I feel so sorry for these poor Conservative victims. All they did was vote against feeding hungry children. And in Selaine's case berated businesses for showing compassion and charity. Someone needs to Step In and tell these monsters in the British Public to shut up. Someone well liked and respected. Like Laurence Fox.
If these were "left-wing lawyers" you'd be demanding heads roll for an attack that legitimised bullying and risked real-life assault.
Parliamentarians have a responsibility to use measured language toward one another, no matter how vociferous the policy differences.
What everyone seems to realise is that while these MPs are complaining about the use of a particular word within Parliament every action they are doing outside Parliament reinforces the idea that the description was highly appropriate.
This is just apologising for language that legitimises abuse.
That's not how we should do politics in this country - no matter how emotive the issue.
Remember: the boot can always end up on the other foot (and usually does) so you should defend the principle, not the accused.
Bernard Jenkin said she needs a holiday. No shortage of suggestions so far
I’d be very tempted were I Labour to make it clear to her that when they get into government she will be sacked from any public role and will be spending a lot of time answering questions in the inquiry into the running of PHE, Test’n’Trace and all the contracts awarded during her time in charge.
I feel so sorry for these poor Conservative victims. All they did was vote against feeding hungry children. And in Selaine's case berated businesses for showing compassion and charity. Someone needs to Step In and tell these monsters in the British Public to shut up. Someone well liked and respected. Like Laurence Fox.
If these were "left-wing lawyers" you'd be demanding heads roll for an attack that legitimised bullying and risked real-life assault.
Parliamentarians have a responsibility to use measured language toward one another, no matter how vociferous the policy differences.
What everyone seems to realise is that while these MPs are complaining about the use of a particular word within Parliament every action they are doing outside Parliament reinforces the idea that the description was highly appropriate.
I rather fancy you'd feel differently about it if it was you and your family at risk, or those who worked for you.
MPs have been badly assaulted in the past, and many more regularly receive death-threats.
I happen to think the Government has got it wrong on free-school meals but Angela Rayner's language was disgraceful.
Yes she was out of order and right to apologise quickly, unlike our PM who says he will never apologise.
Whatever happened to those thoughtful types who considered there to be more than one solution for problems and saw the world in shades of grey rather than black and white? I used to think they were the educated left, but they seem as petty and strident as anyone else now, maybe they always were. Everyone's either hero or villain.
Probably those kind of people aren't on twitter or PB I guess
I feel so sorry for these poor Conservative victims. All they did was vote against feeding hungry children. And in Selaine's case berated businesses for showing compassion and charity. Someone needs to Step In and tell these monsters in the British Public to shut up. Someone well liked and respected. Like Laurence Fox.
If these were "left-wing lawyers" you'd be demanding heads roll for an attack that legitimised bullying and risked real-life assault.
Parliamentarians have a responsibility to use measured language toward one another, no matter how vociferous the policy differences.
What everyone seems to realise is that while these MPs are complaining about the use of a particular word within Parliament every action they are doing outside Parliament reinforces the idea that the description was highly appropriate.
I rather fancy you'd feel differently about it if it was you and your family at risk, or those who worked for you.
MPs have been badly assaulted in the past, and many more regularly receive death-threats.
I happen to think the Government has got it wrong on free-school meals but Angela Rayner's language was disgraceful.
Words are often said in the heat of the moment that people regret later.
My actual comment comes from the fact that MP was complaining about the letter had shown with her previous comments (regarding businesses stepping up to do what many believe was the Government's job) that the description was (in her case) completely valid and if anything not strong enough. After all the screw generous business comment was written and not spoken.
As for being a politician - I think I've said often another on here that in a world of 24 hour news and (especially) social media I cannot see why anyone would want to be one.
This was another example where the easiest solution was to pay it while announcing an investigation into how it could be incorporated into Universal Credit at the first opportunity (which given my knowledge of the UC system will be in roughly 2037).
I feel so sorry for these poor Conservative victims. All they did was vote against feeding hungry children. And in Selaine's case berated businesses for showing compassion and charity. Someone needs to Step In and tell these monsters in the British Public to shut up. Someone well liked and respected. Like Laurence Fox.
If these were "left-wing lawyers" you'd be demanding heads roll for an attack that legitimised bullying and risked real-life assault.
Parliamentarians have a responsibility to use measured language toward one another, no matter how vociferous the policy differences.
That is all true. How many of those 112 spoke out when their leader was going on about traitors or will speak out next time when it is their side who breach those principles?
And how many of them actually said a word when Priti Patel and Boris Johnson were using inflammatory language against lawyers?
Maybe both were wrong?
If the best we can do is whataboutism and an eye for eye then we're heading for an unpleasant place.
I expected a little more from you, to be honest.
It's not whataboutism, it is pointing out that enraged Tory MPs are seeking to score political points. They are absolutely fine with their own side doing what they accuse others of. What's more, Patel did it in the knowledge that there had already been attacks on law firms by far right extremists. She didn't care. And not a single Tory MP called her out for it.
Angela Rayner called another Tory MP "scum". Many Tory MPs have since received reams of similar abuse, and worse, off the back of it as she's legitimised it.
It really is very disappointing that you can't find it within yourself to condemn this.
I feel so sorry for these poor Conservative victims. All they did was vote against feeding hungry children. And in Selaine's case berated businesses for showing compassion and charity. Someone needs to Step In and tell these monsters in the British Public to shut up. Someone well liked and respected. Like Laurence Fox.
If these were "left-wing lawyers" you'd be demanding heads roll for an attack that legitimised bullying and risked real-life assault.
Parliamentarians have a responsibility to use measured language toward one another, no matter how vociferous the policy differences.
That is all true. How many of those 112 spoke out when their leader was going on about traitors or will speak out next time when it is their side who breach those principles?
And how many of them actually said a word when Priti Patel and Boris Johnson were using inflammatory language against lawyers?
Maybe both were wrong?
If the best we can do is whataboutism and an eye for eye then we're heading for an unpleasant place.
I expected a little more from you, to be honest.
It's not whataboutism, it is pointing out that enraged Tory MPs are seeking to score political points. They are absolutely fine with their own side doing what they accuse others of. What's more, Patel did it in the knowledge that there had already been attacks on law firms by far right extremists. She didn't care. And not a single Tory MP called her out for it.
Angela Rayner called another Tory MP "scum". Many Tory MPs have since received reams of similar abuse, and worse, off the back of it as she's legitimised it.
It really is very disappointing that you can't find it within yourself to condemn this.
I do condemn it and Rayner has apologised. Priti Patel has yet to apologise for her language. You condemn that, don't you?
Anybody working in an entertainment industry that does not try to minimise their tax bill is a fool.History is full of pop and sports stars who are made bankrupt 3 years after they retire due to being hit by a belated tax bill.And that was before Corvid hammered the entretainment industry's potential income.The other 2 big causes of bankruptcy 3 years after retirement for ex-stars are expensive divorces and gambling debts.
Mark Drakeford used to be a Welsh nationalist who thought trashing English only road signs was a fantastic thing to be doing'.
The atheist, republican who was Corbyn's favoured candidate to succeed Carwyn Jones later decided that class was more important than nationality, and became a socialist and joined the Labour Party.
Oh no! You are now quoting the Daily Mail. I think I preferred it when you quoted more reliable sources like Trafalgar!
It is true though, at the moment while Starmer now leads UK Labour, Corbyn Labour is making a last stand in Wales under the hapless Drakeford, who supported Corbyn for the leadership even in 2015.
Therefore I think the Tories might do better in Wales next year in the Assembly elections than they do in England in the local elections (and certainly better than in London in the Mayoral and Assembly elections).
Indeed the Tories might find they even get a higher voteshare in Wales in the Assembly elections than they do both in England in the local elections and Scotland in the Scottish Parliament elections, that was certainly what Opinium was suggesting last night
Ever the optimist, young HY. One major problem that you face is that the historic Conservative Party has been changed into the "Cronyism and Corruption Party". You seem to think that you are the only alternative to an incoherent Labour Party. There are other offers available, varying from one part of the country to another, as you will discover in the not too distant future.
A good point, were it not for the fact that PC and the LDs are dead in the water here in Wales.
Up until this week the Welsh Government were probably seen as less chaotic than Westminster. This issue has however become the sum total of the Cummings plus Jenrick plus Ferrier issues all rolled into one. HY might have a point, although I doubt it.
It is an excellent exposition. Conservative bleating about judicial activism has been an organised hypocrisy in the US for a long, long time. And the anti-democratic playbook, while it has changed its label from Democrat to Republican along the way, hasn’t altered much since they gutted the 14th Amendment.
I feel so sorry for these poor Conservative victims. All they did was vote against feeding hungry children. And in Selaine's case berated businesses for showing compassion and charity. Someone needs to Step In and tell these monsters in the British Public to shut up. Someone well liked and respected. Like Laurence Fox.
If these were "left-wing lawyers" you'd be demanding heads roll for an attack that legitimised bullying and risked real-life assault.
Parliamentarians have a responsibility to use measured language toward one another, no matter how vociferous the policy differences.
That is all true. How many of those 112 spoke out when their leader was going on about traitors or will speak out next time when it is their side who breach those principles?
And how many of them actually said a word when Priti Patel and Boris Johnson were using inflammatory language against lawyers?
I feel so sorry for these poor Conservative victims. All they did was vote against feeding hungry children. And in Selaine's case berated businesses for showing compassion and charity. Someone needs to Step In and tell these monsters in the British Public to shut up. Someone well liked and respected. Like Laurence Fox.
If these were "left-wing lawyers" you'd be demanding heads roll for an attack that legitimised bullying and risked real-life assault.
Parliamentarians have a responsibility to use measured language toward one another, no matter how vociferous the policy differences.
What everyone seems to realise is that while these MPs are complaining about the use of a particular word within Parliament every action they are doing outside Parliament reinforces the idea that the description was highly appropriate.
I rather fancy you'd feel differently about it if it was you and your family at risk, or those who worked for you.
MPs have been badly assaulted in the past, and many more regularly receive death-threats.
I happen to think the Government has got it wrong on free-school meals but Angela Rayner's language was disgraceful.
Words are often said in the heat of the moment that people regret later.
As for being a politician - I think I've said often another on here that in a world of 24 hour news and (especially) social media I cannot see why anyone would want to be one.
This was another example where the easiest solution was to pay it while announcing an investigation into how it could be incorporated into Universal Credit at the first opportunity (which given my knowledge of the UC system will be in roughly 2037).
You're trying to wiggle out of it. Sorry - not good enough.
"Scum" implies subhuman/not human, and we you know full well what that leads toward.
We're all happy to discuss the policy solutions - it's so important we do that in a parliamentary way.
I feel so sorry for these poor Conservative victims. All they did was vote against feeding hungry children. And in Selaine's case berated businesses for showing compassion and charity. Someone needs to Step In and tell these monsters in the British Public to shut up. Someone well liked and respected. Like Laurence Fox.
If these were "left-wing lawyers" you'd be demanding heads roll for an attack that legitimised bullying and risked real-life assault.
Parliamentarians have a responsibility to use measured language toward one another, no matter how vociferous the policy differences.
What everyone seems to realise is that while these MPs are complaining about the use of a particular word within Parliament every action they are doing outside Parliament reinforces the idea that the description was highly appropriate.
I rather fancy you'd feel differently about it if it was you and your family at risk, or those who worked for you.
MPs have been badly assaulted in the past, and many more regularly receive death-threats.
I happen to think the Government has got it wrong on free-school meals but Angela Rayner's language was disgraceful.
Yes she was out of order and right to apologise quickly, unlike our PM who says he will never apologise.
Progress, thank you.
I have very little time for our PM, and want him gone.
BBC has, about an hour ago, reported that Joan Hocquard, until then the oldest person in Britain died, aged 112, on Saturday. Nothing to do with Covid-219, either.
I feel so sorry for these poor Conservative victims. All they did was vote against feeding hungry children. And in Selaine's case berated businesses for showing compassion and charity. Someone needs to Step In and tell these monsters in the British Public to shut up. Someone well liked and respected. Like Laurence Fox.
If these were "left-wing lawyers" you'd be demanding heads roll for an attack that legitimised bullying and risked real-life assault.
Parliamentarians have a responsibility to use measured language toward one another, no matter how vociferous the policy differences.
That is all true. How many of those 112 spoke out when their leader was going on about traitors or will speak out next time when it is their side who breach those principles?
And how many of them actually said a word when Priti Patel and Boris Johnson were using inflammatory language against lawyers?
Yep, it's almost as if Tory MPs are not really that concerned when their own side uses language specifically designed to inflame in the full knowledge that it puts those targeted at risk of attack,
I feel so sorry for these poor Conservative victims. All they did was vote against feeding hungry children. And in Selaine's case berated businesses for showing compassion and charity. Someone needs to Step In and tell these monsters in the British Public to shut up. Someone well liked and respected. Like Laurence Fox.
If these were "left-wing lawyers" you'd be demanding heads roll for an attack that legitimised bullying and risked real-life assault.
Parliamentarians have a responsibility to use measured language toward one another, no matter how vociferous the policy differences.
That is all true. How many of those 112 spoke out when their leader was going on about traitors or will speak out next time when it is their side who breach those principles?
And how many of them actually said a word when Priti Patel and Boris Johnson were using inflammatory language against lawyers?
Maybe both were wrong?
If the best we can do is whataboutism and an eye for eye then we're heading for an unpleasant place.
I expected a little more from you, to be honest.
It's not whataboutism, it is pointing out that enraged Tory MPs are seeking to score political points. They are absolutely fine with their own side doing what they accuse others of. What's more, Patel did it in the knowledge that there had already been attacks on law firms by far right extremists. She didn't care. And not a single Tory MP called her out for it.
Angela Rayner called another Tory MP "scum". Many Tory MPs have since received reams of similar abuse, and worse, off the back of it as she's legitimised it.
It really is very disappointing that you can't find it within yourself to condemn this.
I do condemn it and Rayner has apologised. Priti Patel has yet to apologise for her language. You condemn that, don't you?
Yes, of course. I think tempers on both sides need cooling.
That'd be back to the full lockdown, which was successful earlier in the year.
Well it worked until Cummings destroyed all trust in the people asking for it (after that the R figure rose again as people started to ignore the restrictions).
You only have to look at pubs working round the food rules and the Liverpool Gym who stayed open knowing they would be fined to see what will happen now. The damage Cummings did is unrepairable.
Mark Drakeford used to be a Welsh nationalist who thought trashing English only road signs was a fantastic thing to be doing'.
The atheist, republican who was Corbyn's favoured candidate to succeed Carwyn Jones later decided that class was more important than nationality, and became a socialist and joined the Labour Party.
Oh no! You are now quoting the Daily Mail. I think I preferred it when you quoted more reliable sources like Trafalgar!
It is true though, at the moment while Starmer now leads UK Labour, Corbyn Labour is making a last stand in Wales under the hapless Drakeford, who supported Corbyn for the leadership even in 2015.
Therefore I think the Tories might do better in Wales next year in the Assembly elections than they do in England in the local elections (and certainly better than in London in the Mayoral and Assembly elections).
Indeed the Tories might find they even get a higher voteshare in Wales in the Assembly elections than they do both in England in the local elections and Scotland in the Scottish Parliament elections, that was certainly what Opinium was suggesting last night
Don't quote subsamples! Opinion were not suggesting that at all!
I feel so sorry for these poor Conservative victims. All they did was vote against feeding hungry children. And in Selaine's case berated businesses for showing compassion and charity. Someone needs to Step In and tell these monsters in the British Public to shut up. Someone well liked and respected. Like Laurence Fox.
If these were "left-wing lawyers" you'd be demanding heads roll for an attack that legitimised bullying and risked real-life assault.
Parliamentarians have a responsibility to use measured language toward one another, no matter how vociferous the policy differences.
That is all true. How many of those 112 spoke out when their leader was going on about traitors or will speak out next time when it is their side who breach those principles?
And how many of them actually said a word when Priti Patel and Boris Johnson were using inflammatory language against lawyers?
Maybe both were wrong?
If the best we can do is whataboutism and an eye for eye then we're heading for an unpleasant place.
I expected a little more from you, to be honest.
It's not whataboutism, it is pointing out that enraged Tory MPs are seeking to score political points. They are absolutely fine with their own side doing what they accuse others of. What's more, Patel did it in the knowledge that there had already been attacks on law firms by far right extremists. She didn't care. And not a single Tory MP called her out for it.
Angela Rayner called another Tory MP "scum". Many Tory MPs have since received reams of similar abuse, and worse, off the back of it as she's legitimised it.
It really is very disappointing that you can't find it within yourself to condemn this.
I do condemn it and Rayner has apologised. Priti Patel has yet to apologise for her language. You condemn that, don't you?
Yes, of course. I think tempers on both sides need cooling.
Mark Drakeford used to be a Welsh nationalist who thought trashing English only road signs was a fantastic thing to be doing'.
The atheist, republican who was Corbyn's favoured candidate to succeed Carwyn Jones later decided that class was more important than nationality, and became a socialist and joined the Labour Party.
Oh no! You are now quoting the Daily Mail. I think I preferred it when you quoted more reliable sources like Trafalgar!
It is true though, at the moment while Starmer now leads UK Labour, Corbyn Labour is making a last stand in Wales under the hapless Drakeford, who supported Corbyn for the leadership even in 2015.
Therefore I think the Tories might do better in Wales next year in the Assembly elections than they do in England in the local elections (and certainly better than in London in the Mayoral and Assembly elections).
Indeed the Tories might find they even get a higher voteshare in Wales in the Assembly elections than they do both in England in the local elections and Scotland in the Scottish Parliament elections, that was certainly what Opinium was suggesting last night
Ever the optimist, young HY. One major problem that you face is that the historic Conservative Party has been changed into the "Cronyism and Corruption Party". You seem to think that you are the only alternative to an incoherent Labour Party. There are other offers available, varying from one part of the country to another, as you will discover in the not too distant future.
A good point, were it not for the fact that PC and the LDs are dead in the water here in Wales.
Up until this week the Welsh Government were probably seen as less chaotic than Westminster. This issue has however become the sum total of the Cummings plus Jenrick plus Ferrier issues all rolled into one. HY might have a point, although I doubt it.
Drakeford is also Corbynite in policy but without Corbyn's charisma or Foot's dress sense, having him as Labour leader and FM with this disastrous policy on top is a dream for Paul Davies and the Welsh Conservatives ahead of the 2021 Assembly elections
On the RCP numbers though Wisconsin is now the tipping point state again, as it was in 2016, not Pennsylvania.
In which case even if Biden won Michigan and Pennsylvania Trump would be re elected if he held Wisconsin though it would be a 269 269 tie in the EC, assuming the GOP retain a majority of state delegations in the House
Bernard Jenkin said she needs a holiday. No shortage of suggestions so far
I’d be very tempted were I Labour to make it clear to her that when they get into government she will be sacked from any public role and will be spending a lot of time answering questions in the inquiry into the running of PHE, Test’n’Trace and all the contracts awarded during her time in charge.
Excellent idea followed by a few days with her privileged backside ridden round London on a ducking stool
I feel so sorry for these poor Conservative victims. All they did was vote against feeding hungry children. And in Selaine's case berated businesses for showing compassion and charity. Someone needs to Step In and tell these monsters in the British Public to shut up. Someone well liked and respected. Like Laurence Fox.
If these were "left-wing lawyers" you'd be demanding heads roll for an attack that legitimised bullying and risked real-life assault.
Parliamentarians have a responsibility to use measured language toward one another, no matter how vociferous the policy differences.
What everyone seems to realise is that while these MPs are complaining about the use of a particular word within Parliament every action they are doing outside Parliament reinforces the idea that the description was highly appropriate.
I rather fancy you'd feel differently about it if it was you and your family at risk, or those who worked for you.
MPs have been badly assaulted in the past, and many more regularly receive death-threats.
I happen to think the Government has got it wrong on free-school meals but Angela Rayner's language was disgraceful.
Words are often said in the heat of the moment that people regret later.
As for being a politician - I think I've said often another on here that in a world of 24 hour news and (especially) social media I cannot see why anyone would want to be one.
This was another example where the easiest solution was to pay it while announcing an investigation into how it could be incorporated into Universal Credit at the first opportunity (which given my knowledge of the UC system will be in roughly 2037).
You're trying to wiggle out of it. Sorry - not good enough.
"Scum" implies subhuman/not human, and we you know full well what that leads toward.
We're all happy to discuss the policy solutions - it's so important we do that in a parliamentary way.
No I'm not - people say things in anger which shouldn't be said. The fact Selaine Saxby tried to deflect criticism of her callous comments by arguing over the use of a word rather than her (in writing) callous attitude to others (who see seems to think aren't worthy of being cared for) tells me everything I need to know about the Nasty Party.
As it's becoming more and more clear that a lot of new Tory MPs don't actually care about their constituents and can't see the what the consequences of their thoughts and statements are.
I'm surprised there hasn't been one already. Quite often pressure to u turn builds so quickly it happens in a couple of days, but this story has been rumbling for a week at least.
The second they cave into this nonsense then Rashford and his woke PR agency will start on the next thing.
If woke = doesn't think kids should go hungry then consider me woke.
The families already get benefit money for food. Maybe we could do this and scrap all child benefits instead as the money obviously makes no difference to whether they get fed or not.
The feature creep for schools is ridiculous, they should be for educating children (for free) not a social service. Now they have to feed kids not only during term time, but during holidays too.
They'll have to give presents at Christmas to kids with feckless parents soon as well.
A real Tory full of the milk of human kindness.
I sometimes wonder given my circumstances why I am not a Tory. Mr Alexander has explained it perfectly for me.
BBC has, about an hour ago, reported that Joan Hocquard, until then the oldest person in Britain died, aged 112, on Saturday. Nothing to do with Covid-219, either.
I am not a qualified doctor, but strongly suspect it may be in some way connected to being 112.
That'd be back to the full lockdown, which was successful earlier in the year.
Well it worked until Cummings destroyed all trust in the people asking for it (after that the R figure rose again as people started to ignore the restrictions).
You only have to look at pubs working round the food rules and the Liverpool Gym who stayed open knowing they would be fined to see what will happen now. The damage Cummings did is unrepairable.
Restaurant emails encouraging business meetings with "potential collaborators on a possible new venture".....
Sounds like the same loophole will shortly be available for avoiding quarantine on flights with the city businessmen exemption.
I'm surprised there hasn't been one already. Quite often pressure to u turn builds so quickly it happens in a couple of days, but this story has been rumbling for a week at least.
The second they cave into this nonsense then Rashford and his woke PR agency will start on the next thing.
Good for him then if it’s something that needs doing, why is it nonsense, just as well the world isn’t full of right wing bigots like you.
Millionaire tax avoiders making poor workers pay more tax to give even more money to the feckless.
You'd have to be a complete bigot not to agree with that.
Name names, Amazon etc Fine but you are actually implying footballers Do be up front and name them.
It is standard practice for players to have their image rights paid to a company and pay corporation tax rather than income tax.
You clearly have little knowledge of tax. Firstly they will pay Corporation Tax, then when they pay the money out they will pay income tax either on a salary or dividend. So that means they pay more tax by doing that. They will save on NI (assume they don't pay themselves a salary over a trivial amount) and the £2000 dividend tax free band, but although that might be useful if you earn tens of thousands it is peanuts if you earn millions. They will have greater flexibility on expenses that can be claimed.
Of course there are bigger gains to be made if you enter a dodgy tax scheme, but they are being clamped down on and are expensive if you get caught out and you seem to be assuming they are all doing it
They wouldn't go to the trouble of joining those schemes if they didn't save money.
They join them because they think they are going to save money. Sadly for them many have found it has cost them a lot more as HMRC has disallowed them and gone back for the past tax, interest and fines.
Has this happened with image rights? Do you have a link?
If footballers join these schemes hoping to save money on tax and subsequently don't, I can't see how that is any morally better. It just adds incompetence on top of greed
I am talking about tax avoidance schemes not image rights. See eek for more detailed info.
But you keep failing to address the question of how they are avoiding tax. You seem to think that the only tax is 19% Corporation Tax. They then have to pay Income Tax on top of that when they pay the money out of the company at the going income tax rate whether paid via dividend or salary. There are penal restrictions on taking the money via a loan so the net effect will be higher tax (true they save on NI if they don't receive any salary and true they benefit by the £2000 dividend exemption, and they have more flexible expense allowances but that is all peanuts compared to the combined Corporation/Income tax on high income)
They still have to pay income tax on top of the corporation tax unless they leave the money in the company forever.
Well I'm going off what has been reported on HMRC investigating the use of image rights, for example:
Image rights, a tool used by clubs and players to avoid paying employment tax, has been extensively used in football.
The financial incentive for players to create their own Image Rights Company (IRC) is it could save them millions in tax.
Clubs can pay a player's IRC as part of their wages and they would be liable for 19% corporation tax rather than 45% as an employee. That represents a saving to the player of £26,000 on every £100,000."
You really really don't understand this tax business do you, even though I have explained it several times. You don't get to just pay just Corporation Tax if you set up a company. You also pay Income Tax when you pay the money from the company to yourself
You pay 19% Corporation Tax THEN when you pay it from your company to yourself you pay Income Tax on it.
So you pay 19% AND 45%.
OK it isn't quite as simple as that because you make savings on NI, Dividend band of £2000 and more generous allowable expenses and flexibility on when you pay yourself and therefore on when you pay tax BUT it isn't
19% or 45%. It really isn't.
I don't know why you think this?
You pay both unless you leave the money in the company forever!
Glad you enjoyed the Beach Boys songs. The beautiful genius behind the group is anti Trump, the less talented cousin who owns the rights to the name... is
Bernard Jenkin said she needs a holiday. No shortage of suggestions so far
I’d be very tempted were I Labour to make it clear to her that when they get into government she will be sacked from any public role and will be spending a lot of time answering questions in the inquiry into the running of PHE, Test’n’Trace and all the contracts awarded during her time in charge.
I see all those supposed qualms about governments behaving vindictively have evaporated then...
Anybody working in an entertainment industry that does not try to minimise their tax bill is a fool.History is full of pop and sports stars who are made bankrupt 3 years after they retire due to being hit by a belated tax bill.And that was before Corvid hammered the entretainment industry's potential income.The other 2 big causes of bankruptcy 3 years after retirement for ex-stars are expensive divorces and gambling debts.
Well, if you paid taxes when they were due, you might not end up with belated tax bills.
The fundamental reason that pop and sports stars often end up in this situation, is that they (generally) come from not very much money. And land in the crazy money overnight. So haven't acquired money management skills.
When you add in the young-people-think-they-are-invulnerable thing and bad advice from dodgy hangers on.... It seems remarkable that *any* of them end up not sleeping under a bridge.
Anybody working in an entertainment industry that does not try to minimise their tax bill is a fool.History is full of pop and sports stars who are made bankrupt 3 years after they retire due to being hit by a belated tax bill.And that was before Corvid hammered the entretainment industry's potential income.The other 2 big causes of bankruptcy 3 years after retirement for ex-stars are expensive divorces and gambling debts.
But how many of the "belated tax bills" come about directly as a result of them attempting to "minimise their tax bill"?
Bernard Jenkin said she needs a holiday. No shortage of suggestions so far
I’d be very tempted were I Labour to make it clear to her that when they get into government she will be sacked from any public role and will be spending a lot of time answering questions in the inquiry into the running of PHE, Test’n’Trace and all the contracts awarded during her time in charge.
I see all those supposed qualms about governments behaving vindictively have evaporated then...
I hold people to account. You conduct purges. He/she/it behaves vindictively.
That'd be back to the full lockdown, which was successful earlier in the year.
Well it worked until Cummings destroyed all trust in the people asking for it (after that the R figure rose again as people started to ignore the restrictions).
You only have to look at pubs working round the food rules and the Liverpool Gym who stayed open knowing they would be fined to see what will happen now. The damage Cummings did is unrepairable.
Restaurant emails encouraging business meetings with "potential collaborators on a possible new venture".....
Sounds like the same loophole will shortly be available for avoiding quarantine on flights with the city businessmen exemption.
One rule for the little people. And Northerners. Good job Cummings was a bubble story forgotten in short order.
That'd be back to the full lockdown, which was successful earlier in the year.
Well it worked until Cummings destroyed all trust in the people asking for it (after that the R figure rose again as people started to ignore the restrictions).
You only have to look at pubs working round the food rules and the Liverpool Gym who stayed open knowing they would be fined to see what will happen now. The damage Cummings did is unrepairable.
Restaurant emails encouraging business meetings with "potential collaborators on a possible new venture".....
Sounds like the same loophole will shortly be available for avoiding quarantine on flights with the city businessmen exemption.
Probably more to do with them running out of money than something Cummings did.
You really really don't understand this tax business do you, even though I have explained it several times. You don't get to just pay just Corporation Tax if you set up a company. You also pay Income Tax when you pay the money from the company to yourself
You pay 19% Corporation Tax THEN when you pay it from your company to yourself you pay Income Tax on it.
So you pay 19% AND 45%.
OK it isn't quite as simple as that because you make savings on NI, Dividend band of £2000 and more generous allowable expenses and flexibility on when you pay yourself and therefore on when you pay tax BUT it isn't
19% or 45%. It really isn't.
I don't know why you think this?
You pay both unless you leave the money in the company forever!
It wouldn't be income tax when you take the money out, it's likely to be dividend tax (at 32.5% of the dividend payment after the 19% corporation tax has been deducted). The actual rate of tax paid is 45.325% in total which is little different from PAYE.
The actual saving isn't made by the Footballer here (except for the fact they could keep the money in the limited company and draw it later) but for the Football club who don't need to pay Employer NI on the image right payments.
I feel so sorry for these poor Conservative victims. All they did was vote against feeding hungry children. And in Selaine's case berated businesses for showing compassion and charity. Someone needs to Step In and tell these monsters in the British Public to shut up. Someone well liked and respected. Like Laurence Fox.
If these were "left-wing lawyers" you'd be demanding heads roll for an attack that legitimised bullying and risked real-life assault.
Parliamentarians have a responsibility to use measured language toward one another, no matter how vociferous the policy differences.
That is all true. How many of those 112 spoke out when their leader was going on about traitors or will speak out next time when it is their side who breach those principles?
And how many of them actually said a word when Priti Patel and Boris Johnson were using inflammatory language against lawyers?
Maybe both were wrong?
If the best we can do is whataboutism and an eye for eye then we're heading for an unpleasant place.
I expected a little more from you, to be honest.
It's not whataboutism, it is pointing out that enraged Tory MPs are seeking to score political points. They are absolutely fine with their own side doing what they accuse others of. What's more, Patel did it in the knowledge that there had already been attacks on law firms by far right extremists. She didn't care. And not a single Tory MP called her out for it.
Angela Rayner called another Tory MP "scum". Many Tory MPs have since received reams of similar abuse, and worse, off the back of it as she's legitimised it.
It really is very disappointing that you can't find it within yourself to condemn this.
I do condemn it and Rayner has apologised. Priti Patel has yet to apologise for her language. You condemn that, don't you?
Yes, of course. I think tempers on both sides need cooling.
I don't think Patel's remark was 'in the heat of the moment'. It's on a par with her attack on a small constituency delegation that allegedly 'frightened' her office staff. The average age of the delegation was, IIRC, over 60, and several were using walking aids.
Bernard Jenkin said she needs a holiday. No shortage of suggestions so far
I’d be very tempted were I Labour to make it clear to her that when they get into government she will be sacked from any public role and will be spending a lot of time answering questions in the inquiry into the running of PHE, Test’n’Trace and all the contracts awarded during her time in charge.
Complying in both spirit and letter with the Rule of Law, and just the way Donald has taught us to behave in public life. Hurray!
I feel so sorry for these poor Conservative victims. All they did was vote against feeding hungry children. And in Selaine's case berated businesses for showing compassion and charity. Someone needs to Step In and tell these monsters in the British Public to shut up. Someone well liked and respected. Like Laurence Fox.
If these were "left-wing lawyers" you'd be demanding heads roll for an attack that legitimised bullying and risked real-life assault.
Parliamentarians have a responsibility to use measured language toward one another, no matter how vociferous the policy differences.
That is all true. How many of those 112 spoke out when their leader was going on about traitors or will speak out next time when it is their side who breach those principles?
And how many of them actually said a word when Priti Patel and Boris Johnson were using inflammatory language against lawyers?
Maybe both were wrong?
If the best we can do is whataboutism and an eye for eye then we're heading for an unpleasant place.
I expected a little more from you, to be honest.
It's not whataboutism, it is pointing out that enraged Tory MPs are seeking to score political points. They are absolutely fine with their own side doing what they accuse others of. What's more, Patel did it in the knowledge that there had already been attacks on law firms by far right extremists. She didn't care. And not a single Tory MP called her out for it.
Angela Rayner called another Tory MP "scum". Many Tory MPs have since received reams of similar abuse, and worse, off the back of it as she's legitimised it.
It really is very disappointing that you can't find it within yourself to condemn this.
I do condemn it and Rayner has apologised. Priti Patel has yet to apologise for her language. You condemn that, don't you?
Yes, of course. I think tempers on both sides need cooling.
Should Boris Johnson issue an apology every time one of his Conservative MPs says something vicious or crass? Personally I don't think so. I prefer people to take responsibility for their own actions.
I'm surprised there hasn't been one already. Quite often pressure to u turn builds so quickly it happens in a couple of days, but this story has been rumbling for a week at least.
The second they cave into this nonsense then Rashford and his woke PR agency will start on the next thing.
Good for him then if it’s something that needs doing, why is it nonsense, just as well the world isn’t full of right wing bigots like you.
Millionaire tax avoiders making poor workers pay more tax to give even more money to the feckless.
You'd have to be a complete bigot not to agree with that.
Name names, Amazon etc Fine but you are actually implying footballers Do be up front and name them.
It is standard practice for players to have their image rights paid to a company and pay corporation tax rather than income tax.
You clearly have little knowledge of tax. Firstly they will pay Corporation Tax, then when they pay the money out they will pay income tax either on a salary or dividend. So that means they pay more tax by doing that. They will save on NI (assume they don't pay themselves a salary over a trivial amount) and the £2000 dividend tax free band, but although that might be useful if you earn tens of thousands it is peanuts if you earn millions. They will have greater flexibility on expenses that can be claimed.
Of course there are bigger gains to be made if you enter a dodgy tax scheme, but they are being clamped down on and are expensive if you get caught out and you seem to be assuming they are all doing it
They wouldn't go to the trouble of joining those schemes if they didn't save money.
They join them because they think they are going to save money. Sadly for them many have found it has cost them a lot more as HMRC has disallowed them and gone back for the past tax, interest and fines.
Has this happened with image rights? Do you have a link?
If footballers join these schemes hoping to save money on tax and subsequently don't, I can't see how that is any morally better. It just adds incompetence on top of greed
I am talking about tax avoidance schemes not image rights. See eek for more detailed info.
But you keep failing to address the question of how they are avoiding tax. You seem to think that the only tax is 19% Corporation Tax. They then have to pay Income Tax on top of that when they pay the money out of the company at the going income tax rate whether paid via dividend or salary. There are penal restrictions on taking the money via a loan so the net effect will be higher tax (true they save on NI if they don't receive any salary and true they benefit by the £2000 dividend exemption, and they have more flexible expense allowances but that is all peanuts compared to the combined Corporation/Income tax on high income)
They still have to pay income tax on top of the corporation tax unless they leave the money in the company forever.
Well I'm going off what has been reported on HMRC investigating the use of image rights, for example:
Image rights, a tool used by clubs and players to avoid paying employment tax, has been extensively used in football.
The financial incentive for players to create their own Image Rights Company (IRC) is it could save them millions in tax.
Clubs can pay a player's IRC as part of their wages and they would be liable for 19% corporation tax rather than 45% as an employee. That represents a saving to the player of £26,000 on every £100,000."
You really really don't understand this tax business do you, even though I have explained it several times. You don't get to just pay just Corporation Tax if you set up a company. You also pay Income Tax when you pay the money from the company to yourself
You pay 19% Corporation Tax THEN when you pay it from your company to yourself you pay Income Tax on it.
So you pay 19% AND 45%.
OK it isn't quite as simple as that because you make savings on NI, Dividend band of £2000 and more generous allowable expenses and flexibility on when you pay yourself and therefore on when you pay tax BUT it isn't
19% or 45%. It really isn't.
I don't know why you think this?
You pay both unless you leave the money in the company forever!
I now know why you believe it. You have read an ITV article that is bollocks. How about checking out the tax rules or listening to someone who have run a limited company for 30 years and paid both Corporation Tax and Income Tax. Yes I paid both on the same income (albeit I made savings elsewhere which more or less cancelled out the extra tax and I had much more flexibility in running my business rather than being a sole trader.)
BBC has, about an hour ago, reported that Joan Hocquard, until then the oldest person in Britain died, aged 112, on Saturday. Nothing to do with Covid-219, either.
I am not a qualified doctor, but strongly suspect it may be in some way connected to being 112.
Certainly highly likely, given the picture that BBC had!
I feel so sorry for these poor Conservative victims. All they did was vote against feeding hungry children. And in Selaine's case berated businesses for showing compassion and charity. Someone needs to Step In and tell these monsters in the British Public to shut up. Someone well liked and respected. Like Laurence Fox.
If these were "left-wing lawyers" you'd be demanding heads roll for an attack that legitimised bullying and risked real-life assault.
Parliamentarians have a responsibility to use measured language toward one another, no matter how vociferous the policy differences.
That is all true. How many of those 112 spoke out when their leader was going on about traitors or will speak out next time when it is their side who breach those principles?
And how many of them actually said a word when Priti Patel and Boris Johnson were using inflammatory language against lawyers?
Maybe both were wrong?
If the best we can do is whataboutism and an eye for eye then we're heading for an unpleasant place.
I expected a little more from you, to be honest.
They are both wrong. But Tory MPs should understand that if they remain silent when offensive and untrue language is used against others because it suits their political agenda, they are in a weaker position than they might otherwise be when others do it to them.
I feel so sorry for these poor Conservative victims. All they did was vote against feeding hungry children. And in Selaine's case berated businesses for showing compassion and charity. Someone needs to Step In and tell these monsters in the British Public to shut up. Someone well liked and respected. Like Laurence Fox.
If these were "left-wing lawyers" you'd be demanding heads roll for an attack that legitimised bullying and risked real-life assault.
Parliamentarians have a responsibility to use measured language toward one another, no matter how vociferous the policy differences.
That is all true. How many of those 112 spoke out when their leader was going on about traitors or will speak out next time when it is their side who breach those principles?
And how many of them actually said a word when Priti Patel and Boris Johnson were using inflammatory language against lawyers?
Maybe both were wrong?
If the best we can do is whataboutism and an eye for eye then we're heading for an unpleasant place.
I expected a little more from you, to be honest.
It's not whataboutism, it is pointing out that enraged Tory MPs are seeking to score political points. They are absolutely fine with their own side doing what they accuse others of. What's more, Patel did it in the knowledge that there had already been attacks on law firms by far right extremists. She didn't care. And not a single Tory MP called her out for it.
Angela Rayner called another Tory MP "scum". Many Tory MPs have since received reams of similar abuse, and worse, off the back of it as she's legitimised it.
It really is very disappointing that you can't find it within yourself to condemn this.
I do condemn it and Rayner has apologised. Priti Patel has yet to apologise for her language. You condemn that, don't you?
Yes, of course. I think tempers on both sides need cooling.
Should Boris Johnson issue an apology every time one of his Conservative MPs says something vicious or crass? Personally I don't think so. I prefer people to take responsibility for their own actions.
Would take up a large part of his time. Bloody snowflakes can dish it out all day, then run screaming when on the other end of it.
You really really don't understand this tax business do you, even though I have explained it several times. You don't get to just pay just Corporation Tax if you set up a company. You also pay Income Tax when you pay the money from the company to yourself
You pay 19% Corporation Tax THEN when you pay it from your company to yourself you pay Income Tax on it.
So you pay 19% AND 45%.
OK it isn't quite as simple as that because you make savings on NI, Dividend band of £2000 and more generous allowable expenses and flexibility on when you pay yourself and therefore on when you pay tax BUT it isn't
19% or 45%. It really isn't.
I don't know why you think this?
You pay both unless you leave the money in the company forever!
It wouldn't be income tax when you take the money out, it's likely to be dividend tax (at 32.5% of the dividend payment after the 19% corporation tax has been deducted). The actual rate of tax paid is 45.325% in total which is little different from PAYE.
The actual saving isn't made by the Footballer here (except for the fact they could keep the money in the limited company and draw it later) but for the Football club who don't need to pay Employer NI on the image right payments.
I know. I wasn't going to get into the dividend rates with him (plus all the other stuff I could have coved like loans and the NI details) as he can't even grasp that the footballer doesn't just pay 19% and then has free access to the money without any other consequences.
Glad you enjoyed the Beach Boys songs. The beautiful genius behind the group is anti Trump, the less talented cousin who owns the rights to the name... is
One of the enduring images of this presidential campaign was the arrival at the first debate of the Trump Clan taking off their masks and looking like a funeral cortege of Stepford Wives
You really really don't understand this tax business do you, even though I have explained it several times. You don't get to just pay just Corporation Tax if you set up a company. You also pay Income Tax when you pay the money from the company to yourself
You pay 19% Corporation Tax THEN when you pay it from your company to yourself you pay Income Tax on it.
So you pay 19% AND 45%.
OK it isn't quite as simple as that because you make savings on NI, Dividend band of £2000 and more generous allowable expenses and flexibility on when you pay yourself and therefore on when you pay tax BUT it isn't
19% or 45%. It really isn't.
I don't know why you think this?
You pay both unless you leave the money in the company forever!
It wouldn't be income tax when you take the money out, it's likely to be dividend tax (at 32.5% of the dividend payment after the 19% corporation tax has been deducted). The actual rate of tax paid is 45.325% in total which is little different from PAYE.
The actual saving isn't made by the Footballer here (except for the fact they could keep the money in the limited company and draw it later) but for the Football club who don't need to pay Employer NI on the image right payments.
I know. I wasn't going to get into the dividend rates with him (plus all the other stuff I could have coved like loans and the NI details) as he can't even grasp that the footballer doesn't just pay 19% and then has free access to the money without any other consequences.
Equally I'm just trying to be accurate - corporation tax and dividend tax (if extracted as dividends) or Income tax (which is an expense so no corporation tax due) are the options for pulling money out of a company. And except as a means of retaining money for future use a company doesn't offer any tax advantage to the player (just to the football club / employer who avoids Employer NI).
Glad you enjoyed the Beach Boys songs. The beautiful genius behind the group is anti Trump, the less talented cousin who owns the rights to the name... is
Although I think when push comes to shove, given the lives they've led, we would all rather be Mike Love, Beach Boy bad guy that he is. Poor Brian has had a hell of a time
Bernard Jenkin said she needs a holiday. No shortage of suggestions so far
I’d be very tempted were I Labour to make it clear to her that when they get into government she will be sacked from any public role and will be spending a lot of time answering questions in the inquiry into the running of PHE, Test’n’Trace and all the contracts awarded during her time in charge.
I see all those supposed qualms about governments behaving vindictively have evaporated then...
An employer has a right to sack staff subject to the laws that apply. A government has the right - and in this case the duty - to carry out a public inquiry into one of the biggest disasters this country has faced. The circumstances of her appointment are far from transparent as are the contracts that have been awarded. A proper inquiry into all these matters is entirely justified to ensure that any monies spent improperly are recovered for the taxpayer, any other improper behaviour is properly punished and lessons are learnt.
None of this is vindictive. Nor is it incompatible with the rule of law.
What is unacceptable is government appointing cronies without any sort of proper process and trying to make it difficult for them to be made properly accountable to taxpayers.
You really really don't understand this tax business do you, even though I have explained it several times. You don't get to just pay just Corporation Tax if you set up a company. You also pay Income Tax when you pay the money from the company to yourself
You pay 19% Corporation Tax THEN when you pay it from your company to yourself you pay Income Tax on it.
So you pay 19% AND 45%.
OK it isn't quite as simple as that because you make savings on NI, Dividend band of £2000 and more generous allowable expenses and flexibility on when you pay yourself and therefore on when you pay tax BUT it isn't
19% or 45%. It really isn't.
I don't know why you think this?
You pay both unless you leave the money in the company forever!
It wouldn't be income tax when you take the money out, it's likely to be dividend tax (at 32.5% of the dividend payment after the 19% corporation tax has been deducted). The actual rate of tax paid is 45.325% in total which is little different from PAYE.
The actual saving isn't made by the Footballer here (except for the fact they could keep the money in the limited company and draw it later) but for the Football club who don't need to pay Employer NI on the image right payments.
I know. I wasn't going to get into the dividend rates with him (plus all the other stuff I could have coved like loans and the NI details) as he can't even grasp that the footballer doesn't just pay 19% and then has free access to the money without any other consequences.
Equally I'm just trying to be accurate - corporation tax and dividend tax (if extracted as dividends) or Income tax (which is an expense so no corporation tax due) are the options for pulling money out of a company. And except as a means of retaining money for future use a company doesn't offer any tax advantage to the player (just to the football club / employer who avoids Employer NI).
Starmer is going to think that being in Opposition is easy at this rate. All he has to do is get up in the morning, see what the latest self-inflicted own goal Johnson and Rasputin have shot that morning and then stick the knife in a bit further.
To mix my metaphors.
Jon Lewis, on international debut, blew Australia away with 4-24 including Michael Clarke for a first ball duck. A bewildered Simon Mann said, 'he must think this international cricket is a very easy game.'
Yet Lewis only played that one T20I, 13 ODIs and 1 Test.
If Starmer doesn't want to be like Jon Lewis, he needs to have the skills to adapt when Boris Johnson is hit by a bus and somebody vaguely sane and competent takes over. To paraphrase Cyclefree yesterday, can he do that?
It's a risk, but who is this sane, competent MP who gets through the party election process who Starmer should fear?
The refuseniks (Hunt, say) are still unacceptable to the membership.
The cabinet members are set to be covered in the same pile of poo as the PM.
Rayner has done her future leadership prospects no harm with scumgate.
The most she will ever be is a female Prescott to Starmer as leader
So the bruiser who says the unsayable.
'The unsayable'? It's just the same mindless abuse the left has been coming out with since the dawn of time. It doesn't even have the merit of originality.
Mark Drakeford used to be a Welsh nationalist who thought trashing English only road signs was a fantastic thing to be doing'.
The atheist, republican who was Corbyn's favoured candidate to succeed Carwyn Jones later decided that class was more important than nationality, and became a socialist and joined the Labour Party.
Oh no! You are now quoting the Daily Mail. I think I preferred it when you quoted more reliable sources like Trafalgar!
It is true though, at the moment while Starmer now leads UK Labour, Corbyn Labour is making a last stand in Wales under the hapless Drakeford, who supported Corbyn for the leadership even in 2015.
Therefore I think the Tories might do better in Wales next year in the Assembly elections than they do in England in the local elections (and certainly better than in London in the Mayoral and Assembly elections).
Indeed the Tories might find they even get a higher voteshare in Wales in the Assembly elections than they do both in England in the local elections and Scotland in the Scottish Parliament elections, that was certainly what Opinium was suggesting last night
Ever the optimist, young HY. One major problem that you face is that the historic Conservative Party has been changed into the "Cronyism and Corruption Party". You seem to think that you are the only alternative to an incoherent Labour Party. There are other offers available, varying from one part of the country to another, as you will discover in the not too distant future.
Opinium's latest voting intention figures today and details from the data tables
Using sub samples like this is on par with your Trafalgar mutterings. This bears no relationship to the last all Wales ITV poll. Maybe the next one will tell a different story.
That'd be back to the full lockdown, which was successful earlier in the year.
Well it worked until Cummings destroyed all trust in the people asking for it (after that the R figure rose again as people started to ignore the restrictions).
You only have to look at pubs working round the food rules and the Liverpool Gym who stayed open knowing they would be fined to see what will happen now. The damage Cummings did is unrepairable.
Restaurant emails encouraging business meetings with "potential collaborators on a possible new venture".....
Sounds like the same loophole will shortly be available for avoiding quarantine on flights with the city businessmen exemption.
One rule for the little people. And Northerners. Good job Cummings was a bubble story forgotten in short order.
There was a story about Cummings ? Must have missed it. Did he get a particularly cute kitten down from a tree? He's such a sweetie.
You really really don't understand this tax business do you, even though I have explained it several times. You don't get to just pay just Corporation Tax if you set up a company. You also pay Income Tax when you pay the money from the company to yourself
You pay 19% Corporation Tax THEN when you pay it from your company to yourself you pay Income Tax on it.
So you pay 19% AND 45%.
OK it isn't quite as simple as that because you make savings on NI, Dividend band of £2000 and more generous allowable expenses and flexibility on when you pay yourself and therefore on when you pay tax BUT it isn't
19% or 45%. It really isn't.
I don't know why you think this?
You pay both unless you leave the money in the company forever!>
I now know why you believe it. You have read an ITV article that is bollocks. How about checking out the tax rules or listening to someone who have run a limited company for 30 years and paid both Corporation Tax and Income Tax. Yes I paid both on the same income (albeit I made savings elsewhere which more or less cancelled out the extra tax and I had much more flexibility in running my business rather than being a sole trader.)
Well fair enough I can believe the ITV article to be bollocks. But I'm pretty sure the rates are different to pay if you take a dividend rather than 45% PAYE rate, so I'm not sure of your figures either.
It does say HMRC are investigating though, so presumably they think there is something in it too, probably some loophole you've not thought of.
If the dividend rate + savings on NI are less than 45% then that could save tax.
I'm sure there's some more outrageous loopholes, maybe something like a footballer could keep the money in their company until they retire and spend 6 months in a tax haven and pay themselves tax free.
Or the company never makes a profit and pays less corporation tax (I assume that is how Amazon avoid paying anything here).
Rayner has done her future leadership prospects no harm with scumgate.
The most she will ever be is a female Prescott to Starmer as leader
So the bruiser who says the unsayable.
'The unsayable'? It's just the same mindless abuse the left has been coming out with since the dawn of time. It doesn't even have the merit of originality.
It's more that you want a deputy who can say things that appeal to a part of the electorate you want to talk to but wish to avoid upsetting the swing voter.
I feel so sorry for these poor Conservative victims. All they did was vote against feeding hungry children. And in Selaine's case berated businesses for showing compassion and charity. Someone needs to Step In and tell these monsters in the British Public to shut up. Someone well liked and respected. Like Laurence Fox.
If these were "left-wing lawyers" you'd be demanding heads roll for an attack that legitimised bullying and risked real-life assault.
Parliamentarians have a responsibility to use measured language toward one another, no matter how vociferous the policy differences.
That is all true. How many of those 112 spoke out when their leader was going on about traitors or will speak out next time when it is their side who breach those principles?
And how many of them actually said a word when Priti Patel and Boris Johnson were using inflammatory language against lawyers?
Maybe both were wrong?
If the best we can do is whataboutism and an eye for eye then we're heading for an unpleasant place.
I expected a little more from you, to be honest.
They are both wrong. But Tory MPs should understand that if they remain silent when offensive and untrue language is used against others because it suits their political agenda, they are in a weaker position than they might otherwise be when others do it to them.
The Tory MP cohort selected Johnson to go forward to their membership knowing that he would create a divided country where offensive and attacking language is regularly used in our politics. If they really want to change it back to a more consensual country, they are the only people in the country that have that choice to make. The rest of us are stuck with it until 2024.
Do we know if Gupta has finally accepted that her claim that probably only 100/1m infected by covid die of it and certainly no more than 1000/1m is looking somewhere quite a long way past unlikely?
And that just maybe her inability to get journals to publish that might have been down to a disagreement with her methodology rather than a dark international conspiracy.
Surely the Belgian figures bear that out. 925 per million is at the upper end of the scale but cases were being significantly under-reported during the spring. So it looks like the IFR is indeed between 100 and 1000 per million. Or are you misremembering Gupta's figures?
Are you assuming that 100% of Belgians have had covid to date? If any kind of herd immunity kicks in, it’d be at about 66%. So past 660 or so per 1m, you’d see cases fall away if there were zero restrictions. And, as of today, there would be zero cases, zero hospitalisations, and zero deaths, even if Belgium had zero restrictions.
I wouldn’t agree that there is any plausible chance that even as many as 92.5% of Belgians have already had covid.
Rayner has done her future leadership prospects no harm with scumgate.
The most she will ever be is a female Prescott to Starmer as leader
So the bruiser who says the unsayable.
Rayner should not have said what she did for two reasons:-
1. It is simply offensive. There are better ways of making whatever point she was trying to make. 2. It was tactically unwise.
Patel should not have said what she did at conference. Why?
1. It was untrue. As well as offensive. 2. She was specifically warned by her security advisors of the risks to the people she was targeting. 3. She has a legal duty to maintain order.
A lot of hoo-ha today about Rayner by Tory MPs. Radio silence about Patel. Funny that.
When the government said we were only allowed x amount of people inside our homes, it struck me as a bit odd that the rule was the same no matter how big the home - Surely someone with a 5 bedroom house should be allowed more people round than someone in a bedsit?
Did the govt make this so to prevent the criticism of there being one rule for them etc? Or am I misremembering the rules?
You really really don't understand this tax business do you, even though I have explained it several times. You don't get to just pay just Corporation Tax if you set up a company. You also pay Income Tax when you pay the money from the company to yourself
You pay 19% Corporation Tax THEN when you pay it from your company to yourself you pay Income Tax on it.
So you pay 19% AND 45%.
OK it isn't quite as simple as that because you make savings on NI, Dividend band of £2000 and more generous allowable expenses and flexibility on when you pay yourself and therefore on when you pay tax BUT it isn't
19% or 45%. It really isn't.
I don't know why you think this?
You pay both unless you leave the money in the company forever!>
I now know why you believe it. You have read an ITV article that is bollocks. How about checking out the tax rules or listening to someone who have run a limited company for 30 years and paid both Corporation Tax and Income Tax. Yes I paid both on the same income (albeit I made savings elsewhere which more or less cancelled out the extra tax and I had much more flexibility in running my business rather than being a sole trader.)
Well fair enough I can believe the ITV article to be bollocks. But I'm pretty sure the rates are different to pay if you take a dividend rather than 45% PAYE rate, so I'm not sure of your figures either.
It does say HMRC are investigating though, so presumably they think there is something in it too, probably some loophole you've not thought of.
If the dividend rate + savings on NI are less than 45% then that could save tax.
I'm sure there's some more outrageous loopholes, maybe something like a footballer could keep the money in their company until they retire and spend 6 months in a tax haven and pay themselves tax free. .
I showed the rates earlier (income tax and dividend tax work out as roughly the same, the employer does save employer NI on dividend payments though).
And you might be able to remove money from the company on a tax free basis but there are now 5 year rules allowing clawback and Corporation tax (at 19%) would have been paid when the company original received the money so it's nowhere near tax free.
Sadly you are hitting an area I know an awful lot about and while it's fun watching people dig holes with their lack of knowledge it's also pretty pointless.
Basically footballers will be paying tax on their income - the real issue ends up being Employer NI which is currently the bane of the entire industry (it's £70bn a year the Government doesn't want disappearing).
That'd be back to the full lockdown, which was successful earlier in the year.
Well it worked until Cummings destroyed all trust in the people asking for it (after that the R figure rose again as people started to ignore the restrictions).
You only have to look at pubs working round the food rules and the Liverpool Gym who stayed open knowing they would be fined to see what will happen now. The damage Cummings did is unrepairable.
Restaurant emails encouraging business meetings with "potential collaborators on a possible new venture".....
Sounds like the same loophole will shortly be available for avoiding quarantine on flights with the city businessmen exemption.
Probably more to do with them running out of money than something Cummings did.
Or Sunak doing business meetings in a (very good and relatively cheap) pizza place this week. One senses he does not approve of this restriction.
Rayner has done her future leadership prospects no harm with scumgate.
The most she will ever be is a female Prescott to Starmer as leader
So the bruiser who says the unsayable.
'The unsayable'? It's just the same mindless abuse the left has been coming out with since the dawn of time. It doesn't even have the merit of originality.
It's more that you want a deputy who can say things that appeal to a part of the electorate you want to talk to but wish to avoid upsetting the swing voter.
I don't know about Wilson, but it certainly worked for Blair and Attlee. A respectable lawyerly type who the firebrands visibly trust is a powerful combination.
Mark Drakeford used to be a Welsh nationalist who thought trashing English only road signs was a fantastic thing to be doing'.
The atheist, republican who was Corbyn's favoured candidate to succeed Carwyn Jones later decided that class was more important than nationality, and became a socialist and joined the Labour Party.
Oh no! You are now quoting the Daily Mail. I think I preferred it when you quoted more reliable sources like Trafalgar!
It is true though, at the moment while Starmer now leads UK Labour, Corbyn Labour is making a last stand in Wales under the hapless Drakeford, who supported Corbyn for the leadership even in 2015.
Therefore I think the Tories might do better in Wales next year in the Assembly elections than they do in England in the local elections (and certainly better than in London in the Mayoral and Assembly elections).
Indeed the Tories might find they even get a higher voteshare in Wales in the Assembly elections than they do both in England in the local elections and Scotland in the Scottish Parliament elections, that was certainly what Opinium was suggesting last night
Ever the optimist, young HY. One major problem that you face is that the historic Conservative Party has been changed into the "Cronyism and Corruption Party". You seem to think that you are the only alternative to an incoherent Labour Party. There are other offers available, varying from one part of the country to another, as you will discover in the not too distant future.
Opinium's latest voting intention figures today and details from the data tables
Using sub samples like this is on par with your Trafalgar mutterings. This bears no relationship to the last all Wales ITV poll. Maybe the next one will tell a different story.
All Wales polls from April had an even bigger Tory lead and one had the Tories on most Assembly seats
Bernard Jenkin said she needs a holiday. No shortage of suggestions so far
I’d be very tempted were I Labour to make it clear to her that when they get into government she will be sacked from any public role and will be spending a lot of time answering questions in the inquiry into the running of PHE, Test’n’Trace and all the contracts awarded during her time in charge.
I see all those supposed qualms about governments behaving vindictively have evaporated then...
An employer has a right to sack staff subject to the laws that apply. A government has the right - and in this case the duty - to carry out a public inquiry into one of the biggest disasters this country has faced. The circumstances of her appointment are far from transparent as are the contracts that have been awarded. A proper inquiry into all these matters is entirely justified to ensure that any monies spent improperly are recovered for the taxpayer, any other improper behaviour is properly punished and lessons are learnt.
None of this is vindictive. Nor is it incompatible with the rule of law.
What is unacceptable is government appointing cronies without any sort of proper process and trying to make it difficult for them to be made properly accountable to taxpayers.
It is reasonable to have an inquiry but you seem to have predetermined the outcome of the inquiry before it has even happened. My experience of employment law is that sacking someone and then having an inquiry is putting the cart before the horse.
You should surely have the inquiry and then subject to the inquiry hold any disciplinary action or dismissal not the other way around?
Our cleaner has kept her daughter off school for a week for fear of her catching Covid.. the daughter tested positive yesterday, her mum negative today
Some polling out for the US today. USC has Biden on +10, +12, +10.
Trafalgar has 3 new polls out, which I suspect will be discussed here, show: FL Trump +2 AZ Trump +3 MI Trump +2 So I suspect not a surprise to anyone.
That'd be back to the full lockdown, which was successful earlier in the year.
Well it worked until Cummings destroyed all trust in the people asking for it (after that the R figure rose again as people started to ignore the restrictions).
You only have to look at pubs working round the food rules and the Liverpool Gym who stayed open knowing they would be fined to see what will happen now. The damage Cummings did is unrepairable.
Restaurant emails encouraging business meetings with "potential collaborators on a possible new venture".....
Sounds like the same loophole will shortly be available for avoiding quarantine on flights with the city businessmen exemption.
Probably more to do with them running out of money than something Cummings did.
Or Sunak doing business meetings in a (very good and relatively cheap) pizza place this week. One senses he does not approve of this restriction.
Hm, no. I think they just want to make money, and will go as far as the restrictions allow them to.
Rayner has done her future leadership prospects no harm with scumgate.
The most she will ever be is a female Prescott to Starmer as leader
That's further than anyone including herself could have expected. She just sounds stupid.
"As a mother" at 16 and Grandmother at 37, surely she should be PM just because she has lived through the experiences of the underclass? Lived experience trumps thought and consideration in the new normal
Mark Drakeford used to be a Welsh nationalist who thought trashing English only road signs was a fantastic thing to be doing'.
The atheist, republican who was Corbyn's favoured candidate to succeed Carwyn Jones later decided that class was more important than nationality, and became a socialist and joined the Labour Party.
Oh no! You are now quoting the Daily Mail. I think I preferred it when you quoted more reliable sources like Trafalgar!
It is true though, at the moment while Starmer now leads UK Labour, Corbyn Labour is making a last stand in Wales under the hapless Drakeford, who supported Corbyn for the leadership even in 2015.
Therefore I think the Tories might do better in Wales next year in the Assembly elections than they do in England in the local elections (and certainly better than in London in the Mayoral and Assembly elections).
Indeed the Tories might find they even get a higher voteshare in Wales in the Assembly elections than they do both in England in the local elections and Scotland in the Scottish Parliament elections, that was certainly what Opinium was suggesting last night
Ever the optimist, young HY. One major problem that you face is that the historic Conservative Party has been changed into the "Cronyism and Corruption Party". You seem to think that you are the only alternative to an incoherent Labour Party. There are other offers available, varying from one part of the country to another, as you will discover in the not too distant future.
Opinium's latest voting intention figures today and details from the data tables
Not a very good case, young HY. Politics as we know it has shut down since the general election. It ought to have started up again in the spring, with the local elections, but Covid put a stop to that. From what I hear, the Lib Dems are just starting to get going again, though not necessarily everywhere. Meanwhile, take whatever comfort you can from the opinion polls you quote. Those figures will not last.
@ TSE Your header notwithstanding, the US is clearly a functioning democracy - not perfectly so, for sure, but you way oversell its problems.
Are the GOP trying to suppress votes to the extent legally possible and are they pushing that envelope beyond what is moral and ethical? You betcha!
Will they be successful? Doubtful with this many eyes on them.
Is it a good strategy? Definitely not in the medium-term - they are turning off many of the voters they'll need to rebuild the party. In the short-term? Probably not even that - as noted above, with this many eyes on them and on SCOTUS, they won't get away with much, so there is little upside. And it is firing up the Dems to GOTV early on a scale I've never seen in my 8 Presidential elections living in the US, so there is a big potential downside. Little upside, big downside does not strike me as good strategy, unless it is all you have left. Which is, in fact, Trump's situation.
So if I were a Dem operative, I'd be saying to the GOP, bring it on! The more you push this anti-democratic practice just so you can cling on to power, the more your are reinforcing our core message this election, and the more you are helping us.
Mark Drakeford used to be a Welsh nationalist who thought trashing English only road signs was a fantastic thing to be doing'.
The atheist, republican who was Corbyn's favoured candidate to succeed Carwyn Jones later decided that class was more important than nationality, and became a socialist and joined the Labour Party.
Oh no! You are now quoting the Daily Mail. I think I preferred it when you quoted more reliable sources like Trafalgar!
It is true though, at the moment while Starmer now leads UK Labour, Corbyn Labour is making a last stand in Wales under the hapless Drakeford, who supported Corbyn for the leadership even in 2015.
Therefore I think the Tories might do better in Wales next year in the Assembly elections than they do in England in the local elections (and certainly better than in London in the Mayoral and Assembly elections).
Indeed the Tories might find they even get a higher voteshare in Wales in the Assembly elections than they do both in England in the local elections and Scotland in the Scottish Parliament elections, that was certainly what Opinium was suggesting last night
Ever the optimist, young HY. One major problem that you face is that the historic Conservative Party has been changed into the "Cronyism and Corruption Party". You seem to think that you are the only alternative to an incoherent Labour Party. There are other offers available, varying from one part of the country to another, as you will discover in the not too distant future.
Opinium's latest voting intention figures today and details from the data tables
Using sub samples like this is on par with your Trafalgar mutterings. This bears no relationship to the last all Wales ITV poll. Maybe the next one will tell a different story.
All Wales polls from April had an even bigger Tory lead and one had the Tories on most Assembly seats
Comments
Interesting data from Arizona...
That's not how we should do politics in this country - no matter how emotive the issue.
Remember: the boot can always end up on the other foot (and usually does) so you should defend the principle, not the accused.
Probably those kind of people aren't on twitter or PB I guess
My actual comment comes from the fact that MP was complaining about the letter had shown with her previous comments (regarding businesses stepping up to do what many believe was the Government's job) that the description was (in her case) completely valid and if anything not strong enough. After all the screw generous business comment was written and not spoken.
As for being a politician - I think I've said often another on here that in a world of 24 hour news and (especially) social media I cannot see why anyone would want to be one.
This was another example where the easiest solution was to pay it while announcing an investigation into how it could be incorporated into Universal Credit at the first opportunity (which given my knowledge of the UC system will be in roughly 2037).
It really is very disappointing that you can't find it within yourself to condemn this.
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1320316454634459137
Up until this week the Welsh Government were probably seen as less chaotic than Westminster. This issue has however become the sum total of the Cummings plus Jenrick plus Ferrier issues all rolled into one. HY might have a point, although I doubt it.
Conservative bleating about judicial activism has been an organised hypocrisy in the US for a long, long time.
And the anti-democratic playbook, while it has changed its label from Democrat to Republican along the way, hasn’t altered much since they gutted the 14th Amendment.
And today we learn this - https://twitter.com/stand_for_all/status/1320286923206938625?s=21. A specific warning of terrorist attacks and still she carried on.
https://twitter.com/DAaronovitch/status/1320315651215577089
"Scum" implies subhuman/not human, and we you know full well what that leads toward.
We're all happy to discuss the policy solutions - it's so important we do that in a parliamentary way.
I have very little time for our PM, and want him gone.
Nothing to do with Covid-219, either.
You only have to look at pubs working round the food rules and the Liverpool Gym who stayed open knowing they would be fined to see what will happen now. The damage Cummings did is unrepairable.
Meanwhile in Sweden...
https://twitter.com/NickCohen4/status/1320115680704909313
In which case even if Biden won Michigan and Pennsylvania Trump would be re elected if he held Wisconsin though it would be a 269 269 tie in the EC, assuming the GOP retain a majority of state delegations in the House
As it's becoming more and more clear that a lot of new Tory MPs don't actually care about their constituents and can't see the what the consequences of their thoughts and statements are.
Sounds like the same loophole will shortly be available for avoiding quarantine on flights with the city businessmen exemption.
You really really don't understand this tax business do you, even though I have explained it several times. You don't get to just pay just Corporation Tax if you set up a company. You also pay Income Tax when you pay the money from the company to yourself
You pay 19% Corporation Tax THEN when you pay it from your company to yourself you pay Income Tax on it.
So you pay 19% AND 45%.
OK it isn't quite as simple as that because you make savings on NI, Dividend band of £2000 and more generous allowable expenses and flexibility on when you pay yourself and therefore on when you pay tax BUT it isn't
19% or 45%. It really isn't.
I don't know why you think this?
You pay both unless you leave the money in the company forever!
https://twitter.com/sarahmucha/status/1320142456617390080
The fundamental reason that pop and sports stars often end up in this situation, is that they (generally) come from not very much money. And land in the crazy money overnight. So haven't acquired money management skills.
When you add in the young-people-think-they-are-invulnerable thing and bad advice from dodgy hangers on.... It seems remarkable that *any* of them end up not sleeping under a bridge.
You conduct purges.
He/she/it behaves vindictively.
Good job Cummings was a bubble story forgotten in short order.
The actual saving isn't made by the Footballer here (except for the fact they could keep the money in the limited company and draw it later) but for the Football club who don't need to pay Employer NI on the image right payments.
Personally I don't think so. I prefer people to take responsibility for their own actions.
You really really don't understand this tax business do you, even though I have explained it several times. You don't get to just pay just Corporation Tax if you set up a company. You also pay Income Tax when you pay the money from the company to yourself
You pay 19% Corporation Tax THEN when you pay it from your company to yourself you pay Income Tax on it.
So you pay 19% AND 45%.
OK it isn't quite as simple as that because you make savings on NI, Dividend band of £2000 and more generous allowable expenses and flexibility on when you pay yourself and therefore on when you pay tax BUT it isn't
19% or 45%. It really isn't.
I don't know why you think this?
You pay both unless you leave the money in the company forever!
I now know why you believe it. You have read an ITV article that is bollocks. How about checking out the tax rules or listening to someone who have run a limited company for 30 years and paid both Corporation Tax and Income Tax. Yes I paid both on the same income (albeit I made savings elsewhere which more or less cancelled out the extra tax and I had much more flexibility in running my business rather than being a sole trader.)
Bloody snowflakes can dish it out all day, then run screaming when on the other end of it.
'You're just like Mike Love but you'll never be Brain Wilson'
https://genius.com/Panic-at-the-disco-crazy-genius-lyrics
Who was the last Prime Minister of Great Britain and the UK who was neither Conservative, Labour, nor Liberal?
Bonus point for the year(s) when this person was in power.
No cheating!
None of this is vindictive. Nor is it incompatible with the rule of law.
What is unacceptable is government appointing cronies without any sort of proper process and trying to make it difficult for them to be made properly accountable to taxpayers.
But I suppose the answer you're looking for is Viscount Palmerston in the 1850s, when he led the Whigs.
Edit - There's no thing as PM of GB and the UK?
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-10-22/sweden-clamps-down-on-nightclubs-amid-increase-in-covid-cases
The refuseniks (Hunt, say) are still unacceptable to the membership.
The cabinet members are set to be covered in the same pile of poo as the PM.
“Où est la masse de manœuvre?” “Aucune.”
BTW, I'm not going to answer and pretend it was all my own work!
It does say HMRC are investigating though, so presumably they think there is something in it too, probably some loophole you've not thought of.
If the dividend rate + savings on NI are less than 45% then that could save tax.
I'm sure there's some more outrageous loopholes, maybe something like a footballer could keep the money in their company until they retire and spend 6 months in a tax haven and pay themselves tax free.
Or the company never makes a profit and pays less corporation tax (I assume that is how Amazon avoid paying anything here).
If any kind of herd immunity kicks in, it’d be at about 66%.
So past 660 or so per 1m, you’d see cases fall away if there were zero restrictions.
And, as of today, there would be zero cases, zero hospitalisations, and zero deaths, even if Belgium had zero restrictions.
I wouldn’t agree that there is any plausible chance that even as many as 92.5% of Belgians have already had covid.
1. It is simply offensive. There are better ways of making whatever point she was trying to make.
2. It was tactically unwise.
Patel should not have said what she did at conference. Why?
1. It was untrue. As well as offensive.
2. She was specifically warned by her security advisors of the risks to the people she was targeting.
3. She has a legal duty to maintain order.
A lot of hoo-ha today about Rayner by Tory MPs. Radio silence about Patel. Funny that.
Did the govt make this so to prevent the criticism of there being one rule for them etc? Or am I misremembering the rules?
And you might be able to remove money from the company on a tax free basis but there are now 5 year rules allowing clawback and Corporation tax (at 19%) would have been paid when the company original received the money so it's nowhere near tax free.
Sadly you are hitting an area I know an awful lot about and while it's fun watching people dig holes with their lack of knowledge it's also pretty pointless.
Basically footballers will be paying tax on their income - the real issue ends up being Employer NI which is currently the bane of the entire industry (it's £70bn a year the Government doesn't want disappearing).
https://twitter.com/AlistairHaimes/status/1320326194756259842?s=20
https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1248223276427628546?s=20
https://twitter.com/DerynConsulting/status/1248217542109335554?s=20
The Tories are in real contention to be the largest party in the Assembly in Wales next year for the first time since it was created in 1999
You should surely have the inquiry and then subject to the inquiry hold any disciplinary action or dismissal not the other way around?
USC has Biden on +10, +12, +10.
Trafalgar has 3 new polls out, which I suspect will be discussed here, show:
FL Trump +2
AZ Trump +3
MI Trump +2
So I suspect not a surprise to anyone.
A single poll for SD Trump +11
Are the GOP trying to suppress votes to the extent legally possible and are they pushing that envelope beyond what is moral and ethical? You betcha!
Will they be successful? Doubtful with this many eyes on them.
Is it a good strategy? Definitely not in the medium-term - they are turning off many of the voters they'll need to rebuild the party. In the short-term? Probably not even that - as noted above, with this many eyes on them and on SCOTUS, they won't get away with much, so there is little upside. And it is firing up the Dems to GOTV early on a scale I've never seen in my 8 Presidential elections living in the US, so there is a big potential downside. Little upside, big downside does not strike me as good strategy, unless it is all you have left. Which is, in fact, Trump's situation.
So if I were a Dem operative, I'd be saying to the GOP, bring it on! The more you push this anti-democratic practice just so you can cling on to power, the more your are reinforcing our core message this election, and the more you are helping us.