According to Chris himself they haven't spoken since the show ended (though that was some time ago that he said that). Plus they don't follow or mention each other on twitter anymore.
Sorry I ment to say in the last year of the show they barely spoke.
Not for the grief and embarrassment when everyone finds out.
Why be embarrassed that you have tried to minimise your liability? It should be something everybody strives to do, but the problem is, most people are just tied up wage slaves on PAYE. Most self-employed people and Ltd Companies (like me) take contrived measures to structure affairs to minimise liability. It's borderline taking the piss sometimes, but you do what you can, it's a game. Taxpayer tries to take a bit, HMRC tries to take it back, and on it goes. If HMRC (or the courts to be more accurate) rule that your avoidance is outwith the rules, you pay them what they then ask for. But that shouldn't stop people trying. Certainly nothing to be embarrassed about.
Chris' public contrition is because he relies on his public image as part of his career in showbusiness, but to be honest, he'll be one of thousands in that industry all pulling the same wheezes with their tax.
He tried and sucessfully had a gagging order in place last year,said it would contravene his civil rights & would be career damaging etc., however the judge in this instance made the case public. So any mea culpa's (sic) he is making now are self serving.
He was VERY well aware that what he was doing was morally worong.
He tried and sucessfully had a gagging order in place last year,said it would contravene his civil rights & would be career damaging etc., however the judge in this instance made the case public. So any mea culpa's (sic) he is making now are self serving.
He was VERY well aware that what he was doing was morally worong.
He tried and sucessfully had a gagging order in place last year,said it would contravene his civil rights & would be career damaging etc., however the judge in this instance made the case public. So any mea culpa's (sic) he is making now are self serving.
He was VERY well aware that what he was doing was morally worong.
Interesting, I didn't know that, what a tool>:(
It makes me so angry, as for his lame excuses on twitter. It just beggars belief that he's got away with it until now.
He tried and sucessfully had a gagging order in place last year,said it would contravene his civil rights & would be career damaging etc., however the judge in this instance made the case public. So any mea culpa's (sic) he is making now are self serving.
He was VERY well aware that what he was doing was morally worong.
There's no such thing as morally wrong when it comes to tax avoidance in my opinion. Just legally right and wrong.
It is completely wrong and immoral, no two ways about it as far as I'm concerned. Just the cheek of it, so what do you do Chris? Oh I'm a used car salesman, I do a little bit of radio and tv work on the side but primarily used cars, that's my trade. It's utter b******* & I'm glad it has become public knowledge and I hope, like he says, has 'learnt a valuable lesson' although I wonder if he just means it has cost him.
Thats like saying its not morally wrong to take public money that your not entitled to.
But you are entitled to keep the money you save from avoidance measures IF the courts decree that your tax structuring is within the rules, if not the spirit of the intent. Your analogy is more akin to tax evasion.
I might be just being a bit thick, but I don't understand why Moyles (and any others that did the same) isn't facing serious charges. I totally get tax avoidance schemes such as offshore investment type things, setting up a company and drawing a wage etc but surely declaring yourself on an official tax form as something you blatantly are not and never have been must be illegal?
That isn't avoidance, it's blatant fraud and dishonesty. I am really puzzled. I accept many of us might avoid paying where we could but not like this!!
But you are entitled to keep the money you save from avoidance measures IF the courts decree that your tax structuring is within the rules, if not the spirit of the intent. Your analogy is more akin to tax evasion.
Well that's where the law needs to change. Should be able claw back money from tax avoidance schemes used within x years of being closed.
I think he should get the same punishment as an unemployed person would get if they had stollen the equivalent amount of money in more straightforward theft.
I could just see the former fat fcuk walking about singing the Minder theme tune in front off his minions dying to tell them what a card he is.
Didn't even man up when caught, what a weasel. Throw the book at him, preferably a big heavy one.
The hysterical over-reactions in this thread are hilarious (mind you it is the Showbiz forum so I shouldn't really be surprised) Anybody would think he had strangled a child or something.
I guarantee that some of the posters in this thread would be swayed by some of the avoidance measures if they were in his shoes, once they were told how much money they could potentially save.
The hysterical over-reactions in this thread are hilarious (mind you it is the Showbiz forum so I shouldn't really be surprised) Anybody would think he had strangled a child or something.
I guarantee that some of the posters in this thread would be swayed by some of the avoidance measures if they were in his shoes, once they were told how much money they could potentially save.
I hope the government closes this loophole so tax dodgers can't avoid it.
Comments
Dave hates tax dodgers.
Hope to God ge does, PLUS fines & interest.
Lol, good luck facing your workmates, mates down the pub and the family.
;-)
Why be embarrassed that you have tried to minimise your liability? It should be something everybody strives to do, but the problem is, most people are just tied up wage slaves on PAYE. Most self-employed people and Ltd Companies (like me) take contrived measures to structure affairs to minimise liability. It's borderline taking the piss sometimes, but you do what you can, it's a game. Taxpayer tries to take a bit, HMRC tries to take it back, and on it goes. If HMRC (or the courts to be more accurate) rule that your avoidance is outwith the rules, you pay them what they then ask for. But that shouldn't stop people trying. Certainly nothing to be embarrassed about.
Chris' public contrition is because he relies on his public image as part of his career in showbusiness, but to be honest, he'll be one of thousands in that industry all pulling the same wheezes with their tax.
He was VERY well aware that what he was doing was morally worong.
Correct.
Interesting, I didn't know that, what a tool>:(
It makes me so angry, as for his lame excuses on twitter. It just beggars belief that he's got away with it until now.
Depends on whether or not you associate with thieves. They'd be impressed.
There's no such thing as morally wrong when it comes to tax avoidance in my opinion. Just legally right and wrong.
I'm sad that you're sad
Thats like saying its not morally wrong to take public money that your not entitled to.
What a ridiculous ignorant comment
But you are entitled to keep the money you save from avoidance measures IF the courts decree that your tax structuring is within the rules, if not the spirit of the intent. Your analogy is more akin to tax evasion.
That isn't avoidance, it's blatant fraud and dishonesty. I am really puzzled. I accept many of us might avoid paying where we could but not like this!!
Well that's where the law needs to change. Should be able claw back money from tax avoidance schemes used within x years of being closed.
Didn't even man up when caught, what a weasel. Throw the book at him, preferably a big heavy one.
A 'silly mistake' is something you do without thinking, this was a delibert act.
But only if the type of fraud is committed by the well-to-do.
I always find it curious how anyone can defend the actions of the corrupt well-to-do in this country. What is the psychology of such behaviour?
I guarantee that some of the posters in this thread would be swayed by some of the avoidance measures if they were in his shoes, once they were told how much money they could potentially save.
I hope the government closes this loophole so tax dodgers can't avoid it.
I'm sure they will. There are plenty more. It's a game.