Eleven million tax avoiding documents..

[Quik 10]

If it's within the law we should of course not punish people.

The revenue punishes and bullies people into paying tax that isn't due under the rules.

They do the equivalent of changing the the speed limit on a road from 60 to 30 then retrospectively fining people for doing 55 because they now think it is dangerous.

 

Obviously I'm happy, like you, for others to pay much more tax than me. Green eyed etc.

 

I think to be fair HMRC's powers in this regard are more like them being able to do people flying along at 90 in a 60 zone who had used a fake plate to avoid being caught.

[ECCOnoob 1,050]

If nothing illegal has happened then there is nothing to hide.

 

Fair enough. Cant argue with that.

 

When will you be publishing details for your income, expenditure, all your passwords, all your bank account details, your statements, copy wage slips and your receipts for the past 6 months please.

 

I mean, you got nothing to hide so what's the problem.

[I1L2T3 10]

I think to be fair HMRC's powers in this regard are more like them being able to do people flying along at 90 in a 60 zone who had used a fake plate to avoid being caught.

 

Indeed. Odd as it may seem the process is partly designed to protect high earners from dodgy tax accountants and lawyers. Plenty of perfectly decent people (footballers, entertainers etc...) have been caught up in dodgy avoidance schemes in good faith, and have ended up having to repay a lot of money.

[the_bloke 17]

No they don't. You're talking nonsense. What HMRC do is follow a process to assess a registered avoidance scheme. If that avoidance scheme is found to be not within the spirit of the law (and there is a significant amount of latitude in making that decision) or indeed to have been illegal to begin with then HMRC can make steps to recover unpaid tax and they can retrospectively change the law to make a scheme illegal.

 

Not sure where you are getting your information from. The concept of 'the spirit of the law' is basically the law saying 'do A and the end result is B' when in reality someone is 'doing A, via C and the end result is B'. The law doesn't explicitly state you can't do C, so it's not illegal to do so. The idea of C wasn't even thought of when the law was made. In HMRC's case, they can investigate the person doing C all they want but they have to go to court and fight their case if they think doing C is wrong even though it's not written in law. They can lose too.

 

http://www.taxadvisermagazine.com/article/spirit-law

[I1L2T3 10]

Fair enough. Cant argue with that.

 

When will you be publishing details for your income, expenditure, all your passwords, all your bank account details, your statements, copy wage slips and your receipts for the past 6 months please.

 

I mean, you got nothing to hide [/b]

 

You know it doesn't work like that

 

But, you show me yours and I'll show you mine.

 

---------- Post added 04-04-2016 at 00:44 ----------

 

Not sure where you are getting your information from. The concept of 'the spirit of the law' is basically the law saying 'do A and the end result is B' when in reality someone is 'doing A, via C and the end result is B'. The law doesn't explicitly state you can't do C, so it's not illegal to do so. The idea of C wasn't even thought of when the law was made. In HMRC's case, they can investigate the person doing C all they want but they have to go to court and fight their case if they think doing C is wrong even though it's not written in law. They can lose too.

 

http://www.taxadvisermagazine.com/article/spirit-law

 

From here: https://www.gov.uk/topic/dealing-with-hmrc/tax-avoidance

[Obelix 11]

What about it? What's the number of documents prove.

 

 

I suspect that it's not just from one persons accounts though - this is someone wanting to make a point - and a lot of enemies very quickly. 11 million documents is a fair chunk of storage - this was something planned for a while I would expect.

[ECCOnoob 1,050]

You know it doesn't work like that

 

But, you show me yours and I'll show you mine.

 

Yes I do know it does not work like that which is why I am commenting against all these people who are seemingly celebrating that a leak of said documentation has been put out there for all and sundry to see, despite the fact that none of the people involved have YET been found guilty of any wrong doing.

Edited April 3, 2016 by ECCOnoob

[Obelix 11]

 

If nothing illegal has happened then there is nothing to hide.

 

The oft trotted and easily discredited soundbite.

 

Most everyone has something to hide, even if it's not illegal. The reason being that there are plenty of people in the world who will judge and condemn you for it even if it's not illegal.

[the_bloke 17]

From here: https://www.gov.uk/topic/dealing-with-hmrc/tax-avoidance

 

Care to elaborate? I'm not going to wade through the entirety of the tax office's documentation when I've just given you a link explaining what the spirit of the law is. Help me out here

[Quik 10]

Not sure where you are getting your information from. The concept of 'the spirit of the law' is basically the law saying 'do A and the end result is B' when in reality someone is 'doing A, via C and the end result is B'. The law doesn't explicitly state you can't do C, so it's not illegal to do so. The idea of C wasn't even thought of when the law was made. In HMRC's case, they can investigate the person doing C all they want but they have to go to court and fight their case if they think doing C is wrong even though it's not written in law. They can lose too.

 

http://www.taxadvisermagazine.com/article/spirit-law

 

My understanding is that your quoted source, who as an aside looks like a nonce, though I'm sure probably isn't, was put back in his box as a leading shiester tax avoider.

 

New rules are rightly show you are paying the taxes due without avoidance and if not we will assess what tax you need to pay.

[ECCOnoob 1,050]

Let me try another scenario.

 

Lets just imagine that some civil servant leaked thousands of documents with personal information of ordinary citizens suspected of false benefit claims or undeclared earnings.

 

Would the papers be celebrating? Would they be naming and shaming these individuals and smearing them all over the pages?

 

OR would they be screaming hell about incompetent government departments?

[Quik 10]

Let me try another scenario.

 

Lets just imagine that some civil servant leaked thousands of documents with personal information of ordinary citizens suspected of false benefit claims or undeclared earnings.

 

Would the papers be celebrating? Would they be naming and shaming these individuals and smearing them all over the pages?

 

OR would they be screaming hell about incompetent government departments?

 

The prole papers have Barry Cashinhand doley claimant with his 'bad back' playing footy plastered all over them regularly. How is this different other than the fraudulent sums are significantly more?