@matt You might be right on that, given the use of trusts and off shore accounts by media groups and some of their key figures there is a degree of hypocrisy. Blair's shredded expenses ought to have damaged him, had the media decided to go after him.
I wasn't convinced that Darling, Ussher, and other Treasury Ministers were acting wholly above board when it came to expense claims against taxes during the last Labour government.
Cameron does need a better team to play the 24 hour media operation.
Dont forget that darling charged the tax payer for tax efficiency advice on his own personal income.
If it hadn't been for that bloody fool and the duck house...
His resignation from the Society of Advocates did seem unusual for some reason.
I'm struggling to call an act tax avoidance when it is taking advantage of a tax exemption in precisely the way envisaged by the legislation. But we've reached the stage where any posed photo is a selfie, so that type of logical idiocy is only to be expected from the press, especially when they have an axe to grind.
Astonishing how modest the sums are re Cameron's inheritance.
These sort of numbers occur every day of the week, especially in the South.
Massive hysteria over nothing...
I think the real legacy to Cameron from his parents (other than the current political imbroglio of course) was in the upbringing, education, stability, the eternal knowledge that there was a back-up if everything else went sour.
Like you, I raised a quizzical eyebrow at the size of the financial inheritance. There are people who are dirt poor and these would be absolutely life-changing amounts of money. But it's utterly unremarkable for this part of England, and moreover essentially negligible for someone in Cameron's position, with his own financial independence and career prospects, and more so when one factors in the earning power of his wife. Even if his political gig had never gotten above the researcher level and he'd not managed to procure a safe seat for himself, his earning capacity in the corporate world was strong. Of course in political retirement, the man could make a fortune for himself, if he so cared. Even if he didn't get into the extensive business interests of Tony Blair, six after-dinner speeches a year could see him into very comfortable old age.
This is getting stupid now..headlines of Cameron tax dodge when his mum has gifted him money which is laid out in the tax rules & requires his mum to live for I believe 7 years. There is nothing "dodgy", abnormal or tax avoidance-y about it.
Agree 100% with you. It shows how the Brexit referendum is skewing the debate.
Tens or thousands of people gift their property to their children to avoid tax - the mail and telegraph are a disgrace
Is that the party line or did you think of that all by yourself?
It's a fact. Both donor and donee take a risk on life expectancy, albeit from different perspectives.
Astonishing how modest the sums are re Cameron's inheritance.
These sort of numbers occur every day of the week, especially in the South.
Massive hysteria over nothing...
Yeah, but it's not really about Cameron's financial or tax arrangements per se is it? The "game" is "Get Cameron". Destroy him and his public standing because he is by far REMAINS greatest asset.
It's a shame it's come to this but Cameron's brought most of it on himself with his silly EU non-negotiation and everything he's done and said since "The Deal".
Yes. The DEAL is all. With that one big fat lie, Cameron sowed the seeds of his own self destruction. It was the act of a very very lazy and arrogant man, at best.
I thought he did it to support George "support Leave or have a career" Osborne.
Ironic.
You have to laugh at poor George.
Is it normal for so many newspaper front pages to be held back this late? Big scoop for tomorrow?
I'm struggling to call an act tax avoidance when it is taking advantage of a tax exemption in precisely the way envisaged by the legislation. But we've reached the stage where any posed photo is a selfie, so that type of logical idiocy is only to be expected from the press, especially when they have an axe to grind.
The way we are going the tax free £10k allowance we all get will be claimed to be tax avoidance by Cameron.
This is getting stupid now..headlines of Cameron tax dodge when his mum has gifted him money which is laid out in the tax rules & requires his mum to live for I believe 7 years. There is nothing "dodgy", abnormal or tax avoidance-y about it.
Agree 100% with you. It shows how the Brexit referendum is skewing the debate.
Tens or thousands of people gift their property to their children to avoid tax - the mail and telegraph are a disgrace
Is that the party line or did you think of that all by yourself?
No - again you use insults when you do not know that in 40 years in my work I evidenced many thousand of people using this perfectly legitimate process to either mitigate nursing home fees or death duties. You really do not understand tax planning do you
As here in ThisisMoney........
"If you think your estate will be over the limit There’s no need to worry. Even if your estate is worth more than the limit, there are things you can do to minimise Inheritance Tax. In fact, if you plan carefully, you might be able to prevent your estate from paying it at all."
Perfectly legitimate. Not illegal in any way. By 2020 under this government most of us won't be paying any IHT at all as the level where it kicks in will be 1 million.
SeanT and a few socialists will be stuffed though.
On the review aggregator website, Rotten Tomatoes, the film has an approval rating of 93%, based on 221 reviews, with an average rating of 8/10. The site's critical consensus reads, "Led by outstanding work from Emily Blunt and Benicio del Toro, Sicario is a taut, tightly wound thriller with much more on its mind than attention-getting set pieces."[28] On Metacritic, the film has a weighted average score of 81 out of 100, based on 41 critics, indicating "universal acclaim".[29] On CinemaScore, audiences gave the film an average grade of "A−" on an A+ to F scale.[26]
I stand by my statement.
I've not seen it yet, but I get suspicious of critical descriptions praising plots as being more intelligent than other works (as the 'more on its mind' bit suggests). It can very well be true, but I've seen too many supposedly deep and intelligent movies that were just dumb trash in some other way, dressed up nicely because it had a good actor or decent art direction.
On that front, the worse movie I've ever seen I cannot even remember the title of - the most riveting part was when a toilet a guy was working on broke. I only got through it as I was sat there in morbid fascination at how dull and lifeless it was. I think it was supposed to be a slow paced, reflective character piece about dealing with loss or some such, but it was just nothing. No good writing, performances, direction, energy, emotion, not a thing. It was the cinematic equivalent of watching paint dry. So bad I cannot even remember the title it made so little impact (it was about some guy building a boat after his family dies, it turned out, this wasn't mentioned at the beginning).
This is getting stupid now..headlines of Cameron tax dodge when his mum has gifted him money which is laid out in the tax rules & requires his mum to live for I believe 7 years. There is nothing "dodgy", abnormal or tax avoidance-y about it.
Agree 100% with you. It shows how the Brexit referendum is skewing the debate.
Tens or thousands of people gift their property to their children to avoid tax - the mail and telegraph are a disgrace
Is that the party line or did you think of that all by yourself?
No - again you use insults when you do not know that in 40 years in my work I evidenced many thousand of people using this perfectly legitimate process to either mitigate nursing home fees or death duties. You really do not understand tax planning do you
Understand it perfectly thank you, just as I recognize someone who puts tribal politics above all else.
I'm struggling to call an act tax avoidance when it is taking advantage of a tax exemption in precisely the way envisaged by the legislation. But we've reached the stage where any posed photo is a selfie, so that type of logical idiocy is only to be expected from the press, especially when they have an axe to grind.
We had all the same crap over Miliband. I defended him vigorously, as much as I now defend Cameron.
Parliament has gone out of its way to create specific exemptions and reliefs from IHT. Who but a fool, or a living saint, would not take advantage of them, any more than someone would pass up on their annual income tax allowance?
I'm struggling to call an act tax avoidance when it is taking advantage of a tax exemption in precisely the way envisaged by the legislation. But we've reached the stage where any posed photo is a selfie, so that type of logical idiocy is only to be expected from the press, especially when they have an axe to grind.
The way we are going the tax free £10k allowance we all get will be claimed to be tax avoidance by Cameron.
Tim Worstall blogged a sharp and angry post on almost exactly that point a few days back.
He was irritated when he saw the Fabians call the allowance part of the "shadow welfare state", which isn't quite the point of calling it "tax avoidance" but is gnawing rabidly at the same part of the moral compass.
@iainjwatson: The key details from David Cameron's recent tax returns will be broadcast @BBCRadio4 News at midnight and available @BBCNews online
I really hope this sort of thing does not become common. Everything will just get sensationalised and obviously opponents will make mountains out of molehills, and even if there's nothing there, those who are disposed to think ill of someone will find something they can complain about. I'll bet people have found a way to complain about Corbyn not claiming much in expenses somehow for example.
@matt You might be right on that, given the use of trusts and off shore accounts by media groups and some of their key figures there is a degree of hypocrisy. Blair's shredded expenses ought to have damaged him, had the media decided to go after him.
I wasn't convinced that Darling, Ussher, and other Treasury Ministers were acting wholly above board when it came to expense claims against taxes during the last Labour government.
Cameron does need a better team to play the 24 hour media operation.
Dont forget that darling charged the tax payer for tax efficiency advice on his own personal income.
If it hadn't been for that bloody fool and the duck house...
His resignation from the Society of Advocates did seem unusual for some reason.
Perhaps Darling should have taken the "moat" from his own eye first?
I don't know, but I almost hope she doesn't, since as she is so popular and her party doing so well, maybe her resisting will cause everyone to take a deep breath and reflect on matters for a bit..
Astonishing how modest the sums are re Cameron's inheritance.
These sort of numbers occur every day of the week, especially in the South.
Massive hysteria over nothing...
Yeah, but it's not really about Cameron's financial or tax arrangements per se is it? The "game" is "Get Cameron". Destroy him and his public standing because he is by far REMAINS greatest asset.
It's a shame it's come to this but Cameron's brought most of it on himself with his silly EU non-negotiation and everything he's done and said since "The Deal".
Yes. The DEAL is all. With that one big fat lie, Cameron sowed the seeds of his own self destruction. It was the act of a very very lazy and arrogant man, at best.
And just a few weeks ago we had posters on here smugly gloating about how clever Cameron was to be pulling the wool over the eyes of the public re. the referendum. How times change.
@iainjwatson: The key details from David Cameron's recent tax returns will be broadcast @BBCRadio4 News at midnight and available @BBCNews online
I really hope this sort of thing does not become common. Everything will just get sensationalised and obviously opponents will make mountains out of molehills, and even if there's nothing there, those who are disposed to think ill of someone will find something they can complain about. I'll bet people have found a way to complain about Corbyn not claiming much in expenses somehow for example.
I'm also not sure what publishing them actually answers, since if you are engaged in avoidance, you wouldn't be declaring it on your return.
@iainjwatson: The key details from David Cameron's recent tax returns will be broadcast @BBCRadio4 News at midnight and available @BBCNews online
I really hope this sort of thing does not become common. Everything will just get sensationalised and obviously opponents will make mountains out of molehills, and even if there's nothing there, those who are disposed to think ill of someone will find something they can complain about. I'll bet people have found a way to complain about Corbyn not claiming much in expenses somehow for example.
This will be sensationized by the same people who for many many years did everything possible to have all their BBC payments arranged in such a way to minimze their tax expose.
I'm struggling to call an act tax avoidance when it is taking advantage of a tax exemption in precisely the way envisaged by the legislation. But we've reached the stage where any posed photo is a selfie, so that type of logical idiocy is only to be expected from the press, especially when they have an axe to grind.
We had all the same crap over Miliband. I defended him vigorously, as much as I now defend Cameron.
Parliament has gone out of its way to create specific exemptions and reliefs from IHT. Who but a fool, or a living saint, would not take advantage of them, any more than someone would pass up on their annual income tax allowance?
Tyson said the other night on here that he couldn't be arsed too and would probably double his income if he did or words to that effect. Fool then as I don't recollect 3 miracles as yet .
Stand corrected of course if that's wrong........ The 3 miracles I mean.
First, apologies I was unable to join the PB gathering last evening. After a busy week at work, a fish and chip supper provided by Mrs Stodge courtesy of our excellent local emporium was too much of a temptation. I hope everyone had a really good time and I'm sure I'll attend a future gathering though miss the halcyon days of the National Liberal Club terrace...
My first chance to comment on the pit David Cameron has dug for himself and his attempts tonight to dig himself out. As has been said by others, he's done nothing wrong and the amounts for a man in the south of England aren't great though the property from which he derives the rental income is in a better location than enjoyed by most.
He's done nothing wrong and it's certainly no resigning matter.
That isn't the point.
For years, the Cameron/Osborne mantra has been how they understand and are on the side of "hard working families" and how "we are all in this together". Fine, I get that, I really do but most "hard working families" don't have offshore tax havens or the kind of money to put in such havens and gain the fiscal advantages thereof. I know Mrs Stodge and I don't.
Of course, everyone understands why they were used and would use them themselves if they could but again that isn't the point. It re-enforces the point that for all his fine words he is in one place and many of the rest of us are in another financially, economically and legally.
It cuts to the fundamental sense of trust between Cameron and the electorate that won the election for the Conservatives last year. The manner by which Cameron has dealt with this issue has possibly weakened that bond of trust and Cameron also needs that trust to win the Referendum on June 23rd. I signed the e-petition because I don't simply rely on "Trust me" as an argument.
I'm struggling to call an act tax avoidance when it is taking advantage of a tax exemption in precisely the way envisaged by the legislation. But we've reached the stage where any posed photo is a selfie, so that type of logical idiocy is only to be expected from the press, especially when they have an axe to grind.
We had all the same crap over Miliband. I defended him vigorously, as much as I now defend Cameron.
Parliament has gone out of its way to create specific exemptions and reliefs from IHT. Who but a fool, or a living saint, would not take advantage of them, any more than someone would pass up on their annual income tax allowance?
I'm not even convinced that paying tax you really don't have any obligation to pay, because you have deliberately chosen to organise your affairs in a tax-inefficient way, is particularly "saintly". If you wanted to, you could just write a big ol' cheque out to the Chancellor every year, which would - I'm sure - give an even more fulsome (or smugly irritating) sense of pride and self-gratification for those who believe the State to be our humane and beneficent protector and supreme moral arbiter
Or if there was some particular hobby-horse you felt strongly about, and the idea of some portion of your hard-earned pounds being funneled into nuclear weapons, new roads, badger culls and Tory MPs' salaries made you feel a bit dirty, there's the option of directly donating to charity instead.
What I can't get my head around is in the scheme of dodgy financial stuff of politicians this doesn't even register. Mandy & the whole dodgy loan / mortgage application...cash for honours...cash for asking questions in parliament etc etc etc
Cameron scandal I paid my taxes on profits in a unit trust, got rid of all.my investments before becoming PM & my mum gifted me some money in accordance with the law.
I'm struggling to call an act tax avoidance when it is taking advantage of a tax exemption in precisely the way envisaged by the legislation. But we've reached the stage where any posed photo is a selfie, so that type of logical idiocy is only to be expected from the press, especially when they have an axe to grind.
We had all the same crap over Miliband. I defended him vigorously, as much as I now defend Cameron.
Parliament has gone out of its way to create specific exemptions and reliefs from IHT. Who but a fool, or a living saint, would not take advantage of them, any more than someone would pass up on their annual income tax allowance?
Tyson said the other night on here that he couldn't be arsed too and would probably double his income if he did or words to that effect. Fool then as I don't recollect 3 miracles as yet .
Stand corrected of course if that's wrong........ The 3 miracles I mean.
But in some cases the HMRC themselves would say:- "No, you've got that wrong. You don't owe us anything! We can't take your money. Parliament has given you an allowance/relief..."
I'm struggling to call an act tax avoidance when it is taking advantage of a tax exemption in precisely the way envisaged by the legislation. But we've reached the stage where any posed photo is a selfie, so that type of logical idiocy is only to be expected from the press, especially when they have an axe to grind.
The way we are going the tax free £10k allowance we all get will be claimed to be tax avoidance by Cameron.
Actually the PMs salary only just makes it into the higher tax bracket these days. Luckily Gordon Brown after taking the higher amount for 3 years reduced the PMs salary by 25% as he was turfed out of No 10.
Bit like the way he increased the higher rate to 50% after 13 years at lower rate just days before calling the removal men. His last act of spite and hatred towards the UK.
This is getting stupid now..headlines of Cameron tax dodge when his mum has gifted him money which is laid out in the tax rules & requires his mum to live for I believe 7 years. There is nothing "dodgy", abnormal or tax avoidance-y about it.
Agree 100% with you. It shows how the Brexit referendum is skewing the debate.
Tens or thousands of people gift their property to their children to avoid tax - the mail and telegraph are a disgrace
Is that the party line or did you think of that all by yourself?
No - again you use insults when you do not know that in 40 years in my work I evidenced many thousand of people using this perfectly legitimate process to either mitigate nursing home fees or death duties. You really do not understand tax planning do you
Understand it perfectly thank you, just as I recognize someone who puts tribal politics above all else.
Insult? I don't think so.
There is nothing tribal when making a factual statemen
I begin to believe this, Cameron is shit. He's a shit prime minister, with a shit Chancellor, and we are governed by shits.
What 85 SeanT is trying to tell you is that we ain't got no entertainment centre, no climate control, no video system, no surveillance, no freezers, no fucking ice cream, no rubbers, no women, no guns. All we got here is *shit*!
I'm struggling to call an act tax avoidance when it is taking advantage of a tax exemption in precisely the way envisaged by the legislation. But we've reached the stage where any posed photo is a selfie, so that type of logical idiocy is only to be expected from the press, especially when they have an axe to grind.
The problem is that Cameron first off tried to obfuscate, then he virtually lied, before revealing "the truth". But now no one thinks it is the truth (tho it likely is) because of his fibs.
For a PM who is (according to OGH) at his best when his" back is against the wall", it's been a strange performance. His first reaction was to pretend the wall wasn't there, then he tried to hide behind the wall, then he attempted to convince us "wall" meant "window".
Finally he put his back against the wall.
Recently a very well known Tory personally emailed me to say that, in his opinion, Cameron was vastly overrated, and Cameron has just got lucky in that he's faced utterly dreadful opposition. Blair at his peak would have destroyed Cameron. Thatcher is in an entirely different league.
I begin to believe this, Cameron is shit. He's a shit prime minister, with a shit Chancellor, and we are governed by shits.
It's possible. But also possible is even those who are best with their backs up against the wall will fail if they are put up against it enough times, and the wall is crumbling through with EU obsession mould. Cameron is a Remainer, and doesn't have a solid enough foundation to fight back with strength, since apparently EU support has the consistency of custard, so while he's made poor choices in that fight, and all his troubles stem from it, I suspect he was lacking in options because in one areas at least it cannot be denied he has been an absolute failure - he has failed to fix the broken heart of the Tory party.
But it hardly matters now. Unless he wins Remain by a substantial margin, he's toast - the media is against him, a sizable portion of the party will not, despite their claims, back him for much longer, even Corbynite Labour is improving (even if they are still crap), he's massively missed any immigration or economic goals (bar unemployment), and one cabinet minister already had resigned saying the austerity regime is nonsense, and he seems incapable of getting on top of anything.
Whether he's crap or not, he is looking crap at the moment, and unless he gets a stonking great win in June, which is beyond any person I suspect given how unappealing the EU is, what can he do to make himself seem less crap, particularly when he's already said he's going?
Sorry, but any one thinking that Cameron's father only left a couple of million £UK is incredibly niave. If he did, he was incredibly incompetent and his reputation suggested he wasn't.
I'm struggling to call an act tax avoidance when it is taking advantage of a tax exemption in precisely the way envisaged by the legislation. But we've reached the stage where any posed photo is a selfie, so that type of logical idiocy is only to be expected from the press, especially when they have an axe to grind.
We had all the same crap over Miliband. I defended him vigorously, as much as I now defend Cameron.
Parliament has gone out of its way to create specific exemptions and reliefs from IHT. Who but a fool, or a living saint, would not take advantage of them, any more than someone would pass up on their annual income tax allowance?
I'm not even convinced that paying tax you really don't have any obligation to pay, because you have deliberately chosen to organise your affairs in a tax-inefficient way, is particularly "saintly". If you wanted to, you could just write a big ol' cheque out to the Chancellor every year, which would - I'm sure - give an even more fulsome (or smugly irritating) sense of pride and self-gratification for those who believe the State to be our humane and beneficent protector and supreme moral arbiter
Or if there was some particular hobby-horse you felt strongly about, and the idea of some portion of your hard-earned pounds being funneled into nuclear weapons, new roads, badger culls and Tory MPs' salaries made you feel a bit dirty, there's the option of directly donating to charity instead.
I try to pay the only taxes which I can't avoid. Which pretty much comes down to VAT, Council Tax and Road Fund Licence...
Listen Rod- I don't think anyone is querying too much whether Cameron declared his income on offshore investments. Or derived IHT benefits.
But his old fella was responsible for an offshore fund. And many people invest in offshore funds so they avoid declaring it on their tax returns. That is the point otherwise they would invest at home.
So Cameron benefited financially from holding shares in an investment fund that some or many people probably used to avoid paying taxes. And his father was responsible for said fund. It is just tawdry.
We are long passed the days when UK residents invested offshore because of exchange controls- and that was a pretty lame excuse then.
I've got offshore investments but I lived in Guernsey and I invested in these then because my tax liability was lower as a Guernsey resident. But since I've been a UK resident, there are so many UK based investment funds to invest in- M&G, Fidelity etc..that I would not even consider going to an offshore fund. It would just appear that I was doing something to avoid paying tax even if I wasn't.
The management costs, fund costs, transaction costs are so low in UK based funds- many are zero. Why would a UK resident want to pay more to invest in offshore funds- many of which cost 3-5% annually for the privilege of doing so.
This is getting stupid now..headlines of Cameron tax dodge when his mum has gifted him money which is laid out in the tax rules & requires his mum to live for I believe 7 years. There is nothing "dodgy", abnormal or tax avoidance-y about it.
"The Shares are assets situated outside the United Kingdom for the purposes of United Kingdom inheritance tax. A liability to United Kingdom inheritance tax may arise in respect of gifts by, or on the death of, individuals domiciled, or deemed to be domiciled, in the United Kingdom."
From the prospectus of 2006.
Therefore people like the Camerons, domiciled (and deemed-domiciled) in the UK could derive no IHT benefit...
The shares' situs is irrelevant, since IHT is payable on all worldwide assets, for the UK-domiciled.
What I can't get my head around is in the scheme of dodgy financial stuff of politicians this doesn't even register. Mandy & the whole dodgy loan / mortgage application...cash for honours...cash for asking questions in parliament etc etc etc
Cameron scandal I paid my taxes on profits in a unit trust, got rid of all.my investments before becoming PM & my mum gifted me some money in accordance with the law.
Oh let's all be clear - this is a mud-slinging operation. And it wouldn't have happened had Cameron not engaged in a fraudulent EU renegotiation and then treated his opponents on the EU issue with such contempt.
But if it works, so what. The cause is just, and you don't play Queensberry rules with b*stards over such an important matter.
He's done nothing wrong and it's certainly no resigning matter.
That isn't the point.
For years, the Cameron/Osborne mantra has been how they understand and are on the side of "hard working families" and how "we are all in this together". Fine, I get that, I really do but most "hard working families" don't have offshore tax havens or the kind of money to put in such havens and gain the fiscal advantages thereof. I know Mrs Stodge and I don't.
Of course, everyone understands why they were used and would use them themselves if they could but again that isn't the point. It re-enforces the point that for all his fine words he is in one place and many of the rest of us are in another financially, economically and legally.
.
But that really comes down to 'unless a politician is like us, we cannot trust him' which is an awful road to go down, and it's one reason we get so many phoney spouting automatons at the top who then 'disappoint' us when it turns out they are not like us, even if they told us they weren't (One thing that annoyed me about Ed M was he made a point of acknowledging he was not like the 'squeezed middle' as I believe the term was at the time, but then continued to use the same lazy attacks on his opponent being out of touch).
First, apologies I was unable to join the PB gathering last evening. After a busy week at work, a fish and chip supper provided by Mrs Stodge courtesy of our excellent local emporium was too much of a temptation. I hope everyone had a really good time and I'm sure I'll attend a future gathering though miss the halcyon days of the National Liberal Club terrace...
My first chance to comment on the pit David Cameron has dug for himself and his attempts tonight to dig himself out. As has been said by others, he's done nothing wrong and the amounts for a man in the south of England aren't great though the property from which he derives the rental income is in a better location than enjoyed by most.
He's done nothing wrong and it's certainly no resigning matter.
That isn't the point.
For years, the Cameron/Osborne mantra has been how they understand and are on the side of "hard working families" and how "we are all in this together". Fine, I get that, I really do but most "hard working families" don't have offshore tax havens or the kind of money to put in such havens and gain the fiscal advantages thereof. I know Mrs Stodge and I don't.
Of course, everyone understands why they were used and would use them themselves if they could but again that isn't the point. It re-enforces the point that for all his fine words he is in one place and many of the rest of us are in another financially, economically and legally.
It cuts to the fundamental sense of trust between Cameron and the electorate that won the election for the Conservatives last year. The manner by which Cameron has dealt with this issue has possibly weakened that bond of trust and Cameron also needs that trust to win the Referendum on June 23rd. I signed the e-petition because I don't simply rely on "Trust me" as an argument.
Cameron sold his holdings before he became PM. While he was PM he did nor acquire any new holdings and he placed himself on a par with most of the UK so he was not separating himself from most others.
Every question until she does will be "what are you hiding?"
Coupled with the "secret Chinese deal", not a good look during an election campaign
So she probably will, although seriously how many seats do they SNP need? They'll win even if she stabs a baby on the campaign trail, she should hold off until after the election and then publish the damn things, saying clearly the people didn't think it mattered, and in any case look how above board everything was.
Most people go into offshore funds for greater returns. Of course there is a greater risk involved as well hence the argument that a balanced and spread portfolio of investments is necessary.
I am pretty sure most of my pensions have part of the funds offshore as well rather than solely in UK blue chips with crap returns.
What I can't get my head around is in the scheme of dodgy financial stuff of politicians this doesn't even register. Mandy & the whole dodgy loan / mortgage application...cash for honours...cash for asking questions in parliament etc etc etc
Cameron scandal I paid my taxes on profits in a unit trust, got rid of all.my investments before becoming PM & my mum gifted me some money in accordance with the law.
Oh let's all be clear - this is a mud-slinging operation. And it wouldn't have happened had Cameron not engaged in a fraudulent EU renegotiation and then treated his opponents on the EU issue with such contempt.
But if it works, so what. The cause is just, and you don't play Queensberry rules with b*stards over such an important matter.
All sides sling mud, it is true. I don't like it, but that's reality for you. That said, the thing that worries me is that the intensity of the playing the man not the ball with Cameron makes me wonder if for some attacking him and his clique is really the main aim, to damage him such that even if Remain wins he must go.
I hope the efforts to destabilise him are not distracting from the fight to ensure Leave wins, as although I hope whoever leads the Tories post referendum is as competent as can be and hopefully moderate, something which for all his faults Cameron arguably is, I don't care about the civil war that will erupt among the Tories after the vote, I only care about the vote itself. Hurting Cameron may well hurt Remain, but the arguments against the EU are much stronger than the arguments against Cameron, and I hope energy is not being wasted on the latter to ill effect.
Astonishing how modest the sums are re Cameron's inheritance.
These sort of numbers occur every day of the week, especially in the South.
Massive hysteria over nothing...
Yeah, but it's not really about Cameron's financial or tax arrangements per se is it? The "game" is "Get Cameron". Destroy him and his public standing because he is by far REMAINS greatest asset.
It's a shame it's come to this but Cameron's brought most of it on himself with his silly EU non-negotiation and everything he's done and said since "The Deal".
Yes. The DEAL is all. With that one big fat lie, Cameron sowed the seeds of his own self destruction. It was the act of a very very lazy and arrogant man, at best.
@SeanT - you froth too much. Such bitterness from Leavers, with whom I would have liked to associate myself except for their hysterics.
What I can't get my head around is in the scheme of dodgy financial stuff of politicians this doesn't even register. Mandy & the whole dodgy loan / mortgage application...cash for honours...cash for asking questions in parliament etc etc etc
Cameron scandal I paid my taxes on profits in a unit trust, got rid of all.my investments before becoming PM & my mum gifted me some money in accordance with the law.
Oh let's all be clear - this is a mud-slinging operation. And it wouldn't have happened had Cameron not engaged in a fraudulent EU renegotiation and then treated his opponents on the EU issue with such contempt.
But if it works, so what. The cause is just, and you don't play Queensberry rules with b*stards over such an important matter.
Spot on. The Cameroons have been a bunch of smug gits so far. Karma is such a bitch innit?
I posted the other night, but I cannot be bothered looking for tax efficiencies- and yes my money could be used to subsidise fossil fuels, or badger culls, or paying MP's expenses etc....
The reason I cannot be arsed is the I am not that bothered by chasing money. I've left my inheritance to Greenpeace because I do not believe in inherited wealth. I didn't inherit any.
I'm struggling to call an act tax avoidance when it is taking advantage of a tax exemption in precisely the way envisaged by the legislation. But we've reached the stage where any posed photo is a selfie, so that type of logical idiocy is only to be expected from the press, especially when they have an axe to grind.
We had all the same crap over Miliband. I defended him vigorously, as much as I now defend Cameron.
Parliament has gone out of its way to create specific exemptions and reliefs from IHT. Who but a fool, or a living saint, would not take advantage of them, any more than someone would pass up on their annual income tax allowance?
I'm not even convinced that paying tax you really don't have any obligation to pay, because you have deliberately chosen to organise your affairs in a tax-inefficient way, is particularly "saintly". If you wanted to, you could just write a big ol' cheque out to the Chancellor every year, which would - I'm sure - give an even more fulsome (or smugly irritating) sense of pride and self-gratification for those who believe the State to be our humane and beneficent protector and supreme moral arbiter
Or if there was some particular hobby-horse you felt strongly about, and the idea of some portion of your hard-earned pounds being funneled into nuclear weapons, new roads, badger culls and Tory MPs' salaries made you feel a bit dirty, there's the option of directly donating to charity instead.
I try to pay the only taxes which I can't avoid. Which pretty much comes down to VAT, Council Tax and Road Fund Licence...
I'm struggling to call an act tax avoidance when it is taking advantage of a tax exemption in precisely the way envisaged by the legislation. But we've reached the stage where any posed photo is a selfie, so that type of logical idiocy is only to be expected from the press, especially when they have an axe to grind.
The problem is that Cameron first off tried to obfuscate, then he virtually lied, before revealing "the truth". But now no one thinks it is the truth (tho it likely is) because of his fibs.
For a PM who is (according to OGH) at his best when his" back is against the wall", it's been a strange performance. His first reaction was to pretend the wall wasn't there, then he tried to hide behind the wall, then he attempted to convince us "wall" meant "window".
Finally he put his back against the wall.
Recently a very well known Tory personally emailed me to say that, in his opinion, Cameron was vastly overrated, and Cameron has just got lucky in that he's faced utterly dreadful opposition. Blair at his peak would have destroyed Cameron. Thatcher is in an entirely different league.
I begin to believe this, Cameron is shit. He's a shit prime minister, with a shit Chancellor, and we are governed by shits.
Well said SeanT. Everything that has happened this week shouldn't come as a surprise. I think the real reason Cameron was so evasive at the start of the week was because he didn't want the name Blairmore Holdings being revealed, as it would get the investigative journalists digging. His lame excuse about his dad is just that, a lot of guff. And every PB'er should watch this video which lays out why David Cameron should never have become Prime Minister, and should resign forthwith:
But 788 790 Finchley Road is all a giant conspiracy theory I hear some commentators on here say?! Well if it's that, then why has Mr Bowden uncovered the paper trail that indelibly links Mr Cameron and plenty of other high ranking politicians to multi-billion pound money laundering, asset stripping and boiler room operations?
Now the opposition are in a tricky spot here, because they don't want 788 790 Finchley Road coming out as it implicates plenty of them, whilst wanting Cameron out. The exposure of everything that has gone on at 788 790 Finchley Road over the past 40 years would bring the whole house down well and truly.
But that really comes down to 'unless a politician is like us, we cannot trust him' which is an awful road to go down, and it's one reason we get so many phoney spouting automatons at the top who then 'disappoint' us when it turns out they are not like us, even if they told us they weren't (One thing that annoyed me about Ed M was he made a point of acknowledging he was not like the 'squeezed middle' as I believe the term was at the time, but then continued to use the same lazy attacks on his opponent being out of touch).
I don't really get this point. As others have said, £200k isn't a huge income if you live in London or the South East. There will be plenty of people earning that in the Home Counties. He gets £90k of rental income which is pretty decent but then he has a nice property in Notting Hill rather than a small flat in Leyton and he also gets £3k of income from savings. Now that either means he's found a really nice account with a much better interest rate than anything I know or he has a lot of savings invested.
Politicians have to empathise to win votes - in order to make the Conservative Party, which had garnered a truly negative reputation by 2005, electable he had, as leader, to begin to try to understand and appreciate what it was like to be a "hard working family" and speak the language of the aspirational and the hard working.
Oddly enough, that's how Conservatives always win - Margaret Thatcher knew that as indeed did Edward Heath in 1970.
The problem with the aspirational and the hard working in the era of austerity is that all the aspiration and all the hard work is akin to the hamster on the wheel and many people are simply running hard to stand still economically.
I posted the other night, but I cannot be bothered looking for tax efficiencies- and yes my money could be used to subsidise fossil fuels, or badger culls, or paying MP's expenses etc....
The reason I cannot be arsed is the I am not that bothered by chasing money. I've left my inheritance to Greenpeace because I do not believe in inherited wealth. I didn't inherit any.
I'm struggling to call an act tax avoidance when it is taking advantage of a tax exemption in precisely the way envisaged by the legislation. But we've reached the stage where any posed photo is a selfie, so that type of logical idiocy is only to be expected from the press, especially when they have an axe to grind.
We had all the same crap over Miliband. I defended him vigorously, as much as I now defend Cameron.
Parliament has gone out of its way to create specific exemptions and reliefs from IHT. Who but a fool, or a living saint, would not take advantage of them, any more than someone would pass up on their annual income tax allowance?
I'm not even convinced that paying tax you really don't have any obligation to pay, because you have deliberately chosen to organise your affairs in a tax-inefficient way, is particularly "saintly". If you wanted to, you could just write a big ol' cheque out to the Chancellor every year, which would - I'm sure - give an even more fulsome (or smugly irritating) sense of pride and self-gratification for those who believe the State to be our humane and beneficent protector and supreme moral arbiter
Or if there was some particular hobby-horse you felt strongly about, and the idea of some portion of your hard-earned pounds being funneled into nuclear weapons, new roads, badger culls and Tory MPs' salaries made you feel a bit dirty, there's the option of directly donating to charity instead.
I try to pay the only taxes which I can't avoid. Which pretty much comes down to VAT, Council Tax and Road Fund Licence...
Fair enough. Almost a saint then
Just wondering why when residing in Italy you have registered in the Uk for paying taxes as you mentioned the other night also?
Listen Rod- I don't think anyone is querying too much whether Cameron declared his income on offshore investments. Or derived IHT benefits.
But his old fella was responsible for an offshore fund. And many people invest in offshore funds so they avoid declaring it on their tax returns. That is the point otherwise they would invest at home.
So Cameron benefited financially from holding shares in an investment fund that some or many people probably used to avoid paying taxes. And his father was responsible for said fund. It is just tawdry.
But that's just ill-informed and prejudiced. "Offshore Funds" are perfectly legal and appropriate vehicles for certain HNWIs. If Cameron Senior managed such a fund for such people, so be it. If Cameron Junior happened to park his money there, without benefiting in the same way (because he couldn't), so what?
An English judge once said "The law needs its loopholes. It couldn't breathe otherwise."
But that really comes down to 'unless a politician is like us, we cannot trust him' which is an awful road to go down, and it's one reason we get so many phoney spouting automatons at the top who then 'disappoint' us when it turns out they are not like us, even if they told us they weren't (One thing that annoyed me about Ed M was he made a point of acknowledging he was not like the 'squeezed middle' as I believe the term was at the time, but then continued to use the same lazy attacks on his opponent being out of touch).
I don't really get this point. As others have said, £200k isn't a huge income if you live in London or the South East. There will be plenty of people earning that in the Home Counties. He gets £90k of rental income which is pretty decent but then he has a nice property in Notting Hill rather than a small flat in Leyton and he also gets £3k of income from savings. Now that either means he's found a really nice account with a much better interest rate than anything I know or he has a lot of savings invested.
Politicians have to empathise to win votes - in order to make the Conservative Party, which had garnered a truly negative reputation by 2005, electable he had, as leader, to begin to try to understand and appreciate what it was like to be a "hard working family" and speak the language of the aspirational and the hard working.
Oddly enough, that's how Conservatives always win - Margaret Thatcher knew that as indeed did Edward Heath in 1970.
The problem with the aspirational and the hard working in the era of austerity is that all the aspiration and all the hard work is akin to the hamster on the wheel and many people are simply running hard to stand still economically.
I agree politicians have to empathise with voters. My problem was the bits of your post that I quoted suggested the mere fact he has had opportunities not afforded to others meant the talk about understanding 'hard working families' could not be the case. That is, the mere fact of his difference meant he could not understand.
If instead you meant that he should understand but doesn't, that would be a different point, and one that may well be true.
I posted the other night, but I cannot be bothered looking for tax efficiencies- and yes my money could be used to subsidise fossil fuels, or badger culls, or paying MP's expenses etc....
The reason I cannot be arsed is the I am not that bothered by chasing money. I've left my inheritance to Greenpeace because I do not believe in inherited wealth. I didn't inherit any.
I'm struggling to call an act tax avoidance when it is taking advantage of a tax exemption in precisely the way envisaged by the legislation. But we've reached the stage where any posed photo is a selfie, so that type of logical idiocy is only to be expected from the press, especially when they have an axe to grind.
We had all the same crap over Miliband. I defended him vigorously, as much as I now defend Cameron.
Parliament has gone out of its way to create specific exemptions and reliefs from IHT. Who but a fool, or a living saint, would not take advantage of them, any more than someone would pass up on their annual income tax allowance?
I'm not even convinced that paying tax you really don't have any obligation to pay, because you have deliberately chosen to organise your affairs in a tax-inefficient way, is particularly "saintly". If you wanted to, you could just write a big ol' cheque out to the Chancellor every year, which would - I'm sure - give an even more fulsome (or smugly irritating) sense of pride and self-gratification for those who believe the State to be our humane and beneficent protector and supreme moral arbiter
Or if there was some particular hobby-horse you felt strongly about, and the idea of some portion of your hard-earned pounds being funneled into nuclear weapons, new roads, badger culls and Tory MPs' salaries made you feel a bit dirty, there's the option of directly donating to charity instead.
I try to pay the only taxes which I can't avoid. Which pretty much comes down to VAT, Council Tax and Road Fund Licence...
I was told last week by an Italian lawyer, that property in Italy could not be left through a Will to an organisation or people of your choice, if you had a spouse or children or surviving parents etc.
What I can't get my head around is in the scheme of dodgy financial stuff of politicians this doesn't even register. Mandy & the whole dodgy loan / mortgage application...cash for honours...cash for asking questions in parliament etc etc etc
Cameron scandal I paid my taxes on profits in a unit trust, got rid of all.my investments before becoming PM & my mum gifted me some money in accordance with the law.
Oh let's all be clear - this is a mud-slinging operation. And it wouldn't have happened had Cameron not engaged in a fraudulent EU renegotiation and then treated his opponents on the EU issue with such contempt.
But if it works, so what. The cause is just, and you don't play Queensberry rules with b*stards over such an important matter.
All sides sling mud, it is true. I don't like it, but that's reality for you. That said, the thing that worries me is that the intensity of the playing the man not the ball with Cameron makes me wonder if for some attacking him and his clique is really the main aim, to damage him such that even if Remain wins he must go.
I hope the efforts to destabilise him are not distracting from the fight to ensure Leave wins, as although I hope whoever leads the Tories post referendum is as competent as can be and hopefully moderate, something which for all his faults Cameron arguably is, I don't care about the civil war that will erupt among the Tories after the vote, I only care about the vote itself. Hurting Cameron may well hurt Remain, but the arguments against the EU are much stronger than the arguments against Cameron, and I hope energy is not being wasted on the latter to ill effect.
I take your point but I think discrediting Cameron and his circle is crucial to winning the referendum. Lots of other efforts needed too, of course but checking the government propaganda bulldozer is essential.
I posted the other night, but I cannot be bothered looking for tax efficiencies- and yes my money could be used to subsidise fossil fuels, or badger culls, or paying MP's expenses etc....
The reason I cannot be arsed is the I am not that bothered by chasing money. I've left my inheritance to Greenpeace because I do not believe in inherited wealth. I didn't inherit any.
I'm struggling to call an act tax avoidance when it is taking advantage of a tax exemption in precisely the way envisaged by the legislation. But we've reached the stage where any posed photo is a selfie, so that type of logical idiocy is only to be expected from the press, especially when they have an axe to grind.
We had all the same crap over Miliband. I defended him vigorously, as much as I now defend Cameron.
Parliament has gone out of its way to create specific exemptions and reliefs from IHT. Who but a fool, or a living saint, would not take advantage of them, any more than someone would pass up on their annual income tax allowance?
I'm not even convinced that paying tax you really don't have any obligation to pay, because you have deliberately chosen to organise your affairs in a tax-inefficient way, is particularly "saintly". If you wanted to, you could just write a big ol' cheque out to the Chancellor every year, which would - I'm sure - give an even more fulsome (or smugly irritating) sense of pride and self-gratification for those who believe the State to be our humane and beneficent protector and supreme moral arbiter
Or if there was some particular hobby-horse you felt strongly about, and the idea of some portion of your hard-earned pounds being funneled into nuclear weapons, new roads, badger culls and Tory MPs' salaries made you feel a bit dirty, there's the option of directly donating to charity instead.
I try to pay the only taxes which I can't avoid. Which pretty much comes down to VAT, Council Tax and Road Fund Licence...
I was told last week by an Italian lawyer, that property in Italy could not be left through a Will to an organisation or people of your choice, if you had a spouse or children or surviving parents etc.
Most Continental countries have some kind of "forced heirship" where your relatives are guaranteed some kind of a share...
No. Offshore funds invest in the same world's stocks and shares as any others, but invariably charge higher fees for doing so. I hope my pension provider is investing in funds that charge zero or low fees rather than offshore funds.
People invest in offshore funds because they are either resident in said country or they are trying to avoid paying tax. I was once the former as a Guernsey resident. Most are the latter.
Most people go into offshore funds for greater returns. Of course there is a greater risk involved as well hence the argument that a balanced and spread portfolio of investments is necessary.
I am pretty sure most of my pensions have part of the funds offshore as well rather than solely in UK blue chips with crap returns.
FWIW I visited several London homes of prominent Cameroons in the last few weeks. These people have literally no idea how everyone else lives.
Their homes are worth £1m+, minimum, very often £5m+. The mortgage is paid as the house was inherited, or bought from the proceeds of the parental home.
They may not be doing particularly lucrative jobs (in fact most of them aren't) but their sheer luck in owning singular London property means they are, very comfortably and reassuringly, multi-millionaires. This is the circle Cameron moves in. I now firmly believe Cameron has no clue what it is like to be an ordinary Briton. You just can't. I'm not sure Corbyn is that much different, as his family is equally blessed.
The divorce between London and the rest of the UK, and financial reality, is now THE crucial divide. The party that solves it will win the future.
I say the same for the PB labour supporters on here,most of them seem well off or champagne socialist and haven't a f-ing clue how my life is in a poor multiicultural city.
Have we any not well off working class labour on PB ;-)
What I can't get my head around is in the scheme of dodgy financial stuff of politicians this doesn't even register. Mandy & the whole dodgy loan / mortgage application...cash for honours...cash for asking questions in parliament etc etc etc
Cameron scandal I paid my taxes on profits in a unit trust, got rid of all.my investments before becoming PM & my mum gifted me some money in accordance with the law.
Oh let's all be clear - this is a mud-slinging operation. And it wouldn't have happened had Cameron not engaged in a fraudulent EU renegotiation and then treated his opponents on the EU issue with such contempt.
But if it works, so what. The cause is just, and you don't play Queensberry rules with b*stards over such an important matter.
All sides sling mud, it is true. I don't like it, but that's reality for you. That said, the thing that worries me ect.
Don't be ridiculous. This is the longterm future of my beloved country and my even-more beloved children. I will not vote on the basis of liking, or disliking, any particular politician.
I dispute the sanity of anyone who votes in this referendum on a *partisan* basis.
I didn’t suggest you were voting on the sole basis of disliking Cameron, nor that most of those attacking him now have that as their primary motivation. I didn’t even suggest those who dislike him are not also focused on the EU referendum. Don’t be ridiculous. My point was merely that some, I say again, some of those attacking Cameron, and I specify in relation to the more inconsequential stuff (as opposed to things like the £9million EU letter), so intently on non EU matters, worries me, as that stuff seems more intended to damage his position in his party, which I don’t give a rats arse about, in addition to the fight against the EU.
Leave has by far the best arguments in this campaign, and a certain amount of mud is going to slung at Cameron as the lead figure opposing Leave (and he has definitely earned a certain amount), but I happen to think a balance is necessary so Leave as a whole do not appear to be a bunch of whining Tory crybabies and give the impression it is about Cameron generally (rather than just Cameron’s position on the EU) and distract or undermine the rest of those good arguments.
Maybe I worry unnecessarily about that – I still didn’t say what you seem to think I did. I do not doubt my words can be unclear at times, but even so.
As for questioning the sanity of those who would vote on this matter on a partisan basis, well, that might be wise, but do you really believe there are not ridiculous partisans out there who will do just that? I just hope they are small in number.
You are right. In Italy, children by law automatically have inherited rights. Parents cannot leave their fortunes to the donkey sanctuary.
There again in Italy, children have statutory responsibility for their parents- my Italian wife is responsible for her parents care costs. In England folk complain about the local authority claiming against the family home for care costs. In Italy, if the parents are skint or have no home, the authorities chase the children for their care costs. And if you think HMRC are punitive in unpaid costs- the Italian authorities can double, triple, quadruple fees and costs at the blink of an eye.
I posted the other night, but I cannot be bothered looking for tax efficiencies- and yes my money could be used to subsidise fossil fuels, or badger culls, or paying MP's expenses etc....
The reason I cannot be arsed is the I am not that bothered by chasing money. I've left my inheritance to Greenpeace because I do not believe in inherited wealth. I didn't inherit any.
I'm struggling to call an act tax avoidance when it is taking advantage of a tax exemption in precisely the way envisaged by the legislation. But we've reached the stage where any posed photo is a selfie, so that type of logical idiocy is only to be expected from the press, especially when they have an axe to grind.
We had all the same crap over Miliband. I defended him vigorously, as much as I now defend Cameron.
Parliament has gone out of its way to create specific exemptions and reliefs from IHT. Who but a fool, or a living saint, would not take advantage of them, any more than someone would pass up on their annual income tax allowance?
I try to pay the only taxes which I can't avoid. Which pretty much comes down to VAT, Council Tax and Road Fund Licence...
I was told last week by an Italian lawyer, that property in Italy could not be left through a Will to an organisation or people of your choice, if you had a spouse or children or surviving parents etc.
Bacalhau is the Portuguese equivalent, the fish was dried and salted on board ship to preserve it for the long run home. I can remember long queues outside the Lisbon fishmongers When the fishing fleet came in, and rightly so because Bacalhau is delicious regardless of whichever of the hundreds of recipes one chooses. My favourite used to be Bacalhau à Gomes de Sá, with a bottle of Vinho Verde served on a sunny terrace - that was a close to heaven as I am likely to get.
Nowadays my Kidneys are creaking and I am very salt intolerant - more than a small amount in a meal and I have a raging thirst all night. This is a great shame because, with one exception, at least only one I have found so far, I can no longer enjoy a curry in a indian restaurant (something that has been a passion for me since I was about 14). Even the posh curry houses (e.g. Veeraswamy and the Taj in Crawley, where one is talking £50 a head, seem to use salt by the tablespoonful), delicious food but not worth the suffering afterwards.
Actually it is surprising, judging by my reaction to the stuff, how much salt gets thrown into restaurant/pub meals, even those that one would think would be relatively salt free.
Mm, sympathies. I've never had the pelasure of visiting Portugal, but will look out for bacalhau if I get the chance.
Klipfisk has become very unfashionable in Denmark as the traditional fish have given way to international generic fish like cod and plaice, yawn. Another favourite when I lived there, again rare now and one I've never seen outside Scandinavia, is hornfish, which is like a miniature swordfish but much tastier, distinguished by green bones visible through the translucent skin. If there was anywhere in London that served it, I'd go there every month.
Bacalau is indeed delicious, though an acquired taste. One of the many advantages of the EU is that it can be found in specialist Portuguese shops fairly easily.
Ha! Another one for project fear. Vote remain or no cod and chips ever again
FFS......
Bacalau is not cod as we know it.
...
No, it is better. Try Cod and Chips Portuguese style (a.k.a. Bacalhau à Brás).
What I can't get my head around is in the scheme of dodgy financial stuff of politicians this doesn't even register. Mandy & the whole dodgy loan / mortgage application...cash for honours...cash for asking questions in parliament etc etc etc
Cameron scandal I paid my taxes on profits in a unit trust, got rid of all.my investments before becoming PM & my mum gifted me some money in accordance with the law.
Oh let's all be clear - this is a mud-slinging operation. And it wouldn't have happened had Cameron not engaged in a fraudulent EU renegotiation and then treated his opponents on the EU issue with such contempt.
But if it works, so what. The cause is just, and you don't play Queensberry rules with b*stards over such an important matter.
All sides sling mud, it is true. I don't like it, but that's reality for you. That said, the thing that worries me is that the intensity of the playing the man not the ball with Cameron makes me wonder if for some attacking him and his clique is really the main aim, to damage him such that even if Remain wins he must go.
I hope the efforts to destabilise him are not distracting from the fight to ensure Leave wins, as although I hope whoever leads the Tories post referendum is as competent as can be and hopefully moderate, something which for all his faults Cameron arguably is, I don't care about the civil war that will erupt among the Tories after the vote, I only care about the vote itself. Hurting Cameron may well hurt Remain, but the arguments against the EU are much stronger than the arguments against Cameron, and I hope energy is not being wasted on the latter to ill effect.
I take your point but I think discrediting Cameron and his circle is crucial to winning the referendum. Lots of other efforts needed too, of course but checking the government propaganda bulldozer is essential.
I suspect part of the problem is that despite being a Leaver the overly emotional wails of betrayal about Cameron do not tug my patriotic heartstrings any. His EU arguments certainly need combating, and I suppose a certain amount of general discrediting works toward that, but as an overly cautious soul I always worry about overreach in these situations, and thus the motivations behind those I fear are overreaching.
You are right. In Italy, children by law automatically have inherited rights. Parents cannot leave their fortunes to the donkey sanctuary.
There again in Italy, children have statutory responsibility for their parents- my Italian wife is responsible for her parents care costs. In England folk complain about the local authority claiming against the family home for care costs. In Italy, if the parents are skint or have no home, the authorities chase the children for their care costs. And if you think HMRC are punitive in unpaid costs- the Italian authorities can double, triple, quadruple fees and costs at the blink of an eye.
I posted the other night, but I cannot be bothered looking for tax efficiencies- and yes my money could be used to subsidise fossil fuels, or badger culls, or paying MP's expenses etc....
The reason I cannot be arsed is the I am not that bothered by chasing money. I've left my inheritance to Greenpeace because I do not believe in inherited wealth. I didn't inherit any.
I'm struggling to call an act tax avoidance when it is taking advantage of a tax exemption in precisely the way envisaged by the legislation. But we've reached the stage where any posed photo is a selfie, so that type of logical idiocy is only to be expected from the press, especially when they have an axe to grind.
We had all the same crap over Miliband. I defended him vigorously, as much as I now defend Cameron.
Parliament has gone out of its way to create specific exemptions and reliefs from IHT. Who but a fool, or a living saint, would not take advantage of them, any more than someone would pass up on their annual income tax allowance?
I try to pay the only taxes which I can't avoid. Which pretty much comes down to VAT, Council Tax and Road Fund Licence...
I was told last week by an Italian lawyer, that property in Italy could not be left through a Will to an organisation or people of your choice, if you had a spouse or children or surviving parents etc.
So you can only leave your UK property and mobile assets (bank accts and shares) to Greenpeace then?
What I can't get my head around is in the scheme of dodgy financial stuff of politicians this doesn't even register. Mandy & the whole dodgy loan / mortgage application...cash for honours...cash for asking questions in parliament etc etc etc
Cameron scandal I paid my taxes on profits in a unit trust, got rid of all.my investments before becoming PM & my mum gifted me some money in accordance with the law.
Oh let's all be clear - this is a mud-slinging operation. And it wouldn't have happened had Cameron not engaged in a fraudulent EU renegotiation and then treated his opponents on the EU issue with such contempt.
But if it works, so what. The cause is just, and you don't play Queensberry rules with b*stards over such an important matter.
All sides sling mud, it is true. I don't like it, but that's reality for you. That said, the thing that worries me ect.
Don't be ridiculous. This is the longterm future of my beloved country and my even-more beloved children. I will not vote on the basis of liking, or disliking, any particular politician.
I dispute the sanity of anyone who votes in this referendum on a *partisan* basis.
I didn’
Maybe I worry unnecessarily about that – I still didn’t say what you seem to think I did. I do not doubt my words can be unclear at times, but even so.
As for questioning the sanity of those who would vote on this matter on a partisan basis, well, that might be wise, but do you really believe there are not ridiculous partisans out there who will do just that? I just hope they are small in number.
Dude, apologies! I wasn't attacking you. Just those who think the EU vote is purely a party-political thing.
FWIW I regard you as one of the most interestingly level-headed and lucid of PB observers. You are a bit of a touchstone.
That is quite the praise, sir, I thank you. I don't know about touchstone, but I can still be a bit touchy, hence the extent of my response. I confess the EU referendum is already jangling my nerves - I spent the Indyref night frightfully sick, I assume as a coincidence, but now I wonder if my constitution is so weak I get ill and cranky at momentous political events!
AS SeanT correctly said before, we haven't got kids- so things would be different. But we have split our inheritance (including foreign assets and properties)- evenly between Greenpeace, and University research grants- with something to friends who are prepared to look after our animals.
You are right. In Italy, children by law automatically have inherited rights. Parents cannot leave their fortunes to the donkey sanctuary.
There again in Italy, children have statutory responsibility for their parents- my Italian wife is responsible for her parents care costs. In England folk complain about the local authority claiming against the family home for care costs. In Italy, if the parents are skint or have no home, the authorities chase the children for their care costs. And if you think HMRC are punitive in unpaid costs- the Italian authorities can double, triple, quadruple fees and costs at the blink of an eye.
I posted the other night, but I cannot be bothered looking for tax efficiencies- and yes my money could be used to subsidise fossil fuels, or badger culls, or paying MP's expenses etc....
The reason I cannot be arsed is the I am not that bothered by chasing money. I've left my inheritance to Greenpeace because I do not believe in inherited wealth. I didn't inherit any.
I'm struggling to call an act tax avoidance when it is taking advantage of a tax exemption in precisely the way envisaged by the legislation. But we've reached the stage where any posed photo is a selfie, so that type of logical idiocy is only to be expected from the press, especially when they have an axe to grind.
We had all the same crap over Miliband. I defended him vigorously, as much as I now defend Cameron.
Parliament has gone out of its way to create specific exemptions and reliefs from IHT. Who but a fool, or a living saint, would not take advantage of them, any more than someone would pass up on their annual income tax allowance?
I try to pay the only taxes which I can't avoid. Which pretty much comes down to VAT, Council Tax and Road Fund Licence...
I was told last week by an Italian lawyer, that property in Italy could not be left through a Will to an organisation or people of your choice, if you had a spouse or children or surviving parents etc.
So you can only leave your UK property and mobile assets (bank accts and shares) to Greenpeace then?
I had a theory a while ago that Bernie did better in weekend contests (when the kids weren't at college).....however, him winning by "only" 13% in a caucus in a demographically-favourable state kinda blows that out of the water.
Yeah....you really know they desperately want to use the word "evade" rather than "avoid" No doubt cooler heads prevailed and they must have been crestfallen when it was pointed out what they already knew that its all within the law.
Yeah....you really know they desperately want to use the word "evade" rather than "avoid" No doubt cooler heads prevailed and they must have been crestfallen when it was pointed out what they already knew that its all within the law.
I was thinking perhaps lawyering over a different story (no inside info)...that is normally what has happened when they are really late & then the front page is just the same as everybody else.
Parliament says: you have an IHT allowance. Use it, or lose it! (OK, for those who were unaware, we'll let your heirs re-write your will to rectify your error. See Miliband) Parliament says: if you can give money away >7 years before you die, do it! You'll avoid IHT. Parliament also says: here's maybe another half-dozen ways to avoid paying IHT.
Where is the crime, moral or otherwise, in taking Parliament at its word?
In one of John le Carré's novels he has a character "launder lawyers", whereby a law firm instructs another law firm without telling them the identity of their client.
Meanwhile, here is a list of the "Magic Circle" law firms, the top firms headquartered in London:
Allen & Overy Clifford Chance Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer Linklaters Slaughter and May
And here is the list suggested by Legal Business magazine of the "Offshore Magic Circle" law firms, the top firms handling offshore business in the global British network. (I think this means the top firms handling such business inside that network but outside Britain itself, but I'm not sure. London remains a major offshore and money-laundering centre. Smaller, apparently, than the Cayman Islands or the Channel Islands, but still.)
There's no overlap between the two lists. Which is doubtless convenient for some.
Of course there's no overlap, they do different things. They all do extensive client due diligence though. Still I'm sure you'll find sone more shit to fling, like some simpleton baboon.
I suspect that if I'd said there was an overlap, you'd have said of course there's an overlap and insulted me in the same way.
Most or all of the offshore magic circle firms boast of operating not just in one of the big money-laundering jurisdictions in the British sphere, but in several. It's obvious they need connections in the mothership, the City of London, to do that, so don't tell me it's not worthy of note that they don't have big open operations in the Square Mile.
"Client due diligence"? Yeah, the big law firms in Jersey and Bermuda, in the Cayman Islands and the British Virgin Islands and the Seychelles - they're all really careful only to do squeaky-clean work for squeaky-clean clients. Who do you think does the money-laundering and tax evasion, then? A Russian skinhead recently out of prison, carrying a bit of wood with a nail in the end? Arthur Daley?
I await further insults from you, calling me a member of a subhuman species and a fool.
Well Rory the tiger has made a right David Cameron of the 3rd round of the masters!!!
Jordan Speith is the real deal - I have a feeling Rory is becoming something of a choker.
Not a choker, more just too inconsistent in his game. Speith on the other hand really is "you da man"
That's really what I meant to say. When I've spoken with Rory he's much more outgoing. Speaking with Jordan he's much more self-contained. I have to say I think Rory has more raw talent, but Jordan makes much better use of his.
But at the end of the day - these guys are going to be around for a while. Let's just enjoy it. Golf is in a good place right now.
What I can't get my head around is in the scheme of dodgy financial stuff of politicians this doesn't even register. Mandy & the whole dodgy loan / mortgage application...cash for honours...cash for asking questions in parliament etc etc etc
Cameron scandal I paid my taxes on profits in a unit trust, got rid of all.my investments before becoming PM & my mum gifted me some money in accordance with the law.
Oh let's all be clear - this is a mud-slinging operation. And it wouldn't have happened had Cameron not engaged in a fraudulent EU renegotiation and then treated his opponents on the EU issue with such contempt.
But if it works, so what. The cause is just, and you don't play Queensberry rules with b*stards over such an important matter.
Cameron plans to win. The nastiness of many of his opponents encourages me to support him.
David Cameron said he'd be publishing "the information that goes into [his] tax return, not just for this year but the years gone past because [he wants] to be completely open and transparent about these things."
Well Rory the tiger has made a right David Cameron of the 3rd round of the masters!!!
Jordan Speith is the real deal - I have a feeling Rory is becoming something of a choker.
Not a choker, more just too inconsistent in his game. Speith on the other hand really is "you da man"
That's really what I meant to say. When I've spoken with Rory he's much more outgoing. Speaking with Jordan he's much more self-contained. I have to say I think Rory has more raw talent, but Jordan makes much better use of his.
But at the end of the day - these guys are going to be around for a while. Let's just enjoy it. Golf is in a good place right now.
Tiger who?
This is my favourite sporting event of the year...
In one of John le Carré's novels he has a character "launder lawyers", whereby a law firm instructs another law firm without telling them the identity of their client.
Meanwhile, here is a list of the "Magic Circle" law firms, the top firms headquartered in London:
Allen & Overy Clifford Chance Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer Linklaters Slaughter and May
And here is the list suggested by Legal Business magazine of the "Offshore Magic Circle" law firms, the top firms handling offshore business in the global British network. (I think this means the top firms handling such business inside that network but outside Britain itself, but I'm not sure. London remains a major offshore and money-laundering centre. Smaller, apparently, than the Cayman Islands or the Channel Islands, but still.)
There's no overlap between the two lists. Which is doubtless convenient for some.
Of course there's no overlap, they do different things. They all do extensive client due diligence though. Still I'm sure you'll find sone more shit to fling, like some simpleton baboon.
I suspect that if I'd said there was an overlap, you'd have said of course there's an overlap and insulted me in the same way.
Most or all of the offshore magic circle firms boast of operating not just in one of the big money-laundering jurisdictions in the British sphere, but in several. It's obvious they need connections in the mothership, the City of London, to do that, so don't tell me it's not worthy of note that they don't have big open operations in the Square Mile.
"Client due diligence"? Yeah, the big law firms in Jersey and Bermuda, in the Cayman Islands and the British Virgin Islands and the Seychelles - they're all really careful only to do squeaky-clean work for squeaky-clean clients. Who do you think does the money-laundering and tax evasion, then? A Russian skinhead recently out of prison, carrying a bit of wood with a nail in the end? Arthur Daley?
I await further insults from you, calling me a member of a subhuman species and a fool.
Matt and plenty on here live in cloud cuckoo land. They simply can't get their heads around the fact that our political masters have been having fun at the expense of the 99.9%. Gordon Bowden handed prima facie evidence to the BBC about 788 790 Finchley Road in March last year, but they've sat on their hands with it allegdly because senior BBC operatives are involved in the fraud and money laundering.
Rory reminds me of Greg Norman- he goes into those purple zones.
Speith though has such majestic control over a golf ball- especially from anywhere within 100 yards which is where you want it. Speith knows that he can always get it down within three from 100 yards. That is what will set him apart from any golfer in my lifetime- despite all the tricks and power of Ballesteros and Woods.
Anyway, out of curiosity, from your post, it seems like you know the top golfers..
Well Rory the tiger has made a right David Cameron of the 3rd round of the masters!!!
Jordan Speith is the real deal - I have a feeling Rory is becoming something of a choker.
Not a choker, more just too inconsistent in his game. Speith on the other hand really is "you da man"
That's really what I meant to say. When I've spoken with Rory he's much more outgoing. Speaking with Jordan he's much more self-contained. I have to say I think Rory has more raw talent, but Jordan makes much better use of his.
But at the end of the day - these guys are going to be around for a while. Let's just enjoy it. Golf is in a good place right now.
David Cameron said he'd be publishing "the information that goes into [his] tax return, not just for this year but the years gone past because [he wants] to be completely open and transparent about these things."
Well Rory the tiger has made a right David Cameron of the 3rd round of the masters!!!
Jordan Speith is the real deal - I have a feeling Rory is becoming something of a choker.
Not a choker, more just too inconsistent in his game. Speith on the other hand really is "you da man"
That's really what I meant to say. When I've spoken with Rory he's much more outgoing. Speaking with Jordan he's much more self-contained. I have to say I think Rory has more raw talent, but Jordan makes much better use of his.
But at the end of the day - these guys are going to be around for a while. Let's just enjoy it. Golf is in a good place right now.
Tiger who?
This is my favourite sporting event of the year...
Mine too - I was on the scoring committee at The Masters for several years. I used to live in Augusta.
Well Rory the tiger has made a right David Cameron of the 3rd round of the masters!!!
Jordan Speith is the real deal - I have a feeling Rory is becoming something of a choker.
Not a choker, more just too inconsistent in his game. Speith on the other hand really is "you da man"
That's really what I meant to say. When I've spoken with Rory he's much more outgoing. Speaking with Jordan he's much more self-contained. I have to say I think Rory has more raw talent, but Jordan makes much better use of his.
But at the end of the day - these guys are going to be around for a while. Let's just enjoy it. Golf is in a good place right now.
Tiger who?
This is my favourite sporting event of the year...
Well Rory the tiger has made a right David Cameron of the 3rd round of the masters!!!
Jordan Speith is the real deal - I have a feeling Rory is becoming something of a choker.
Not a choker, more just too inconsistent in his game. Speith on the other hand really is "you da man"
That's really what I meant to say. When I've spoken with Rory he's much more outgoing. Speaking with Jordan he's much more self-contained. I have to say I think Rory has more raw talent, but Jordan makes much better use of his.
But at the end of the day - these guys are going to be around for a while. Let's just enjoy it. Golf is in a good place right now.
Tiger who?
This is my favourite sporting event of the year...
Mine too - I was on the scoring committee at The Masters for several years. I used to live in Augusta.
David Cameron said he'd be publishing "the information that goes into [his] tax return, not just for this year but the years gone past because [he wants] to be completely open and transparent about these things."
David Cameron said he'd be publishing "the information that goes into [his] tax return, not just for this year but the years gone past because [he wants] to be completely open and transparent about these things."
And he's withheld some of it.
I think these two posts neatly demonstrate why publishing any more information was pointless if the intent was to quell further criticism. As someone interested enough as a general political point to be aware of it, but not so interested as to examine the damn things myself (even assuming I'd know what to look for), I'm none the wiser.
Rory reminds me of Greg Norman- he goes into those purple zones.
Speith though has such majestic control over a golf ball- especially from anywhere within 100 yards which is where you want it. Speith knows that he can always get it down within three from 100 yards. That is what will set him apart from any golfer in my lifetime- despite all the tricks and power of Ballesteros and Woods.
Anyway, out of curiosity, from your post, it seems like you know the top golfers..
Well Rory the tiger has made a right David Cameron of the 3rd round of the masters!!!
Jordan Speith is the real deal - I have a feeling Rory is becoming something of a choker.
Not a choker, more just too inconsistent in his game. Speith on the other hand really is "you da man"
That's really what I meant to say. When I've spoken with Rory he's much more outgoing. Speaking with Jordan he's much more self-contained. I have to say I think Rory has more raw talent, but Jordan makes much better use of his.
But at the end of the day - these guys are going to be around for a while. Let's just enjoy it. Golf is in a good place right now.
Tiger who?
Today is Seve's birthday by the way.
I don't "know" them - I just have worked a lot of golf tournaments.
Somebody mentioned Butch Harmon on Sky. When you watch Sky's coverage of the Tour Championship in September I will be standing about 50 yards away from the Sky studio on course.
Well Rory the tiger has made a right David Cameron of the 3rd round of the masters!!!
Jordan Speith is the real deal - I have a feeling Rory is becoming something of a choker.
Not a choker, more just too inconsistent in his game. Speith on the other hand really is "you da man"
That's really what I meant to say. When I've spoken with Rory he's much more outgoing. Speaking with Jordan he's much more self-contained. I have to say I think Rory has more raw talent, but Jordan makes much better use of his.
But at the end of the day - these guys are going to be around for a while. Let's just enjoy it. Golf is in a good place right now.
Tiger who?
This is my favourite sporting event of the year...
Mine too - I was on the scoring committee at The Masters for several years. I used to live in Augusta.
Now I just have to hate you ;-)
Now I live in Atlanta and work the Tour Championship, as well as the Mitsubishi Electric Classic (Champions Tour) and the RSM Classic. Does that help?
Well Rory the tiger has made a right David Cameron of the 3rd round of the masters!!!
Jordan Speith is the real deal - I have a feeling Rory is becoming something of a choker.
Not a choker, more just too inconsistent in his game. Speith on the other hand really is "you da man"
That's really what I meant to say. When I've spoken with Rory he's much more outgoing. Speaking with Jordan he's much more self-contained. I have to say I think Rory has more raw talent, but Jordan makes much better use of his.
But at the end of the day - these guys are going to be around for a while. Let's just enjoy it. Golf is in a good place right now.
Tiger who?
This is my favourite sporting event of the year...
Mine too - I was on the scoring committee at The Masters for several years. I used to live in Augusta.
Now I just have to hate you ;-)
Now I live in Atlanta and work the Tour Championship, as well as the Mitsubishi Electric Classic (Champions Tour) and the RSM Classic. Does that help?
Having to slog that crazy Atlanta ttraffic with the mad ring road is a punishment worse than death. So we will let you off.
Rory reminds me of Greg Norman- he goes into those purple zones.
Speith though has such majestic control over a golf ball- especially from anywhere within 100 yards which is where you want it. Speith knows that he can always get it down within three from 100 yards. That is what will set him apart from any golfer in my lifetime- despite all the tricks and power of Ballesteros and Woods.
Anyway, out of curiosity, from your post, it seems like you know the top golfers..
Well Rory the tiger has made a right David Cameron of the 3rd round of the masters!!!
Jordan Speith is the real deal - I have a feeling Rory is becoming something of a choker.
Not a choker, more just too inconsistent in his game. Speith on the other hand really is "you da man"
That's really what I meant to say. When I've spoken with Rory he's much more outgoing. Speaking with Jordan he's much more self-contained. I have to say I think Rory has more raw talent, but Jordan makes much better use of his.
But at the end of the day - these guys are going to be around for a while. Let's just enjoy it. Golf is in a good place right now.
Tiger who?
Today is Seve's birthday by the way.
I don't "know" them - I just have worked a lot of golf tournaments.
Somebody mentioned Butch Harmon on Sky. When you watch Sky's coverage of the Tour Championship in September I will be standing about 50 yards away from the Sky studio on course.
Well Rory the tiger has made a right David Cameron of the 3rd round of the masters!!!
Jordan Speith is the real deal - I have a feeling Rory is becoming something of a choker.
Not a choker, more just too inconsistent in his game. Speith on the other hand really is "you da man"
That's really what I meant to say. When I've spoken with Rory he's much more outgoing. Speaking with Jordan he's much more self-contained. I have to say I think Rory has more raw talent, but Jordan makes much better use of his.
But at the end of the day - these guys are going to be around for a while. Let's just enjoy it. Golf is in a good place right now.
Tiger who?
This is my favourite sporting event of the year...
Mine too - I was on the scoring committee at The Masters for several years. I used to live in Augusta.
Now I just have to hate you ;-)
Now I live in Atlanta and work the Tour Championship, as well as the Mitsubishi Electric Classic (Champions Tour) and the RSM Classic. Does that help?
Having to slog that crazy Atlanta ttraffic with the mad ring road is a punishment worse than death. So we will let you off.
I live 30 miles north of the 'mad ring road' but thanks anyway
I was at Royal Lytham in 1963 with my Dad when Bob Charles won. I was born near Blackpool.
It was brought home to me when I helped run a charity golf tournament in 2009 at Sugar Loaf. Stuart Cink had beaten Tom Watson at The Open, and he lives there. He turned up with the Claret Jug. I have a a photo of me holding the Jug.
Rory reminds me of Greg Norman- he goes into those purple zones.
Speith though has such majestic control over a golf ball- especially from anywhere within 100 yards which is where you want it. Speith knows that he can always get it down within three from 100 yards. That is what will set him apart from any golfer in my lifetime- despite all the tricks and power of Ballesteros and Woods.
Anyway, out of curiosity, from your post, it seems like you know the top golfers..
Well Rory the tiger has made a right David Cameron of the 3rd round of the masters!!!
Jordan Speith is the real deal - I have a feeling Rory is becoming something of a choker.
Not a choker, more just too inconsistent in his game. Speith on the other hand really is "you da man"
That's really what I meant to say. When I've spoken with Rory he's much more outgoing. Speaking with Jordan he's much more self-contained. I have to say I think Rory has more raw talent, but Jordan makes much better use of his.
But at the end of the day - these guys are going to be around for a while. Let's just enjoy it. Golf is in a good place right now.
Tiger who?
Today is Seve's birthday by the way.
I don't "know" them - I just have worked a lot of golf tournaments.
Somebody mentioned Butch Harmon on Sky. When you watch Sky's coverage of the Tour Championship in September I will be standing about 50 yards away from the Sky studio on course.
Comments
His resignation from the Society of Advocates did seem unusual for some reason.
Like you, I raised a quizzical eyebrow at the size of the financial inheritance. There are people who are dirt poor and these would be absolutely life-changing amounts of money. But it's utterly unremarkable for this part of England, and moreover essentially negligible for someone in Cameron's position, with his own financial independence and career prospects, and more so when one factors in the earning power of his wife. Even if his political gig had never gotten above the researcher level and he'd not managed to procure a safe seat for himself, his earning capacity in the corporate world was strong. Of course in political retirement, the man could make a fortune for himself, if he so cared. Even if he didn't get into the extensive business interests of Tony Blair, six after-dinner speeches a year could see him into very comfortable old age.
Is it normal for so many newspaper front pages to be held back this late? Big scoop for tomorrow?
"If you think your estate will be over the limit There’s no need to worry. Even if your estate is worth more than the limit, there are things you can do to minimise Inheritance Tax. In fact, if you plan carefully, you might be able to prevent your estate from paying it at all."
https://www.moneyadviceservice.org.uk/en/articles/will-you-have-to-pay-inheritance-tax
Perfectly legitimate. Not illegal in any way. By 2020 under this government most of us won't be paying any IHT at all as the level where it kicks in will be 1 million.
SeanT and a few socialists will be stuffed though.
How long before Nicola gets round to it?
(Kezia also released hers)
On that front, the worse movie I've ever seen I cannot even remember the title of - the most riveting part was when a toilet a guy was working on broke. I only got through it as I was sat there in morbid fascination at how dull and lifeless it was. I think it was supposed to be a slow paced, reflective character piece about dealing with loss or some such, but it was just nothing. No good writing, performances, direction, energy, emotion, not a thing. It was the cinematic equivalent of watching paint dry. So bad I cannot even remember the title it made so little impact (it was about some guy building a boat after his family dies, it turned out, this wasn't mentioned at the beginning).
I give it 3 stars.
Insult? I don't think so.
Parliament has gone out of its way to create specific exemptions and reliefs from IHT.
Who but a fool, or a living saint, would not take advantage of them, any more than someone would pass up on their annual income tax allowance?
http://www.timworstall.com/2016/04/02/its-an-interesting-starting-point-isnt-it/
He was irritated when he saw the Fabians call the allowance part of the "shadow welfare state", which isn't quite the point of calling it "tax avoidance" but is gnawing rabidly at the same part of the moral compass.
Who will up the ante and release 10 years worth?
Stand corrected of course if that's wrong........ The 3 miracles I mean.
Coupled with the "secret Chinese deal", not a good look during an election campaign
First, apologies I was unable to join the PB gathering last evening. After a busy week at work, a fish and chip supper provided by Mrs Stodge courtesy of our excellent local emporium was too much of a temptation. I hope everyone had a really good time and I'm sure I'll attend a future gathering though miss the halcyon days of the National Liberal Club terrace...
My first chance to comment on the pit David Cameron has dug for himself and his attempts tonight to dig himself out. As has been said by others, he's done nothing wrong and the amounts for a man in the south of England aren't great though the property from which he derives the rental income is in a better location than enjoyed by most.
He's done nothing wrong and it's certainly no resigning matter.
That isn't the point.
For years, the Cameron/Osborne mantra has been how they understand and are on the side of "hard working families" and how "we are all in this together". Fine, I get that, I really do but most "hard working families" don't have offshore tax havens or the kind of money to put in such havens and gain the fiscal advantages thereof. I know Mrs Stodge and I don't.
Of course, everyone understands why they were used and would use them themselves if they could but again that isn't the point. It re-enforces the point that for all his fine words he is in one place and many of the rest of us are in another financially, economically and legally.
It cuts to the fundamental sense of trust between Cameron and the electorate that won the election for the Conservatives last year. The manner by which Cameron has dealt with this issue has possibly weakened that bond of trust and Cameron also needs that trust to win the Referendum on June 23rd. I signed the e-petition because I don't simply rely on "Trust me" as an argument.
Or if there was some particular hobby-horse you felt strongly about, and the idea of some portion of your hard-earned pounds being funneled into nuclear weapons, new roads, badger culls and Tory MPs' salaries made you feel a bit dirty, there's the option of directly donating to charity instead.
Cameron scandal I paid my taxes on profits in a unit trust, got rid of all.my investments before becoming PM & my mum gifted me some money in accordance with the law.
Bit like the way he increased the higher rate to 50% after 13 years at lower rate just days before calling the removal men. His last act of spite and hatred towards the UK.
What
85SeanT is trying to tell you is that we ain't got no entertainment centre, no climate control, no video system, no surveillance, no freezers, no fucking ice cream, no rubbers, no women, no guns. All we got here is *shit*!But it hardly matters now. Unless he wins Remain by a substantial margin, he's toast - the media is against him, a sizable portion of the party will not, despite their claims, back him for much longer, even Corbynite Labour is improving (even if they are still crap), he's massively missed any immigration or economic goals (bar unemployment), and one cabinet minister already had resigned saying the austerity regime is nonsense, and he seems incapable of getting on top of anything.
Whether he's crap or not, he is looking crap at the moment, and unless he gets a stonking great win in June, which is beyond any person I suspect given how unappealing the EU is, what can he do to make himself seem less crap, particularly when he's already said he's going?
But his old fella was responsible for an offshore fund. And many people invest in offshore funds so they avoid declaring it on their tax returns. That is the point otherwise they would invest at home.
So Cameron benefited financially from holding shares in an investment fund that some or many people probably used to avoid paying taxes. And his father was responsible for said fund. It is just tawdry.
We are long passed the days when UK residents invested offshore because of exchange controls- and that was a pretty lame excuse then.
I've got offshore investments but I lived in Guernsey and I invested in these then because my tax liability was lower as a Guernsey resident. But since I've been a UK resident, there are so many UK based investment funds to invest in- M&G, Fidelity etc..that I would not even consider going to an offshore fund. It would just appear that I was doing something to avoid paying tax even if I wasn't.
The management costs, fund costs, transaction costs are so low in UK based funds- many are zero. Why would a UK resident want to pay more to invest in offshore funds- many of which cost 3-5% annually for the privilege of doing so.
But if it works, so what. The cause is just, and you don't play Queensberry rules with b*stards over such an important matter.
I am pretty sure most of my pensions have part of the funds offshore as well rather than solely in UK blue chips with crap returns.
I hope the efforts to destabilise him are not distracting from the fight to ensure Leave wins, as although I hope whoever leads the Tories post referendum is as competent as can be and hopefully moderate, something which for all his faults Cameron arguably is, I don't care about the civil war that will erupt among the Tories after the vote, I only care about the vote itself. Hurting Cameron may well hurt Remain, but the arguments against the EU are much stronger than the arguments against Cameron, and I hope energy is not being wasted on the latter to ill effect.
The reason I cannot be arsed is the I am not that bothered by chasing money. I've left my inheritance to Greenpeace because I do not believe in inherited wealth. I didn't inherit any.
https://www.mixcloud.com/shylou73/lou-collins-radio-show-9215-gordon-bowden-part-5-david-camerons-link-to-788-790-finchley-road/
But 788 790 Finchley Road is all a giant conspiracy theory I hear some commentators on here say?! Well if it's that, then why has Mr Bowden uncovered the paper trail that indelibly links Mr Cameron and plenty of other high ranking politicians to multi-billion pound money laundering, asset stripping and boiler room operations?
Now the opposition are in a tricky spot here, because they don't want 788 790 Finchley Road coming out as it implicates plenty of them, whilst wanting Cameron out. The exposure of everything that has gone on at 788 790 Finchley Road over the past 40 years would bring the whole house down well and truly.
Politicians have to empathise to win votes - in order to make the Conservative Party, which had garnered a truly negative reputation by 2005, electable he had, as leader, to begin to try to understand and appreciate what it was like to be a "hard working family" and speak the language of the aspirational and the hard working.
Oddly enough, that's how Conservatives always win - Margaret Thatcher knew that as indeed did Edward Heath in 1970.
The problem with the aspirational and the hard working in the era of austerity is that all the aspiration and all the hard work is akin to the hamster on the wheel and many people are simply running hard to stand still economically.
Just wondering why when residing in Italy you have registered in the Uk for paying taxes as you mentioned the other night also?
An English judge once said "The law needs its loopholes. It couldn't breathe otherwise."
If instead you meant that he should understand but doesn't, that would be a different point, and one that may well be true.
People invest in offshore funds because they are either resident in said country or they are trying to avoid paying tax. I was once the former as a Guernsey resident. Most are the latter.
Have we any not well off working class labour on PB ;-)
Leave has by far the best arguments in this campaign, and a certain amount of mud is going to slung at Cameron as the lead figure opposing Leave (and he has definitely earned a certain amount), but I happen to think a balance is necessary so Leave as a whole do not appear to be a bunch of whining Tory crybabies and give the impression it is about Cameron generally (rather than just Cameron’s position on the EU) and distract or undermine the rest of those good arguments.
Maybe I worry unnecessarily about that – I still didn’t say what you seem to think I did. I do not doubt my words can be unclear at times, but even so.
As for questioning the sanity of those who would vote on this matter on a partisan basis, well, that might be wise, but do you really believe there are not ridiculous partisans out there who will do just that? I just hope they are small in number.
There again in Italy, children have statutory responsibility for their parents- my Italian wife is responsible for her parents care costs. In England folk complain about the local authority claiming against the family home for care costs. In Italy, if the parents are skint or have no home, the authorities chase the children for their care costs. And if you think HMRC are punitive in unpaid costs- the Italian authorities can double, triple, quadruple fees and costs at the blink of an eye.
Cameron's 200,000 gift from Mummy.
She gave him money as 300,000 from dad was not enough.
Payment to help he millionaire son avoid 80k of death duties.
http://news.sky.com/gallery/1675748/sundays-newspaper-front-pages
Hardly worth waiting up for.
No doubt cooler heads prevailed and they must have been crestfallen when it was pointed out what they already knew that its all within the law.
Speith could perhaps become the greatest ever, or more likely, probably. He is more than the real deal.
Parliament says: if you can give money away >7 years before you die, do it! You'll avoid IHT.
Parliament also says: here's maybe another half-dozen ways to avoid paying IHT.
Where is the crime, moral or otherwise, in taking Parliament at its word?
Most or all of the offshore magic circle firms boast of operating not just in one of the big money-laundering jurisdictions in the British sphere, but in several. It's obvious they need connections in the mothership, the City of London, to do that, so don't tell me it's not worthy of note that they don't have big open operations in the Square Mile.
"Client due diligence"? Yeah, the big law firms in Jersey and Bermuda, in the Cayman Islands and the British Virgin Islands and the Seychelles - they're all really careful only to do squeaky-clean work for squeaky-clean clients. Who do you think does the money-laundering and tax evasion, then? A Russian skinhead recently out of prison, carrying a bit of wood with a nail in the end? Arthur Daley?
I await further insults from you, calling me a member of a subhuman species and a fool.
But at the end of the day - these guys are going to be around for a while. Let's just enjoy it. Golf is in a good place right now.
Tiger who?
And he's withheld some of it.
Speith though has such majestic control over a golf ball- especially from anywhere within 100 yards which is where you want it. Speith knows that he can always get it down within three from 100 yards. That is what will set him apart from any golfer in my lifetime- despite all the tricks and power of Ballesteros and Woods.
Anyway, out of curiosity, from your post, it seems like you know the top golfers..
Good night all.
I don't "know" them - I just have worked a lot of golf tournaments.
Somebody mentioned Butch Harmon on Sky. When you watch Sky's coverage of the Tour Championship in September I will be standing about 50 yards away from the Sky studio on course.
Seve was someone who transcended sport. As much as Speith (and Tiger) will achieve in golf, they will never be Seve.
I was at Royal Lytham the Monday when Seve won the Open in 1988.
Just watching the golf, if Speith could drive a ball nobody else should bother turning up
It was brought home to me when I helped run a charity golf tournament in 2009 at Sugar Loaf. Stuart Cink had beaten Tom Watson at The Open, and he lives there. He turned up with the Claret Jug. I have a a photo of me holding the Jug.