‘March for the Alternative’ - 26th March - London

[sim667]

The average age of a UK Uncut protester seems about 17. Probably explains why they want to destroy the only remaining private sector businesses that are actually generating any wealth in the economy.

Billiant.

considering its supposed to be the creative industries bringing the UK out of the recession, I didnt see one ad/media agency targeted.....

 

[stuff_it]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/mar/28/cuts-protest-uk-uncut-fortnum

Guardian article about police lying to the F&M protesters.

 

[sim667]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/mar/28/cuts-protest-uk-uncut-fortnum

Guardian article about police lying to the F&M protesters.

Is this basically not entrapment, which is illegal in the UK?

 

[Blagsta]

What gets me most about this is that undertaking political violence is a big, BIG step to take, it's as serious a thing as it's possible to get. Yet people on here are happy to treat it almost as something ephemeral, as if to them it sits easily within the natural course of events at a demonstration and that being called on to justify the use of it is somehow an affront.

Imo you have to go a hell of a lot further to justify the use of political violence than the weak attempts we've had so far on here.

Yet capitalism and liberal democracy are built on violence...

 

[strung out]

Is this basically not entrapment, which is illegal in the UK?

entrapment would be tricking them into committing the illegal act, not tricking them into giving themselves up for arrest. i think.

 

[butchersapron]

Who has control over their parents choice of education?
There are better sticks.

I didn't mention his education, i have no idea about his education or his background. I didn't beat him with anything at all, i merely highlighted the fact that he was the one who started off class-baiting (and is stil at it today as well).

 

[Crispy]

My misunderstanding then

 

[butchersapron]

No worries.

Combustible asked earlier for more details on Fortnum's tax-avoidance. Richard Murphy has come up with this:

This is why UK Uncut picked on Fortnum’s

Bit sketchy tbh. Some serious research and printed explanations/talk would have been very handy on the day.

 

[sim667]

entrapment would be tricking them into committing the illegal act, not tricking them into giving themselves up for arrest. i think.

Oh that makes sense.

Is it illegal to lure someone into a false sense of security?

 

[moon23]

They want private sector businesses that are taking vast sums out of the British economy to pay the taxes they should be paying. You can spin that however you like but that is what it boils down to.

Why haven't you answered my earlier post yet Moonie?

HMRC makes the situation as murky as possible. Tax avoidance is legal behaviour, so you cannot be prosecuted for it per se, but transactions deemed carried out solely for the purposes of avoidance may be set aside. A considerable amount of discretion is in practice exercised by inspectors. And a curiously British institution is a fantastically complex and often vague tax law (it isn't a code), in connection with which the authorities will never as a matter of policy confirm that taxpayer behaviour is legal, or (if they can avoid it) make any statement on which you may legally rely. The whole structure is built on draconian unrealistic rules under which taxpayers have few verifiable rights - so they must in practice rely on the custom and practice of extra statutory concessions and judgments about costs and the willingness of the authorities to pursue any particular issue.

Rather than sitting around in shops causing trouble and looking like a bunch of idiots UK Uncut could do us all a favour and lobby for a clear and transparent tax regime. I know tax simplification isn't sexy, but it's really at the heart of any 'avoidance' problem.

 

[butchersapron]

HMRC makes the situation as murky as possible. Tax avoidance is legal behaviour, so you cannot be prosecuted for it per se, but transactions deemed carried out solely for the purposes of avoidance may be set aside. A considerable amount of discretion is in practice exercised by inspectors. And a curiously British institution is a fantastically complex and often vague tax law (it isn't a code), in connection with which the authorities will never as a matter of policy confirm that taxpayer behaviour is legal, or (if they can avoid it) make any statement on which you may legally rely. The whole structure is built on draconian unrealistic rules under which taxpayers have few verifiable rights - so they must in practice rely on the custom and practice of extra statutory concessions and judgments about costs and the willingness of the authorities to pursue any particular issue.

Rather than sitting around in shops causing trouble and looking like a bunch of idiots UK Uncut could do us all a favour and lobby for a clear and transparent tax regime. I know tax simplification isn't sexy, but it's really at the heart of any 'avoidance' problem.

It's really not. It's the desire to pay as little money as possible and to use the saved money to make more money on which you also try to pay as little as possible - and that desire is inherent to capitalist accumulation. It's its central dynamic. And it damages wider society whilst parasiting off the benefits that society provides to those private businesses (educated workforce, transportation infrastructure, communincation networks, law and order, housing and health etc).

 

[magneze]

No worries.

Combustible asked earlier for more details on Fortnum's tax-avoidance. Richard Murphy has come up with this:

This is why UK Uncut picked on Fortnum’s

Bit sketchy tbh. Some serious research and printed explanations/talk would have been very handy on the day.

That's a really good blog. Some interesting stuff on there re: tax justice.

 

[Louis MacNeice]

HMRC makes the situation as murky as possible. Tax avoidance is legal behaviour, so you cannot be prosecuted for it per se, but transactions deemed carried out solely for the purposes of avoidance may be set aside. A considerable amount of discretion is in practice exercised by inspectors. And a curiously British institution is a fantastically complex and often vague tax law (it isn't a code), in connection with which the authorities will never as a matter of policy confirm that taxpayer behaviour is legal, or (if they can avoid it) make any statement on which you may legally rely. The whole structure is built on draconian unrealistic rules under which taxpayers have few verifiable rights - so they must in practice rely on the custom and practice of extra statutory concessions and judgments about costs and the willingness of the authorities to pursue any particular issue.

Rather than sitting around in shops causing trouble and looking like a bunch of idiots UK Uncut could do us all a favour and lobby for a clear and transparent tax regime. I know tax simplification isn't sexy, but it's really at the heart of any 'avoidance' problem.

It is the financial muscle of business/timidity of government that produces opaque tax law. Highlighting this finacial muscle (and ensuing injustice), as UK Uncut do, is part of a solution. So you get on with your campaign for coporate tax simplification (if that's what you're actually doing) and they can get on with their's for coporate tax justice; it something of a win win situation.

Louis MacNeice

 

[butchersapron]

That's a really good blog. Some interesting stuff on there re: tax justice.

Yes, he does some very useful work.

 

[moon23]

I agree that we should reduce the deficit. Why not do this through collecting the £123 billion in uncollected taxes instead of attacking the jobs and services which people like your mum and my mum rely upon?

I do think we should make efforts to close tax loops, but I'm not convinced by this figure of £123 billion. I think it's based on a misunderstanding of the term avoidance (which is a legal practice). Just as public spending is not a complete loss of money, because some comes back into the economy via wages being spent so does any money that goes untaxed. If Vodaphone have an extra few Billion that's going to go into improving their business, employing more staff or into investments that stimulate growth by providing capital for the private sector.

As mentioned in my last post I think we need to simplify the taxation system so we can be clear what is or isn’t avoidance (at the moment it’s determined by hugely expensive and lengthy legal battles, due to the complexity of our taxation system). Doing that would reduce the cost of complying with tax and leave more money for actual profit and taxation.

I’d see a simplification and reduction in the size of HMRC, I’d combine National Insurance with Income Tax and I’d remove lot’s of the complex allowances in favour of a lower overall base rate.

 

[moon23]

It's really not. It's the desire to pay as little money as possible and to use the saved money to make more money on which you also try to pay as little as possible - and that desire is inherent to capitalist accumulation. It's its central dynamic. And it damages wider society whilst parasiting off the benefits that society provides to those private businesses (educated workforce, transportation infrastructure, communincation networks, law and order, housing and health etc).

Which is why you need a simple tax code that is easy to understand and enforce.

 

[moon23]

It is the financial muscle of business/timidity of government that produces opaque tax law. Highlighting this finacial muscle (and ensuing injustice), as UK Uncut do, is part of a solution. So you get on with your campaign for coporate tax simplification (if that's what you're actually doing) and they can get on with their's for coporate tax justice; it something of a win win situation.

Louis MacNeice

I'll give UK Uncut some credit in that they may cause people to think about what they can do to improve the taxation system.

 

[butchersapron]

I do think we should make efforts to close tax loops, but I'm not convinced by this figure of £123 billion. I think it's based on a misunderstanding of the term avoidance (which is a legal practice).

<snip>

You have clearly not read the reports that these figures are based on - this is dealt with ion great detail at the start. Do you really think someone who is a visiting fellow at Portsmouth University Business School, the Centre for Global Political Economy at the University of Sussex and at the Tax Research Institute, University of Nottingham doesn't know the difference between evasion and avoidance? GThis is just lazy lazy rubbish.

 

[butchersapron]

Which is why you need a simple tax code that is easy to understand and enforce.

That may help crack down tax avoiders if the political will was there (it isn't - in fact your government is making it much easier for business to avoid and evade tax), but it doesn't do a damn thing about the underlying dynamic that's driving this behaviour.

 

[Louis MacNeice]

I'll give UK Uncut some credit in that they may cause people to think about what they can do to improve the taxation system.

Do you think they have created more interest in tax justice than you have in tax simplification? If so you've got some catching up to do if you're not going to let the side down.

Louis MacNeice

 

[moon23]

You have clearly not read the reports that these figures are based on - this is dealt with ion great detail at the start. Do you really think someone who is a visiting fellow at Portsmouth University Business School, the Centre for Global Political Economy at the University of Sussex and at the Tax Research Institute, University of Nottingham doesn't know the difference between evasion and avoidance? GThis is just lazy lazy rubbish.

I'm sure these people are very capable of working out what is avoidance and evasion based on their current understanding of the law, but HMRC make this incredibly difficult by rarely confirming what is or isn't legal behaviour.

 

[Louis MacNeice]

I'm sure these people are very capable of working out what is avoidance and evasion based on their current understanding of the law, but HMRC make this incredibly difficult by rarely confirming what is or isn't legal behaviour.

So you agree with their estimate?

Louis MacNeice

 

[butchersapron]

I'm sure these people are very capable of working out what is avoidance and evasion based on their current understanding of the law, but HMRC make this incredibly difficult by rarely confirming what is or isn't legal behaviour.

So why then are you dismissing the figure on the grounds that the authot can't tell the difference between avoidance and evasion?

 

[moon23]

Do you think they have created more interest in tax justice than you have in tax simplification? If so you've got some catching up to do if you're not going to let the side down.

Louis MacNeice

I think running around causing mayhem is going to be of far more fun and interest to people then tax simplification I haven't done anything to raise the issue of tax simplification to the public, but I have to Danny Alexander.

 

[IC3D]

I'll give UK Uncut some credit in that they may cause people to think about what they can do to improve the taxation system.

They are also the ones stamped on the hardest by being arrested, charged and possibly asbo'd from further demo's. Causing more of a threat than the BB

 

[moon23]

So you agree with their estimate?

Louis MacNeice

I haven't read enough of their workings to decide. I'm sceptical as to what methodology they may have used because so many of these tax cases are subject to obscure points of European Law. I do think it's worth considering that taking £130Bn out of the private sector in the UK is going to have a wider affect on the economy.

 

[moon23]

They are also the ones stamped on the hardest by being arrested, charged and possibly asbo'd from further demo's. Causing more of a threat than the BB

Well that's a result of their stupid tactics that allow them to be painted as a bunch of fringe nutters.

 

[fractionMan]

Your lot are making it easier to avoid tax moon. The guys you cheer for. Them.

 

[tommers]

I haven't read enough of their workings to decide. I'm sceptical as to what methodology they may have used because so many of these tax cases are subject to obscure points of European Law. I do think it's worth considering that taking £130Bn out of the private sector in the UK is going to have a wider affect on the economy.

So nobody should pay any tax? Cool.

 

[Louis MacNeice]

I think running around causing mayhem is going to be of far more fun and interest to people then tax simplification I haven't done anything to raise the issue of tax simplification to the public, but I have to Danny Alexander.

Bad people not falling in line with your priorities, choosing stuff that is interesting and enjoyable; your misanthropic streak is showing again.

As for Danny, well he was making promises back in September:

The Liberal Democrats today promised an attack on those who have made tax evasion a lifestyle choice, as the party announced government plans to raise an extra £7bn by 2014-15 by tackling tax avoidance and fraud.

The Treasury would be "ruthless with wealthy individuals and business who think paying extra tax is an optional extra", vowed its chief secretary, Danny Alexander.

Much of the clampdown will involve more intensive scrutiny of those liable for paying the new 50p tax band introduced by the Labour government. Revenue and Customs currently looks at 5,000 high net-worth individuals, but will expand that number to 150,000.​

But they look a little foolish now that Vince and George are getting rid of the 50p tax band.

Louis MacNeice