tax on the few pounds of interest I have earned.
There is no justification to expect private citizens to declare their income publicly if it is entirely privately generated.
But there is absolutely no reason for Tax Consumers to be given the right to privacy over their consumption of tax. Indeed, anyone who consumes tax should be required to declare all their income so it is transparent that they are entitled to the tax they consume.
That may well be logical. But I'm afraid that I think the right to privacy is pretty fundamental. With no privacy we have no real freedom. I disagree with Mr Meeks over this. My financial affairs, like my medical affairs, indeed, like any sort of affairs, are private. I answer to HMRC for my financial affairs not to anyone else.
I suspect much of the country agree. Think about the uproar over ID cards. It wasn't the fact you were going to have a card kinda of like a passport, it was all the personal info and the wide range of people who were going to be able to access it that did for the scheme.
IMO, the biggest problem was actually biometrics were (and still aren't) as reliable as they needed to be and of course IT / governments, cos nothing ever goes wrong with highly complex IT schemes when the government is involved.
Comments
Totally unbiased question ("are you going to go and hide if Vote Leave get the designation because they have made clear they don't want anything to do with you").
Response: We've had disagreements in the past, but they have some very senior Cabinet Ministers on board now. I've met with two of them in the last week (interesting) and we've had some very serious conversations. Whichever group gets the designation doesn't matter - we are both going to work together: Vote Leave understand that they need to be able to reach out beyond the Tories, to the working classes and the left. [I paraphrase from memory]
Sounds like there's a deal been done.
Unbelievable !
Death and taxes, of course. Ahem.
Would be a much better leader than Corbyn
At the risk of sounding other than a tory yet again one of the reasons that the better paid in this country are paying a larger share of the tax revenue is because they are doing very well thank you very much. I have no problem with those doing well earning well but if Corbyn got one thing right it is that the fact that mugs like me get hammered for tax and the very well off are given a broad range of reliefs and benefits and allowances which result in a much lower rate of tax. It just isn't right.
Tax simplification, as explained by Cameron today, is really the way to go and progress is far too slow.
Missed all the action as in a meeting. Am I safe in assuming another utterly dire performance from Corbyn?
“It’s over. There are no more respectable forms of tax avoidance and from now on offshore wealth will be treated the same way we treat terrorist finance.”
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/11/smash-uk-mafia-elite-treat-offshore-wealth-terrorist-finance-perugia
I don't have a problem with them operating a parallel campaign so long as it's coordinated and all the fire is directed on Remain, not on each other.
I'd forgotten about Shawbrook, they look a useful option as well. I think we'll split the money into £75K chunks and spread it around to be sure of the FSCS protection.
Yes it is David, but we haven't had any for so very long now - nothing substantive since the 1980s to be honest.
Indeed things have been going in the opposite direction, with more complexity and endless fiddling. I'm sorry to say it but the supposed Conservative Chancellor Osborne has been as much of a culprit here as his Labour predecessors.
"it feels like there's a lonely allotment somewhere"
And they had all noticed that Corbyn, by filing a late return, was in the wrong.
Scientists. Fear us.
I wrote about this in 2010 on pb2 here:
http://politicalbetting.blogspot.co.uk/2010/07/negotiations-and-love-songs-why.html
I stand by every word.
Do I have to withdraw for the current thread?
BUT
Didn't this kind of happen with the IDS/tax credit thing. A week of almost studied inaction, Labour frotted into incompetence and then a bravura performance in the house and the story deader than any cat, parrot, or related animal?~
Ministers or other MPs shouting out from a sedentary position can expect to be admonished. If the Speaker's cutting remark is good enough it will keep them quiet for a while.
Just imagine what he might have achieved had he made any effort whatsoever in his renegotiation with the EU
Sadly for us, that wasn't the case.
Lawson did his best tax reforms when he had money pouring in from the north sea and the big bang. I remember his target of finding a tax to abolish every budget. Good times but much, much harder to do when you have a huge and obstinate deficit to deal with.
As an aside, Skinner would now be Father of the House had he shown a bit more urgency in 1970. We can be grateful for small mercies.
Doubt Khan will run though.
They've got to fill them with something. Far better to have lower taxes on everyone with very few exemptions at all. Simpler, cheaper to collect and fairer.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-36014630
The problem when you build an economy, in the long term, where tax avoidance is a mainstay of wealth accumulation and the complexity requires many relatively simple tax declarations to still benefit from paying an accountant, that a significant chunk of your economy is then based on this.
I would be unsurprised if various accountancy practices from basic year end prep to full scale avoidance schemes do not make up somewhere close to 5% of the UK economy.
I am not a Conservative but recognise that Cameron did well today.
I have to say I basically agree with him.
But there is absolutely no reason for Tax Consumers to be given the right to privacy over their consumption of tax. Indeed, anyone who consumes tax should be required to declare all their income so it is transparent that they are entitled to the tax they consume.
Of course, competent opponents excludes Corbyn.
@ConorMcGinn
Tory MP after Tory MP now standing up in House of Commons to say if you aren't rich you aren't successful. Draw your own conclusions, folks.
http://www.itv.com/news/wales/2016-04-11/welsh-political-barometer-labour-retain-lead-while-plaid-cymru-move-up-ahead-of-assembly-election/
Main story - Conservatives declining (not exactly surprisingly, all things considered).
You ought to know this. Your wife is a Tory !
Ha!, I'll tell her that! Her views on Gove are unprintable although i believe she did vote Con last year as she thought Ed M as Pm was too absurd to contemplate.
They are absolutely not saying the opposite, but I don't expect the Labour benches to understand that.
IMO, the biggest problem was actually biometrics were (and still aren't) as reliable as they needed to be and of course IT / governments, cos nothing ever goes wrong with highly complex IT schemes when the government is involved.