Is Gideon a tax dodger?

1235»

Comments

  • TimCypherTimCypher Posts: 9,052
    Forum Member
    PFKA EB wrote: »
    I think what youll find is they decry the percentages of tax they pay in ratio to their earnings rather than the actual amounts.

    The oft-mentioned cleaner paying 20% vs 18% on a dividend no longer applies since they raised CGT to 28%.

    Assuming that that's what you were referring to...

    Regards,

    Cypher
  • Nick1966Nick1966 Posts: 15,742
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Caxton wrote: »
    ...but I am not happy to pay my taxes to provide benefit to the likes of irresponsible baby factories...

    define 'irresponsible baby factories'
  • PFKA EBPFKA EB Posts: 1,900
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    TimCypher wrote: »
    The oft-mentioned cleaner paying 20% vs 18% on a dividend no longer applies since they raised CGT to 28%.

    Assuming that that's what you were referring to...

    Regards,

    Cypher

    I wasnt referring to anything other than the "left" talk about the percentage of tax rather than the fiscal amount. I have no political leanings myself seeing them all as self serving narcissists.

    Regards pfka
  • TimCypherTimCypher Posts: 9,052
    Forum Member
    PFKA EB wrote: »
    I have no political leanings myself seeing them all as self serving narcissists.

    Brother! :D

    Regards,

    Cypher
  • CaxtonCaxton Posts: 28,881
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Nick1966 wrote: »
    define 'irresponsible baby factories'

    Oh I can easily do that, unmarried mothers who do not care or know who the father is and who not only have one child but a number of them, Totally irresponsible, but then not surprising as it appears the norm now is just to get pissed on a night out and then sleep around with anyone and everyone without a care in the world.

    The same applies to those who have multiple children and have not got the resources to finance them. In many cases if the father is known he is unemployed. All kept by handouts from the state which the taxpayer have to finance.
  • Ethel_FredEthel_Fred Posts: 34,127
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Caxton wrote: »
    Oh I can easily do that, unmarried mothers who do not care or know who the father is and who not only have one child but a number of them, Totally irresponsible, but then not surprising as it appears the norm now is just to get pissed on a night out and then sleep around with anyone and everyone without a care in the world.

    The same applies to those who have multiple children and have not got the resources to finance them. In many cases if the father is known he is unemployed. All kept by handouts from the state which the taxpayer have to finance.
    It would be interesting to know actual numbers on this, rather than Daily Heil Rant.
  • J LeninJ Lenin Posts: 3,228
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Caxton wrote: »
    Oh I can easily do that, unmarried mothers who do not care or know who the father is and who not only have one child but a number of them, Totally irresponsible, but then not surprising as it appears the norm now is just to get pissed on a night out and then sleep around with anyone and everyone without a care in the world.

    The same applies to those who have multiple children and have not got the resources to finance them. In many cases if the father is known he is unemployed. All kept by handouts from the state which the taxpayer have to finance.

    A bit of a generalisation I would say. What figures do you have to back this up?
  • PFKA EBPFKA EB Posts: 1,900
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    J Lenin wrote: »
    A bit of a generalisation I would say. What figures do you have to back this up?

    Figures? FIGURES???? do not trivialise this problem with facts and figures, do you not know they are breeding in order to destroy our way of life it says so in the Mail and the telegraph so it must be true. First they take over a street with their evil brood then the brood breed and they take over an esate then they dare to move into the suburns where we live, DO YOU KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS!!!!!??????

    no I mean it what does it mean the MAil hasnt published that part of the diatribe yet so Im lost...BUT ITS WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • lucius4lucius4 Posts: 400
    Forum Member
    ecco66 wrote: »
    Ridicule his policies then, not his name.

    I ridicule him and his policies. Gidean, call me dave and Mr Clog are a joke and I love being childish, but I am not a tax or an expensive cheat like that lot. I include a nickname taken from Tory central office Red Ed too. They are all a joke.
    We are all in it together, well you will all find out tomorrow how far we are all in it together. I suspect you will find the shit hits the pan for us rather then them.
  • CaxtonCaxton Posts: 28,881
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    So there are hardly any unmarried mothers with children living off benefits and I must stress these are the ones who got pregnant, and do not care or do not know who the father is?

    Well I for one know at least five in the last year who are in this situation. The latest one (daughter of a colleague I worked with) got pregnant and the waster who she had sex and slept around with has no job is too idle to get a job and she thinks it will be far easier to get money off the state than the father.

    I have two cousins who this has happened to in the last three years and two more live in the village I live in.
  • Flyboy152Flyboy152 Posts: 14,656
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    TimCypher wrote: »
    The oft-mentioned cleaner paying 20% vs 18% on a dividend no longer applies since they raised CGT to 28%.

    Assuming that that's what you were referring to...

    Regards,

    Cypher

    Capital gains have nothing to with dividend income. :confused:
  • Flyboy152Flyboy152 Posts: 14,656
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Caxton wrote: »
    Oh I can easily do that, unmarried mothers who do not care or know who the father is and who not only have one child but a number of them, Totally irresponsible, but then not surprising as it appears the norm now is just to get pissed on a night out and then sleep around with anyone and everyone without a care in the world.

    The same applies to those who have multiple children and have not got the resources to finance them. In many cases if the father is known he is unemployed. All kept by handouts from the state which the taxpayer have to finance.

    For just a minute there I was thrown back to the eighties. In the times and attitudes of the likes of Portillio, Tebbit, Heseltine, Fowler and Clarke. They also used the same targets for the ills of our society. It didn't wash then and won't wash now.
  • Flyboy152Flyboy152 Posts: 14,656
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Caxton wrote: »
    So there are hardly any unmarried mothers with children living off benefits and I must stress these are the ones who got pregnant, and do not care or do not know who the father is?

    Well I for one know at least five in the last year who are in this situation. The latest one (daughter of a colleague I worked with) got pregnant and the waster who she had sex and slept around with has no job is too idle to get a job and she thinks it will be far easier to get money off the state than the father.

    I have two cousins who this has happened to in the last three years and two more live in the village I live in.

    And becasue Caxton knows of at least five "unmarried mothers," it must be true.
  • paulschapmanpaulschapman Posts: 35,536
    Forum Member
    Flyboy152 wrote: »
    Capital gains have nothing to with dividend income. :confused:

    Dividend income is taxed when the company pays it's corporation tax and share holders get a tax credit to ensure they do not pay double tax on the income. If they are upper rate taxpayers then further tax is due to ensure upper rate tax is paid on the dividend income.
  • smudges dadsmudges dad Posts: 36,989
    Forum Member
    Flyboy152 wrote: »
    And becasue Caxton knows of at least five "unmarried mothers," it must be true.

    Is this just coincidence???:eek:

    :D
  • Flyboy152Flyboy152 Posts: 14,656
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Dividend income is taxed when the company pays it's corporation tax and share holders get a tax credit to ensure they do not pay double tax on the income. If they are upper rate taxpayers then further tax is due to ensure upper rate tax is paid on the dividend income.

    I know that, but one doesn't pay CGT on dividends, do they.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 292
    Forum Member
    starsailor wrote: »
    He has applied with the 'spirit of the law' it's perfectly and totally legal.

    Sheesh the amount of ignorance, and basically pure lack of knowledge on this thread is amazing.

    I'm an accountant. I do these things day in, day out, and there is nothing wrong with any aspect of these things. It's simple straightforward tax planning which anyone with brains would do.

    Agreed, one of those cases of people complaining and saying others are wrong for doing it just because they didn't take the initiative and do it themselves too.

    There are not many people who have no options what so ever to reduce their tax bill in some way, either now, or in the future. And there is plenty of information out there that is free to get hold of that can help you if you read it.

    It still amazes me how many people I meet with some savings that don't have an ISA for example and often fall into the trap of believing only the rich can save tax, or the self employed who are just getting by, who are able to save tax too.

    For the people who are really convinced they (the Tories) and others have done something illegal, instead of getting worked up on an internet chat forum, contact HMR+C about it.
Sign In or Register to comment.