Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

David Cameron admits to profiting from offshore fund !!! watch

    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by MrMackyTv)
    Specifically staying in the topic of oversea territories, they should be taxed however there are tax loopholes and obviously the need to be covered. If they are covered then we could actually get the money we need to run our public services. Just look at the NHS for a start, it's in a pit, we can't afford big-companies like Google or Starbucks avoiding tax that is really needed.
    Being registered in another country is not a loophole...

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Community Assistant
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    The public was not mislead by the statements. People criticising Cameron are out for blood no matter what. A factually correct statement is only 'misleading' because it's now convenient for it to be so, even though it's, well, factually correct.
    Yes they were. They were told half-truths.

    Students love criticising the government. How many student protests have their been since 2010? I've lost count. I fail to see what you believe in students that make them immune to political posturing.
    Lots, do you know the main reason why? And I didn't say that they are immune to political posturing. Yes students are very involved in politics but you made it sound as if it's only students who are attacking the Tories, which is false.

    I said you're implying that the 'masses' are up in arms over this issue, and apparently 94% of people want Cameron to resign. You then use the e-petition gaining 100,000 signatures as evidence of this. 100,000 is not a large number in the context of an e-petition.
    That 94% was in a poll which I don't think represented the country as a whole, but 94% is still a lot.

    You're not understanding. What you're talking about is the total of signatures, I'm talking about the rate of the signatures. I said 100,000 signatures in just a couple of hours is very large in terms of rate not total.

    It was 80,000 in 24 hours last time, now apparently it's 100,000 in a couple of hours. Make your mind up.
    A petition that trends through social media can easily reach it's target in days. You clearly have no context to compare to. The banning Donald Trump petition reached it's target in a day I think, and was at around 500,000 when Parliament got round to debating it.
    I didn't say it reached 80,000 in 24 hours. I said that a petition has just reached 80,000 signatures (it was only up for a few hours) and I said it could have easily have reached 100,000 by the time we were talking about it. Looking at the time now, it has probably surpassed that target ages ago since we talked about that yesterday. So there's nothing wrong with my mind, it's yours...

    What is a "large" number to you then? 100,000 not large enough? Then what is?

    This is getting repetitive.
    We're not even entirely in disagreement. I said, from the beginning, that Cameron should have handled it better. Simply his mismanagement of the situation is not a reason for his resignation, and people calling for such are being sensationalist and frankly silly. That was pretty much the first point I made that you originally responded to.
    I know right? I agree, it probably isn't a reason for him to resign, I was just trying to tell you why people might think he needs to resign. You probably just kept assuming it was me who said he needed to resign (I did originally when the news came out but I quickly changed my mind as I was told the EU referendum is more important, so he cannot possibly resign over this).
    • Community Assistant
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Being registered in another country is not a loophole...

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    If you register a company in a different country it is still evading tax. Correct me if I'm wrong.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by MrMackyTv)
    If you register a company in a different country it is still evading tax. Correct me if I'm wrong.
    Once again, justify why every company in the world should be registered in Britain. And pray tell what is illegal about registering a company outside Britain?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Community Assistant
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Once again, justify why every company in the world should be registered in Britain. And pray tell what is illegal about registering a company outside Britain?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    A company can choose where it wants to be registered, I don't care about that what I care about is that if they use tax havens to evade tax. And I didn't say that registering a company outside of Britain is illegal.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by MrMackyTv)
    A company can choose where it wants to be registered, I don't care about that what I care about is that if they use tax havens to evade tax. And I didn't say that registering a company outside of Britain is illegal.
    If it isn't illegal then how is it evasion for an Ireland based company to register in Panama?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Yeah... who would have thought these guys avoided tax.



    What a surprise.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Like_A_G6)
    At my place of work, half the employees are agency staff who have registered as a Ltd company. The lengths they go to to save tax is incredible. Almost all offset everyday expenses as business expenses. Things like breakfast (allowed apparently if they eat it at work), lunch, petrol, gas and electricity even due to smarter working. Some of them then moan all day about the state of the UK and how public services are woeful whilst browsing the daily mail and blaming immigrants. If everyone just paid in good faith, that would be good.
    Yes, they may be self employed, but they are being employed. Regular food is ridiculous, because it`s required in any event. Are you sure that`s correct? - Are they claiming business lunches?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    People were up in arms about ed milliband having two kitchens. It doesn't take much.
    To be fair, the context of that was the fact that Ed was basing his election campaign on rants about the undeserving rich.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KimKallstrom)
    To be fair, the context of that was the fact that Ed was basing his election campaign on rants about the undeserving rich.
    I don't think he was complaining about people being rich or undeserving per se. I think it was more that he wanted the rich to do their fair share, like not avoid tax and contribute to society. Cameron himself said vaguely similar things about 'those with the broadest shoulders carrying the heaviest load' and 'we're all in this together'.

    Granted Miliband wasn't the best communicator though (not did he have the best team) and it may well have come across a bit more as you're describing than was intended.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    Yeah... who would have thought these guys avoided tax.



    What a surprise.
    That's all well and good.....except for the small fact that Cameron didn't avoid tax. Just because thousands of Guardian readers say something repeatedly, it doesn't make it true, no matter how much you wish it to be.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KimKallstrom)
    That's all well and good.....except for the small fact that Cameron didn't avoid tax. Just because thousands of Guardian readers say something repeatedly, it doesn't make it true, no matter how much you wish it to be.
    Something good has come of it though. Cameron has published his tax returns, prompting others to do the same and set a precedent. This isn't even a party political point, but transparency over the financial interests of our 'leaders' and potential 'leaders' is a good thing.

    In addition the whole Panama thing will hopefully provide a bit of impetus for tackling avoidance in the future.

    Cameron hasn't avoided tax no. He did however make this situation ten times more difficult then it needed to be by acting really shady about it over the course of four separate carefully worded statement rather than being honest and open about it from the start.

    Nonetheless I give him credit for publishing his tax returns now and prompting others to do the same.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Osborne has now released his tax returns too. Nothing saucy in there (obviously otherwise he wouldn't have released them) but it's a positive step for transparency and will hopefully set a precedent for leaders of all parties.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: April 11, 2016
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.