Pandora Papers ! .

[Staunton 18]

When $Billionaire Leona Helmsley decided not to bother paying the builders who had modified the Connecticut mansion she had purchased in 1983 they sued. In the court case that followed it emerged that Helmsley was an adept at tax abuse. She was convicted of conspiracy to defraud the United States, three counts of tax evasion, three counts of filing false personal tax returns, sixteen counts of assisting in the filing of false corporate and partnership tax returns, and mail fraud (mailing or electronically transmitting something associated with fraud, a federal crime in the United States). Famously, during the trial, Helmsley's housekeeper testified  that she had heard Helmsley say: "We don't pay taxes; only the little people pay taxes."

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leona_Helmsley

 

Only the little people pay taxes. There it is. This shocking sneer from a rich tax cheat perfectly exposes the beliefs that have characterised tax policy in the US and the UK (the two states at the centre of neoliberalism) for decades.

 

It is no doubt the case that the Pandora Papers, like the Panama Papers, shall soon be forgotten.

 

But the point we little people, those of us who pay our taxes and depend upon the services that taxation funds, such as schools, healthcare, social care, policing, etc., must ask should be 'is this fair?'

 

Clearly, when billionaires can simply choose not to pay their taxes, there is something wrong with politics.

 

If we wish to live in a fair and democratic society, the kind of society that UK politicians like to claim in their rhetoric, then we should be demanding that the tax system is structured to end any and every abuse. Our political representatives should be stating unambiguously that if someone lives in the UK then they pay UK taxes, and following this up with revised tax law. It should be made clear that if anyone wishes to do business in the UK then they will pay UK taxes on that business they transact, if they own property in the UK then they will pay, and people enjoying unearned wealth should be subject to the same level of taxation as those paid on earnings.

 

That means campaigning for social and economic justice, impressing upon those with aspirations to political office that fair taxation is non-negotiable, and insisting on robust tax law.

 

[Carbuncle 0]

58 minutes ago, Staunton said:

If we wish to live in a fair and democratic society, the kind of society that UK politicians like to claim in their rhetoric, then we should be demanding that the tax system is structured to end any and every abuse. Our political representatives should be stating unambiguously that if someone lives in the UK then they pay UK taxes, and following this up with revised tax law. It should be made clear that if anyone wishes to do business in the UK then they will pay UK taxes on that business they transact, if they own property in the UK then they will pay, and people enjoying unearned wealth should be subject to the same level of taxation as those paid on earnings.

Yes!

 

But, it won't be easy. Apart from the political head winds there are also practical issues. One desirable property of tax law is that it should be consistent in always taxing "similar situations" in the same way even if the "similar situations" are described in different ways. It sounds simple but turns out to be difficult.

 

Here are a couple of similar situations:

1. You buy a house in the UK;

2. You buy a company whose sole asset is a house in the UK.

Both ways round you seem to end up having effective ownership of a house but they have different legal forms and attract different tax treatment.

 

Do you know how to write tax laws that handle this situation without being a. hugely burdensome in other ways and b. easily avoidable with a little more legal finagling?

 

At any rate, it helps if people have a sense of what is going on and the release of the Pandora Papers help with that.

[trastrick 866]

1 hour ago, Staunton said:

When $Billionaire Leona Helmsley decided not to bother paying the builders who had modified the Connecticut mansion she had purchased in 1983 they sued. In the court case that followed it emerged that Helmsley was an adept at tax abuse. She was convicted of conspiracy to defraud the United States, three counts of tax evasion, three counts of filing false personal tax returns, sixteen counts of assisting in the filing of false corporate and partnership tax returns, and mail fraud (mailing or electronically transmitting something associated with fraud, a federal crime in the United States). Famously, during the trial, Helmsley's housekeeper testified  that she had heard Helmsley say: "We don't pay taxes; only the little people pay taxes."

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leona_Helmsley

 

Only the little people pay taxes. There it is. This shocking sneer from a rich tax cheat perfectly exposes the beliefs that have characterised tax policy in the US and the UK (the two states at the centre of neoliberalism) for decades.

 

It is no doubt the case that the Pandora Papers, like the Panama Papers, shall soon be forgotten.

 

But the point we little people, those of us who pay our taxes and depend upon the services that taxation funds, such as schools, healthcare, social care, policing, etc., must ask should be 'is this fair?'

 

Clearly, when billionaires can simply choose not to pay their taxes, there is something wrong with politics.

 

If we wish to live in a fair and democratic society, the kind of society that UK politicians like to claim in their rhetoric, then we should be demanding that the tax system is structured to end any and every abuse. Our political representatives should be stating unambiguously that if someone lives in the UK then they pay UK taxes, and following this up with revised tax law. It should be made clear that if anyone wishes to do business in the UK then they will pay UK taxes on that business they transact, if they own property in the UK then they will pay, and people enjoying unearned wealth should be subject to the same level of taxation as those paid on earnings.

 

That means campaigning for social and economic justice, impressing upon those with aspirations to political office that fair taxation is non-negotiable, and insisting on robust tax law.

 

Lofty sentiments, but naive. 

 

The only folks who make your tax laws are the politicians themselves.

 

With the help of their lawyers and lobbyist donors, who got them elected, they are responsible for making sure there are the loopholes that they, like Corbyn, Blair, Trump and their corporate friends, can take advantage of, are built in to tax law.

 

Politicians spend their first two years, in office paying back their election IOU's to their corporate and union pals.

 

Then the next two years working on their re-election campaign fundraising.

 

If they have any time left, they might do something for the country.

 

[El Cid 213]

3 hours ago, trastrick said:

With the help of their lawyers and lobbyist donors, who got them elected, they are responsible for making sure there are the loopholes that they, like Corbyn, Blair, Trump and their corporate friends, can take advantage of, are built in to tax law.

 

I never view these matters as a conspiracy. More a question of money can buy you anything.

In just the same way that if you spend millions on a legal team, they can get you off speeding and muder; a very good tax accountant can save you millions in taxes.

[Box11 28]

On 05/10/2021 at 07:42, FoxLady said:

Again, what's with the multi use of exclamation marks?

If I want to use exclamation marks and if I want to put 2 thousand of them then I can and what’s with the stalking !!!!...

It’s none of your business what I do or what I write or what my opinion is !!!...

 

Why don’t you try using your energy by being creative and comment on the topic or better still create a new one !!!!!!!!!!....,

 

Edited October 6, 2021 by Box11

[Anna B 1,401]

9 hours ago, Staunton said:

When $Billionaire Leona Helmsley decided not to bother paying the builders who had modified the Connecticut mansion she had purchased in 1983 they sued. In the court case that followed it emerged that Helmsley was an adept at tax abuse. She was convicted of conspiracy to defraud the United States, three counts of tax evasion, three counts of filing false personal tax returns, sixteen counts of assisting in the filing of false corporate and partnership tax returns, and mail fraud (mailing or electronically transmitting something associated with fraud, a federal crime in the United States). Famously, during the trial, Helmsley's housekeeper testified  that she had heard Helmsley say: "We don't pay taxes; only the little people pay taxes."

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leona_Helmsley

 

Only the little people pay taxes. There it is. This shocking sneer from a rich tax cheat perfectly exposes the beliefs that have characterised tax policy in the US and the UK (the two states at the centre of neoliberalism) for decades.

 

It is no doubt the case that the Pandora Papers, like the Panama Papers, shall soon be forgotten.

 

But the point we little people, those of us who pay our taxes and depend upon the services that taxation funds, such as schools, healthcare, social care, policing, etc., must ask should be 'is this fair?'

 

Clearly, when billionaires can simply choose not to pay their taxes, there is something wrong with politics.

 

If we wish to live in a fair and democratic society, the kind of society that UK politicians like to claim in their rhetoric, then we should be demanding that the tax system is structured to end any and every abuse. Our political representatives should be stating unambiguously that if someone lives in the UK then they pay UK taxes, and following this up with revised tax law. It should be made clear that if anyone wishes to do business in the UK then they will pay UK taxes on that business they transact, if they own property in the UK then they will pay, and people enjoying unearned wealth should be subject to the same level of taxation as those paid on earnings.

 

That means campaigning for social and economic justice, impressing upon those with aspirations to political office that fair taxation is non-negotiable, and insisting on robust tax law.

 

I agree. 

But far from wanting to clean up the tax system, the UK is considered one of the best tax havens for rich people wanting to shelter their money, so I doubt the Conservative government will have sorting out the tax system and making it fair very high on their agenda. Their donor friends in high places wouldn't like it....

Edited October 6, 2021 by Anna B

[FoxLady 121]

3 hours ago, Box11 said:

If I want to use exclamation marks and if I want to put 2 thousand of them then I can and what’s with the stalking !!!!...

It’s none of your business what I do or what I write or what my opinion is !!!...

 

Why don’t you try using your energy by being creative and comment on the topic or better still create a new one !!!!!!!!!!....,

 

What a strange response to a simple question.

 

 

[Box11 28]

3 hours ago, FoxLady said:

What a strange response to a simple question.

 

 

Strange response !!!!....

 

You asked me why I use so many exclamation marks and I answered by telling you it is none of your business why I do !!!!....

 

Go and bother someone else and could you please stop trolling !!!!...

 

I will not be responding back !!!!!!!!.....

[FoxLady 121]

5 hours ago, Box11 said:

Strange response !!!!....

 

You asked me why I use so many exclamation marks and I answered by telling you it is none of your business why I do !!!!....

 

Go and bother someone else and could you please stop trolling !!!!...

 

I will not be responding back !!!!!!!!.....

Who's "trolling"?

All I did was ask why you feel you need to use so many.

If you think it adds emphasis to your many points, it doesn't.

[Tony 10]

10 hours ago, Anna B said:

I agree. 

But far from wanting to clean up the tax system, the UK is considered one of the best tax havens for rich people wanting to shelter their money, so I doubt the Conservative government will have sorting out the tax system and making it fair very high on their agenda. Their donor friends in high places wouldn't like it....

So you keep saying but you haven't actually provided any evidence or even a suggestion of what you think would be better. 

 

Basically, you don't like rich people because you're not one. Prove me wrong if that's not the case.

[Staunton 18]

To believe that all it will take to put an end to tax abuse would be for a few people to demand change and attempt to sway constituency candidates would indeed be naive. As I hinted in the Insulate Britain Wants Motorway Speed Limit Cut... thread (Post #33), the supposedly neutral BBC news broadcasting project is never going to help people understand what's going on in politics or economics. Television and radio news will not join the dots on tax abuse or any other significant political issue.

 

The popular press is clearly dedicated to defending the interests of the rich, championing neoliberal ideology as the only realistic policy option (without ever using the term 'neoliberal' of course, since that might raise some curiosity), while simultaneously distracting their readers with a blizzard of celebrity, sensation and sport features. And as we have seen over the last few years, so-called social media has been captured by unaccountable and secretive forces determined to propagate ignorance in order to stimulate the most outrageous political beliefs. All of this leads to the question of how we ordinary people, those Helmsley dismissed as the little people, can ever hope to develop a political consciousness or the determination to understand our political interests? Though we are the many, and the few are cheating the democratic system, until we find a way to counter the lies and distraction that swamps our culture, and to halt the abuse of democratically sanctioned office, then our social, educational, health, safety, economic and political needs shall continue to be marginalised and ignored.

[Tony 10]

☝️ This is conspiracy nonsense.

1 hour ago, Staunton said:

... our social, educational, health, safety, economic and political needs shall continue to be marginalised and ignored.

Our social, educational, health, safety, economic and political needs have never had it so good and continue to improve year on year. 

 

The logical conclusion of your line of thinking is that a Great Reset is necessary, along with the Great Purge that will require. Yes? If not, what?