- This topic has 35 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Yea richard but it comes down the ever present truism
You fail on the private sector and you lose the contract/job
You fail in the public sector and you keep your job
Who has the most incentive to succeed?
“There is no such thing as tax ‘avoidance’.”
You sure about that, GT?
You may look at HMRC’s note in UK government’s website that not only defines the concept of “tax avoidance” but also states that it’s legal:
“Tax avoidance involves bending the rules of the tax system to try to gain a tax advantage that Parliament never intended…It involves operating within the letter, but not the spirit, of the law.”
Hence, tax avoidance is legal…
Here’s the link:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/tax-avoidance-an-introductionMoreover, we have countries/territories (a.k.a “tax havens”) whose seemingly main purpose of existence is to provide tax “avoidance” services to the world’s biggest corporations and wealthiest individuals. Places like British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Jersey, Panama, etc., etc. I think that (Sir) Richard Branson owns an island in the British Virgin Islands. Tax avoidance anyone?..Oh, and speaking of Panama, a few years ago the world’s most elite and affluent experienced shock waves registering 9.0 on the tax “avoidance/evasion” scale with the release of the “Panama Papers”. The rest of us were shocked as well since nothing came of it…
But the most perverse example of tax avoidance? Well, that honor belongs to the worlds most wealthiest and biggest corporation Apple and the government of Ireland which jointly took on the EU in court and won! This was big news in July, 2020.
Here’s one headline: “Apple Wins €13 Billion Tax Avoidance Case Against EU Antitrust Regulator”
Just imagine, if you will, Ireland is in the midst of COVID pandemic whose economy is shut down but it goes to court to fight alongside Apple telling the EU that they don’t want the tax money that is owed to them? And, following the verdict, the Irish government hailed the court’s decision as a victory for Ireland! I still can’t get my head around this one.
Furthermore, it was disclosed in the same year that the Apple paid an effective tax rate of just 2% in Ireland in the preceding decade. C’mon, 2% ??? What is the tax rate for the average tax payer in Ireland? I don’t have the facts, but I would wager that it’s greater than 2%.
No such thing as tax “avoidance”?…maybe not for the average tax payer because he/she can’t afford the high-priced lawyers and consultants to advise how to lessen the tax burden….
That is about so called “Avoidance Schemes”, Turk’.
I’d put most so called Avoidance Schemes in the category of what I described as “Loopholes” that I want to be closed, not avoidance.
Some so called Avoidance Schemes go too far and users end up paying more tax than they would’ve done without the scheme – these I would describe as “Tax Evasion”, not Avoidance.
Some so called Avoidance Schemes are not Loopholes or Evasion and are just ways to “pay the tax you’e entitled”, not Avoidance.
If Tax havens are anything they are Loopholes that need to be closed, not Avoidance.
Apple uses Loopholes to get around paying more tax, not Avoidance.
Close the Loopholes and they’d pay the right tax.Where would your “Avoidance” end?
Some countries have lower income and VAT taxes than others, helping their population avoid paying more tax. Surely that is Government sponsored tax avoidance in your world?
What about a self employed family firm only employing one person – their son who lives with them.
Only two people in the business.
If the father pays a lower wage but the mother accepts no money in keep, is that “Avoidance”?
ie Are you saying it should be illegal for any parent not to make their son or daughter pay keep?Value Is EverythingThe company that was supposed to deliver my passport had a three year multi million pound contract but weren’t fit for purpose right from the start. So they pocketed the money and did a rubbish job for three years. So I don’t understand the argument that the private sector have to deliver or they lose their jobs. I moved to the civil service having worked in local government and boy did I have to work hard. This was many decades ago so I don’t know if things have changed.
“ie Are you saying it should be illegal for any parent not to make their son or daughter pay keep?”
How did you reach that conclusion about my points above, GT? Where did I explicitly or implicitly state that “tax avoidance” should be illegal? My whole premise is that tax avoidance exists, period. That’s true in any country or territory that has tax laws and tax codes. I gave two unambiguous examples of tax avoidance in recent times…
My point Turk’ is that if people (or companies) are paying what they legally need to, then they are not “avoiding” paying tax. They’e just acting in the same way as the vast majority of ordinary people paying what they legally need to. Why should rich people or rich companies be any different to a one man band? ie Why should anyone not do all they can to only pay what is legal?
To turn the much used saying around…
Why should it be one (lesser) rule for the ordinary man in the street and another for the rich?If loopholes are there it is only natural for people and companies to use them.
It is up to Governments to close those loopholes.
Value Is EverythingSorry moehat
If that company was rubbish then who hired them and on what terms? Where were the penalty clauses? Where were the termination clauses? What were the kpis?
It’s delivery. There is enormous competition in that sector and if they stuck with someone not being able to carry out simple deliveries for three years then who’s fault is that? And why? I would guess that there is more than just delivery problems here and in fact I would bet house on it
No one in the private sector would get into that mess. No one at all. You should see how building industry contracts work for one. You would be fired immediately for ruining a business by getting stuck with a supplier who can’t deliver and have no alternative. No question
So we come back to this
It is completely the public sectors fault to be stuck with a supplier for three years without an alternative in a very competitive arena and seemingly without any penalties.
Also moehat. How did they “pocket the money” and do a rubbish job.
You mean they were paid three years in advance? Really?
And if they were not fulfilling the contract, who was authorising the payments to them?
So what do you think should be done? The whole thing be privatised? I don’t that worked with other things that have been privatised. I don’t think privatising the prison and probation services went very well, did it?
Online is a very good and speedy way to get your passport dealt with, but when you actually send them the documents, recorded first class is the best way, clark at the post office did tell me that a lot just send it first class. Then you’ll be given a tracking number and can see if they received it. Usually next day, then they get the new passport back within a week or two. Also if you do this out of the height of the holiday season, when the world and his Mrs are applying.
The best things in life are free.
But you can give them to the birds and bees.I did everything that way. Did it online. Sent everything by recorded delivery. It was once the passport had been passed onto the delivery service to return it to me that it all went wrong. The delivery back to me was tracked but the tracking said it had been delivered when it hadn’t What had happened was the delivery driver had taken it back to the depot but said it had been delivered. There was no one to contact at the depot as it was a Saturday and the passport office weren’t answering their phones or replying to my emails. They also didn’t make it clear if you had to sign for delivery or not. They said as long as there was a secure letter box it would just be posted through it but when they did eventually deliver it they knocked on the door and wanted a signature.
There is no such thing as tax “avoidance”.
Otherwise…
I was told I could make a voluntary contribution.
As I understand it anyone can pay more tax in the way of a voluntary contribution.
So if someone not legally needed to pay anymore tax is “avoiding”, then anyone not paying a voluntary tax contribution is also “avoiding” paying more tax…
And anyone not paying much voluntary tax is also “avoiding” paying more voluntary tax.You can make voluntary NI contributions but this is to maximise state pensions if you haven’t enough qualifying years. To pay “voluntary tax” would mean overstating your income which is just as bad as understating income. One reason for doing this would be to obtain finance such as a mortgage.
“So they pocketed the money and did a rubbish job for three years.”
I read that as pocket money …
I got sixpence a week for more than three years. What could I do with said riches ?I could buy a packet of Devonian Toffees to rot my teeth or buy a Dandy and Beano.
I just love cow pie !The Beano came out in 1938.
I was on a bit of a bender that year and my two pence found a better home.The DANDY was an elitist comic – we felt a world away from the Beano and that tacky little upstart Dennis with strange hair.
I read both and basically The Dandy was the broadsheet and The Beano was the tabloid.
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.