George Osborne wriggles out of £1.6m taxes - make him pay here

[oryx]

I'm pretty sure that's a different petition - for tax cheats in general, not osborne specifically.

Cheers - thanks for clarification.

Signed. (I didn't add a comment as I couldn't think of anything to say about Osborne that didn't involve the c-word, and 38 Degrees look like a nice polite organisation. )

 

[trevhagl]

they seem to be sound from all that i have heard so i will not join in any Urban secreatarianism here

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

foiled dammit

you'll find most of the time it's tin foiled tbf...

 

[yield]

they seem to be sound from all that i have heard so i will not join in any Urban secreatarianism here

"That would be an ecumenical matter!"

 

[lighterthief]

When it comes to cuts, George Osborne likes to say "we're all in this together". But Channel 4 has just revealed that along with two other Cabinet ministers, he's avoiding paying tax. [1] He pays accountants to find loopholes which help him dodge £1.6 million.

What exactly is he avoiding paying and how? The Channel 4 links to a programme, the Telegraph doesn't mention him, the Guardian link is broken and the 38 Degrees Petition doesn't say either.

 

[butchersapron]

Osborne, Mitchell and Hammond accused of tax avoidance

On to Mr Osborne, and Dispatches reveals his family has set up offshore trusts, one of the most common ways for the super rich to avoid paying inheritance tax – put simply, there will be no inheritance tax to pay on the death of Mr Osborne’s father, a saving of up to £1.6m.

Mr Osborne no longer declares his interest in his family trust in the House of Commons register of members’ interests.

More

 

[i_got_poison]

i'm worried about the boy... boy george

 

[frogwoman]

you're the ones who put him there.

 

[i_got_poison]

the conservative voters put him there. but then you would already know about that, being a conservative supporter.

 

[A Dashing Blade]

So the charges are . . .
1) transferring assets into your spouse's name
2) taking advantage of the different tax treatment of dividends and income
3) using a trust fund to mitigate inheritance tax

To contextualise this, 1) & 2) are very, very common strategies used by many small businesses and 3) is increasingly used by anyone who is going to pay inheritance tax on their death. They are not the preserve of the rich.

 

[grogwilton]

signed

 

[shagnasty]

So the charges are . . .
1) transferring assets into your spouse's name
2) taking advantage of the different tax treatment of dividends and income
3) using a trust fund to mitigate inheritance tax

To contextualise this, 1) & 2) are very, very common strategies used by many small businesses and 3) is increasingly used by anyone who is going to pay inheritance tax on their death. They are not the preserve of the rich.

Were not saying it is illegal but when your cutting peoples livelyhoods then it is morally wrong

 

[lighterthief]

Were not saying it is illegal but when your cutting peoples livelyhoods then it is morally wrong

Should I close my ISA?

 

[fogbat]

Should I close my ISA?

Would you? Ta x

 

[_angel_]

So the charges are . . .
1) transferring assets into your spouse's name
2) taking advantage of the different tax treatment of dividends and income
3) using a trust fund to mitigate inheritance tax

To contextualise this, 1) & 2) are very, very common strategies used by many small businesses and 3) is increasingly used by anyone who is going to pay inheritance tax on their death. They are not the preserve of the rich.

Yes but remember he's the one that wants to declare war on benefit "thieves" for the things like not telling the DSS about a partner or their income..

 

[butchersapron]

So the charges are . . .
1) transferring assets into your spouse's name
2) taking advantage of the different tax treatment of dividends and income
3) using a trust fund to mitigate inheritance tax

To contextualise this, 1) & 2) are very, very common strategies used by many small businesses and 3) is increasingly used by anyone who is going to pay inheritance tax on their death. They are not the preserve of the rich.

Let's contextualise properly. The program was called How the Rich Beat the Taxman - the example given was of how a rich person (George Osbrone) beat the taxman and avoids paying tax. Your 6 apparent points are in fact, one - lots of people do it. Are they all the Chancellor i wonder?

On tax evasion, George Osborne has just signed a deal with the Swiss that practically says go ahead, tax avoid, we'll let you keep £40 billion plus, we'll agree not to investigate, in fact to allow the swiss to tell us what when how and who we can investigate, and in fact, we'll cede tax sovereignty to switzerland and their tax avoider friendly regime.

Britain gives up sovereignty to Switzerland and £40 billion to tax evaders

In other words if true then the UK has just done the following:
Granted Switzerland the right to set the effective higher rate of tax on investment income in the UK;

Granted Swiss banks an everlasting competitive advantage over UK banks – because it will pay all higher rate tax payers to bank in Switzerland henceforth;

Denied the UK tax authority the right to make enquiries of their own choosing about the tax affairs of a British person – the Swiss now being granted the right to decide how many enquiries may be made and whether they are appropriate or not.

Granted criminal immunity to Swiss bakers who sell tax evasion – so allowing them to commit ongoing crime in the UK.

 

[Citizen66]

i'm worried about the boy... boy george

Is that why you climbed into bed with him?

 

[trevhagl]

So the charges are . . .
1) transferring assets into your spouse's name
2) taking advantage of the different tax treatment of dividends and income
3) using a trust fund to mitigate inheritance tax

To contextualise this, 1) & 2) are very, very common strategies used by many small businesses and 3) is increasingly used by anyone who is going to pay inheritance tax on their death. They are not the preserve of the rich.

he's saying we're all in this together whilst trying to avoid contributing to the country. Just because something is legal does not make it ok.

 

[trevhagl]

Let's contextualise properly. The program was called How the Rich Beat the Taxman - the example given was of how a rich person (George Osbrone) beat the taxman and avoids paying tax. Your 6 apparent points are in fact, one - lots of people do it. Are they all the Chancellor i wonder?

On tax evasion, George Osborne has just signed a deal with the Swiss that practically says go ahead, tax avoid, we'll let you keep £40 billion plus, we'll agree not to investigate, in fact to allow the swiss to tell us what when how and who we can investigate, and in fact, we'll cede tax sovereignty to switzerland and their tax avoider friendly regime.

Britain gives up sovereignty to Switzerland and £40 billion to tax evaders

it gets even worse

 

[Streathamite]

the conservative voters put him there. but then you would already know about that, being a conservative supporter.

froggy's unlike you in 2 ways
1) she's got principles - yours have clearly died long ago
2) sher's no tory - you, in effect, are, for all you wave the libdem figleaf. Now run along and have a sherry with your bullingdon chums

 

[Streathamite]

Should I close my ISA?

as you know full well, that's totally different

 

[frogwoman]

remind me again, which party is in coalition with the tories poison?

 

[A Dashing Blade]

Were not saying it is illegal but when your cutting peoples livelyhoods then it is morally wrong

Most pertinant point on this thread imo
However a moral position almost by definition cannot be demonstrated to be true or false in an absolute sense.
Playing devil's advocate for a moment, I would suggest that many people regard legally minimising their tax bill as a moral obligation.

 

[moon23]

Which monopoly would that be?

Their monopoly over ‘activism’. I have a concern that 38 Degrees is an ineffective exercise in encouraging futile political behaviour that will have very will impact in the real world. It encourages pseudo-activity within on-line networks that does nothing to build a grass-roots campaign.

e.g. they mass spam MPs, most I know simply have filters on their inboxes to dump 38degree emails into trash.

I also have concerns regarding their use of the information they collect on people, in that they pass on statistical information to third parties which is valuable to political analysts.
http://38degrees.org.uk/pages/privacy-statement

 

[butchersapron]

You don't know what a monopoly is. You've described a) them being ineffective and b) showed how your worldview centres around what MPs think. What you most certainly have not done is demonstrate any sort of monopoly - have you?

 

[frogwoman]

Their monopoly over ‘activism’. I have a concern that 38 Degrees is an ineffective exercise in encouraging futile political behaviour that will have very will impact in the real world. It encourages pseudo-activity within on-line networks that does nothing to build a grass-roots campaign.

e.g. they mass spam MPs, most I know simply have filters on their inboxes to dump 38degree emails into trash.

I also have concerns regarding their use of the information they collect on people, in that they pass on statistical information to third parties which is valuable to political analysts.
http://38degrees.org.uk/pages/privacy-statement

thats a legitimate criticism (I read an article saying the same about avaaz) but given the lib dems' past enthusiasm for such groups, criticising them on the one occasion theyre doing good for not being radical enough doesnt really look credible coming from you.

 

[nino_savatte]

Their monopoly over ‘activism’. I have a concern that 38 Degrees is an ineffective exercise in encouraging futile political behaviour that will have very will impact in the real world. It encourages pseudo-activity within on-line networks that does nothing to build a grass-roots campaign.

e.g. they mass spam MPs, most I know simply have filters on their inboxes to dump 38degree emails into trash.

I also have concerns regarding their use of the information they collect on people, in that they pass on statistical information to third parties which is valuable to political analysts.
http://38degrees.org.uk/pages/privacy-statement

Your use of the word "spam" is value-loaded. Please expand.

 

[butchersapron]

I also have concerns regarding their use of the information they collect on people, in that they pass on statistical information to third parties which is valuable to political analysts.
http://38degrees.org.uk/pages/privacy-statement

Amazing that those same concerns about passing info on don't extend your pet lib-dem vote yes to AV site. In fact, you played down and dismissed those concerns when i highlighted them for you. And that was for a much more invasive privacy policy. You two faced freak. Have some principles beyond self interest.

 

[frogwoman]

he knows hes made a mistake and doesnt want to admit it.

 

[stupid kid]

Their monopoly over ‘activism’. I have a concern that 38 Degrees is an ineffective exercise in encouraging futile political behaviour that will have very will impact in the real world. It encourages pseudo-activity within on-line networks that does nothing to build a grass-roots campaign.

e.g. they mass spam MPs, most I know simply have filters on their inboxes to dump 38degree emails into trash.

I also have concerns regarding their use of the information they collect on people, in that they pass on statistical information to third parties which is valuable to political analysts.
http://38degrees.org.uk/pages/privacy-statement

Yesterday I emailed my MP, by myself, nothing to do with 38 degrees. I might also get involved in demonstrating against cuts or for other issues, again, 38 degrees have no say in whether I do this or not. I guess their monopoly is broken now then?