Larky Masher Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 46 minutes ago, euan2020 said: Pension contributions, charity giving, buying uniform for work, professional memberships fee's associated with work, asset transfers to spouses, cycling to work miles, company car mileage associated with business travel or are you discussing Tax evasion ? Given that at the time of the EBTs these were legal I'd argue that was tax avoidance though my paying cash example would probably be facilitating tax avoidance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orraloon Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 Nothing wrong with a wee bit of tax avoidance. I would guess that most of us will do a bit of it at some point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
euan2020 Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 41 minutes ago, Larky Masher said: Given that at the time of the EBTs these were legal I'd argue that was tax avoidance though my paying cash example would probably be facilitating tax avoidance. They were never legal at the time - they had only been registered This is what these companies who are proposing these schemes do - they register them so the Government is aware, typically notifying they have discovered a loophole - once loophole is closed down they move onto a new one I think the language you are looking for is that they had never been "tested" yet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larky Masher Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 1 minute ago, euan2020 said: They were never legal at the time - they had only been registered This is what these companies who are proposing these schemes do - they register them so the Government is aware, typically notifying they have discovered a loophole - once loophole is closed down they move onto a new one I think the language you are looking for is that they had never been "tested" yet I'd go with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
euan2020 Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 (edited) guys - tax avoidance is legal - better word would be "tax planning" which includes Pensions, Creating Trusts, Preparing a Will, etc etc what we are discussing is Tax Evasion, and that is illegal such as hiding money offshore etc, directing income offshore, flying in via ireland and crossing to uk overland to avoid declaring "in country days" Edited July 25, 2017 by euan2020 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larky Masher Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 37 minutes ago, Orraloon said: Nothing wrong with a wee bit of tax avoidance. I would guess that most of us will do a bit of it at some point. Should there be a spectrum? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larky Masher Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 5 minutes ago, euan2020 said: guys - tax avoidance is legal - better word would be "tax planning" which includes Pensions, Creating Trusts, Preparing a Will, etc etc what we are discussing is Tax Evasion, and that is illegal such as hiding money offshore etc, directing income offshore, flying in via ireland and crossing to uk overland to avoid declaring "in country days" I'd disagree with that, there is a moral and legal dimension to this. Technically what Google, Amazon, etc do with diverting profits is tax avoidance but morally I'd argue it's tax evasion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaid Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 1 hour ago, euan2020 said: Pension contributions, charity giving, buying uniform for work, professional memberships fee's associated with work, asset transfers to spouses, cycling to work miles, company car mileage associated with business travel All of these are examples of where the government gives specific tax relief in order to promote certain types of behaviour, for example, they want people to pay in to personal pensions and so they give tax relief on pension contributions. They are all completely legal and are not examples of tax avoidance or tax evasion furthermore, there is no moral issue. Tax avoidance is where the tax regulations are used in a way that is legal but not as the regulations were designed to be used. They are not illegal although they may be of dubious morality depending on the circumstances. EBTs fall into this category. Tax evasion is illegal and is where assets and income are deliberately hidden to avoid paying tax. A tradesman doing cash in hand work and not declaring it is tax evasion, not avoidance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toepoke Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 14 hours ago, sbcmfc said: I'm pretty sure my window cleaner makes £20k a week, so that seems a reasonable comparison... You must use the same guy my missus hired... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orraloon Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 40 minutes ago, Larky Masher said: Should there be a spectrum? No really. Tax avoidance is legal and often encouraged. So that's OK in my book. Tax evasion isn't. Tax evasion is defined in legal terms and can be tested in court. I think one of the problems for this thread is that we have folk with different interpretations of what constitutes tax avoidance. I'm with euan here, pension contributions are a form of tax avoidance and should be encouraged. It's up to law makers, the courts and HMRC to decide which tax avoidance schemes are acceptable. This is what has happened with these EBTs. We won't all agree with all their decisions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larky Masher Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 14 minutes ago, Orraloon said: No really. Tax avoidance is legal and often encouraged. So that's OK in my book. Tax evasion isn't. Tax evasion is defined in legal terms and can be tested in court. I think one of the problems for this thread is that we have folk with different interpretations of what constitutes tax avoidance. I'm with euan here, pension contributions are a form of tax avoidance and should be encouraged. It's up to law makers, the courts and HMRC to decide which tax avoidance schemes are acceptable. This is what has happened with these EBTs. We won't all agree with all their decisions. I don't think anyone could argue against pensions contributions as people should be incentivised to save for their retirement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larky Masher Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 Just noticed that Sir Alex Ferguson was also an investor in the film scheme that did for Barry. https://www.ft.com/content/786319e2-ae5a-11e6-a37c-f4a01f1b0fa1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty CTA Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 1 hour ago, Larky Masher said: Should there be a spectrum? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larky Masher Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 12 minutes ago, Scotty CTA said: You're on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 35 minutes ago, Larky Masher said: Just noticed that Sir Alex Ferguson was also an investor in the film scheme that did for Barry. https://www.ft.com/content/786319e2-ae5a-11e6-a37c-f4a01f1b0fa1 It's saying that i need a subscription but when i put the title into google and go for it that way the page opens. Hyperlink looks the same. https://www.ft.com/content/786319e2-ae5a-11e6-a37c-f4a01f1b0fa1 Sounds heavy though... Nick Wood, an adviser for hundreds of investors in the Eclipse 35 partnership, told The Times that it was ‘highly likely’ that up to 600-700 of the 780 people in the scheme would go bankrupt. Despite the claims, there was no evidence that any named investors were in financial difficulties, the paper said. HMRC said it recognised that some people would face “life-changing bills”. It said it took its duty of care very seriously and it had briefed its teams on the support available to people who were worried or anxious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bzzzz Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 Didn't Marvin live in a gated property down there somewhere? he did keep saying he was "happy as Barry"... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Bzzzz said: Didn't Marvin live in a gated property down there somewhere? he did keep saying he was "happy as Barry"... Campbell Ogilvie was at hearts too Mind that player trying to buy a house cause he only got paid minimum wage lol the rest was "overseas" Hope you're doing well though sir Edited July 25, 2017 by phart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squirrelhumper Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 29 minutes ago, Bzzzz said: Didn't Marvin live in a gated property down there somewhere? he did keep saying he was "happy as Barry"... Nah, that was in Lanarkshire. Some gangsters place. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/through-the-keyhole-inside-marvin-from-the-schemes-1106570 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 Wow did not realize how heavy this is... Quote Hundreds of celebrities could face 'financial ruin' after the taxman ordered them to repay up to 20 times of what they invested in a massive avoidance scheme. "An investor to the scheme who stumped up £200,000, for example, could be expected to pay back somewhere between £2million and £4million." Ouch. This is going to ruin many many people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larky Masher Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 7 minutes ago, thplinth said: Wow did not realize how heavy this is... Ouch. This is going to ruin many many people. It's ruined a few already https://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/jan/23/footballers-tax-demands-hmrc http://www.mackrell.com/legal-news/footballers-falling-foul-tax-avoidance-legislation/?gclid=Cj0KEQjw2NvLBRCjsq-Qq6TjwecBEiQAF98GMf8IzQlTpuIVQFuXByC5R9zWLJXc3EVvCT2JDXVVbccaAuff8P8HAQ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parklife Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 Anyone able to explain this? Apologies for being thick but how can they be liable for a tax sum which is greater than the amount they "invested"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty CTA Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 Possibly takes into account the total amount that they have benefitted from over the years? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theweestevie Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 (edited) 21 minutes ago, Parklife said: Anyone able to explain this? Apologies for being thick but how can they be liable for a tax sum which is greater than the amount they "invested"? I'd imagine it is penalties for not paying the tax. Edited July 25, 2017 by theweestevie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parklife Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 11 minutes ago, theweestevie said: I'd imagine it is penalties for not paying the tax. Makes sense. Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parklife Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15432375.Former_Rangers_star_Barry_Ferguson_transferred_luxury_mansion_into_wife_s_name_before_bankruptcy/ FORMER Rangers star Barry Ferguson transferred his luxury mansion into his wife's name six years before his bankruptcy, it has emerged. The ex-Scotland captain, applied for bankruptcy after accumulating debts of more than 1.4 million, gifted his joint share in the house to wife Margaret. Their home is a gated property near Larkhall, Lanarkshire, which the couple bought for £1.2 million in 2003. Property records show Mrs Ferguson, 39, became the sole owner in November, 2011, when the footballer handed over his interest in the home for 'love, favour and affection'. Under bankruptcy laws, an asset which has been transferred more than five years before the date a person is made bankrupt cannot be used to pay off their debts. Ferguson also gave up all his company directorships in firms which he ran with his wife. He resigned as a director from an investment company, a nursery business and a media firm during 2013 and 2014 but Mrs Ferguson remains involved in them all. He is one of a number of former Ibrox stars who faced paying back money they had received in Employee Benefit Trusts after Rangers lost a battle with HMRC at the Supreme Court. Ferguson received £2.5 million in EBT payments and invested in a film production partnership called Eclipse which was ruled to be a tax avoidance scheme. The Rangers 'big tax case' found more than £47million was paid to players, managers and directors in EBTs between 2001 and 2010. A spokesman for HMRC said: "We do not comment on identifiable taxpayers." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.