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

David Cameron's father 'ran offshore fund that paid zero UK tax for 30 years' Watch

    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    Overwhelming majority said "so? It's his dad, not him".

    And so what if a few did prove themselves to be idiots - do you think the right way to counter that is by sinking to their level? All that does is make everyone look like morons.

    You want to raise the level of debate? Then do it. Not just empty rhetoric.
    Nothing wrong with pointing out the hypocrisy of certain people is there, you done it, just you hypocritically only pointed at one side.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    It's a reason to hate the son's hypocrisy.

    I don't think they are the same - the coordinated campaign run by the Tories and their friends at the Sun and the Mail to blacken Ralph Miliband was mainly fiction. This story is mainly fact. Then we have the issue that the basis of those attacks was against patriotism and whilst that may or may not have been an issue with Miliband senior, we can see that it definitely is an issue with the Camerons and to make matters worse, Cameron jnr was a cheer leader in the 'Ed's family are not patriots' jeering match.

    The slimy hypocrisy of leading Tory families like this has to be seen to be believed.
    A nice balanced opinion from you. I'd expect nothing less.



    Answer me one thing: where is the proof that DC knew anything about this?

    And don't spout conjecture, none of this "I can't imagine he wouldn't know" bs. I'm a bright guy, I know feck all about what my dad got up to at work. I doubt you know the inner workings of your parent's work history.


    The news about Miliband senior was bs and snatched up by idiots as a reason to go after the son. This is identical.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    I did not think we held children to account for their father's actions. His father was clearly engaged in dodgy dealings, but Cameron was his son, not his business partner. There is no issue here unless Cameron is shown to have been directly involved. Christ we allow the relatives of terrorists less of a public hanging than Cameron is getting in this thread.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    I did not think we held children to account for their father's actions. His father was clearly engaged in dodgy dealings, but Cameron was his son, not his business partner. There is no issue here unless Cameron is shown to have been directly involved. Christ we allow the relatives of terrorists less of a public hanging than Cameron is getting in this thread.
    Cameron has benefited from that money. He's had it passed down to him. And when he was asked how much he knew about it and whether he had shares he said 'it's a private matter'.

    Cameron's dad lived in this country, benefited from our public services and infrastructure yet paid no tax whatsoever, that's the definition of a scrounger. Yet he has the nerve to criticise other scroungers.


    Why is is that people exploiting he system at the bottom is disgusting but it's fine for people at the top?

    And the regular response seems to be its 'legal'. Searching, exploiting and finding legal loopholes to avoid tax is unacceptable. If there was some technical legal loophole which made murder legal would that be okay? Marital rape used to be legal, was that acceptable?

    Everyone should pay tax and we shouldn't allow huge accountancy firms to exploit loopholes to help people pay zero tax in this country. The whole thing is corrupt.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    To all the lefties banging on about this as a reason to hate the son; what did you think, say and do when the story about Miliband's father came out?





    Don't be hypocrites.
    Milibands dad used an isa which is expressly allowed and intended by Parliament. There is no loophole.

    On the contrary Cameron's family exploited a legal loophole, unintended by Parliament to avoid tax, going against the spirit of the law.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    'it's a private matter'.
    Nothing to hide nothing to fear.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Milibands dad used an isa which is expressly allowed and intended by Parliament. There is no loophole.

    On the contrary Cameron's family exploited a legal loophole, unintended by Parliament to avoid tax, going against the spirit of the law.
    So David Cameron is at fault for something legal done by his father?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    So David Cameron is at fault for something legal done by his father?
    Stop using the fact 'it's legal' as an excuse. It's not like it was expressly provided for or intended, it's bending the rules to find and exploit a loophole on a technicality, going against the intention and spirit of the law.

    I repeat, until 1991 marital rape was legal, did that make it acceptable?

    Cameron hasn't denied being involved and when asked said 'it's a private matter' rather than no.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    It really does astound me how people like TimmonaPortella above come out of the woodwork to defend or at best apologise for the corruption that goes on.

    Apparently it's all OK that we have the big four writing our tax code because they're all sooo smart only they can do it. It's one thing our government enlisting them when they are the sort of people who will personally benefit: it's quite another seeing useful idiots who will never have enough money to use these schemes, and who will therefore be paying for them, cheer them on.

    It's pathetic the way people bow to big business and believe the propaganda about it: remember, these crooks are the sorts of people regularly referred to in the Tory media as "hard-working wealth creators"!

    Make no mistake, this obsequity is something peculiar to the more servile, docile, stupefied populations of the West, chief among these the UK. We open our legs and our property market to the laundered money of Saudi oil sheikhs, Russian mafiosi and Chinese Communist Party mandarins, and our own elites cycle theirs through the most extensive network of tax havens on the planet, while our own elected Chancellor argues passionately and wields his veto mercilessly against vote after vote by the other EU member states to take multilateral action on tax avoidance.

    In Iceland ten per cent of the entire voting population is protesting in front of the Althing right now demanding the removal of the prime minister, whose family, like Cameron's, has been implicated in the scandal, and who not a day after the scandal broke faces a vote of no confidence. That's the sort of contempt with which we should treat corrupt politicians.

    Can any one of us here imagine anything even remotely like that happening over here? There is more chance of Cameron's dad rising from the grave and being appointed to a plum position on the Public Accounts Committee than of the average Brit holding any of these verminous elites, British or foreign, to account for their corruption.

    After all, this has been known for years: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...ily-tax-havens
    Nail.On.Head

    People like Timmona and others on here are in all likeliness never going to be rich enough to use such schemes, they are in al likeliness going to be reliant on good public services yet these are the same people who support such schemes.

    The Tories are so good at getting your average joes to vote in favour and support policies which will never benefit them.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Cameron hasn't denied being involved and when asked said 'it's a private matter' rather than no.
    So he hasn't admitted being involved either...

    Don't jump to conclusions and assumptions, just makes you look like an idiot.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    So he hasn't admitted being involved either...

    Don't jump to conclusions and assumptions, just makes you look like an idiot.
    It's not 'jumping to conclusions'. Why didn't he just say no? Surely easier and clearer.

    Either way he has directly benefited from this money. He's had it spent on him and passed down on him.

    Will Camerons family make a donation to make up for the lost tax receipts? Not a chance.

    Cameron's dad lived here tax free. He didn't pay for the army, the navy, public roads and infrastructure, public parks, council services etc yet benefited from them like everyone else. That's the true definition of a scrounger.

    So when Cameron speaks about cracking down on scroungers will he mention people like his dad? Of course not.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    So he hasn't admitted being involved either...

    Don't jump to conclusions and assumptions, just makes you look like an idiot.
    Why wouldn't he deny it then?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Milibands dad used an isa which is expressly allowed and intended by Parliament. There is no loophole.

    On the contrary Cameron's family exploited a legal loophole, unintended by Parliament to avoid tax, going against the spirit of the law.
    In my view the difference is more that ISAs are the sort of tax avoidance vehicles the man in the street has some chance of being able to benefit from. As long as everyone is doing it or has the opportunity to do it it's fine. But you would have to have millions to benefit from offshore tax avoidance schemes.

    Although the Tories have quadrupled the ISA allowance from £5k to £20k and thus forced rates well down, hurting everyone who has less than £20k spare a year, same as what they have done by raising the threshold for the personal allowance.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    It's not 'jumping to conclusions'. Why didn't he just say no? Surely easier and clearer.
    Because he's a politician. None of them know how to answer a question directly. And if he had answered directly he opens himself up to family being a legitimate target for political questions - something no politician wants and rightly so.


    Cameron's dad lived here tax free. He didn't pay for the army, the navy, public roads and infrastructure, public parks, council services etc yet benefited from them like everyone else. That's the true definition of a scrounger.
    Bull.
    Council tax. Road fund licence. VAT.

    Did he avoid spending more tax, sure. Did he avoid spending any money on tax? I'm sure that's impossible unless he was actually a hermit.


    But mostly. I just don't care. Couldn't give a flying ****.
    I hate the media for bringing stories like this up. I hate people like you for banging on about it with so much vigour you'd think it was the end of the world. I hate the left. I hate the right. It's all petty, moronic bs and you're just buying straight into it like a total idiot.

    Grow up and live your own life, because none of this **** really matters or makes any kind of difference to you.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Cameron has benefited from that money. He's had it passed down to him. And when he was asked how much he knew about it and whether he had shares he said 'it's a private matter'.

    Cameron's dad lived in this country, benefited from our public services and infrastructure yet paid no tax whatsoever, that's the definition of a scrounger. Yet he has the nerve to criticise other scroungers.


    Why is is that people exploiting he system at the bottom is disgusting but it's fine for people at the top?

    And the regular response seems to be its 'legal'. Searching, exploiting and finding legal loopholes to avoid tax is unacceptable. If there was some technical legal loophole which made murder legal would that be okay? Marital rape used to be legal, was that acceptable?

    Everyone should pay tax and we shouldn't allow huge accountancy firms to exploit loopholes to help people pay zero tax in this country. The whole thing is corrupt.

    To be blunt about it, it is a private matter. Unless something illegal has gone on ( given that these files have been passed on to HMRC, it'd become apparent quickly) it is little business of the public's. No doubt as it was passed down to him he payed inheritance tax on it too. What was he supposed to do? Go to his father aged ten and say daddy i'd like to be put up for adoption, because I feel your tax arrangements are wrong and I don't want to benefit from it? I truly hope you are this principled and have a detailed understanding of your parents financial arrangements.

    Again, Cameron is not his father. Stop trying to beat Cameron with the actions of a parent. He is no a hypocrite because his father acted a particular war, you don't judge people by the actions of their fore bearers.

    It is not, it is wrong. But you are trying to attack Cameron for something he likely
    had little to do with.

    I don't really see any issue with taking advantage of financial loopholes and clearly it is a different issue compared to murder or rape. Personally I do all I can to legally safe money, when I see companies or individuals taking advantage of legal loopholes my issue is with the people who wrote poor laws. Most people would argue doing all you can to legally save money is a rational decision.

    For someone who hates political attacks on Labour politician's families you are certainly doing all you can to get the most of this story on DC's family.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    It's a reason to hate the son's hypocrisy.

    I don't think they are the same - the coordinated campaign run by the Tories and their friends at the Sun and the Mail to blacken Ralph Miliband was mainly fiction. This story is mainly fact. Then we have the issue that the basis of those attacks was against patriotism and whilst that may or may not have been an issue with Miliband senior, we can see that it definitely is an issue with the Camerons and to make matters worse, Cameron jnr was a cheer leader in the 'Ed's family are not patriots' jeering match.

    The slimy hypocrisy of leading Tory families like this has to be seen to be believed.
    And 99.9% of the time they make damn sure it isn't seen.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    This is becoming quite a tired argument. No matter how rigorous the legal frameworks, if you put thousands of highly paid City people onto the case, you will find loopholes. The problem is not the laws but the corrupted system where an entire industry is devoted to offshoring a critical part of our national tax base, to the detriment of all of us.
    The information is out there and accessible. My point stands: if you want to prevent offshoring, simplify the tax code. Blaming the people who use the loopholes to evade tax is not a long-term solution. Furthermore, neither the Left nor the Right have done much to improve the situation.

    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    I think a simple response would be to remove citizenship from all persons caught engaging in such conduct and prohibit them from ever receiving any access to public services. They would, for example, not be permitted to drive on British roads. Similarly, we should prevent all the tax-dodging corporations from having any access to things like police and fire protection, taxpayer-funded motorway connections or subsidised airports. (which is all of them)
    Your solution to not allow those who pay nothing towards the state should be prevented is equally applicable to those living on benefits and therefore pay little to nothing in tax. Would you say that is acceptable?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TSRUsername99)
    How should those on payee carry out their patriotic duty to avoid tax?
    Relevance?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sisuphos)
    So? that doesn't exonerate him.

    OP: Tbh, I'm quite okay with fiscal conservatives or free-market conservatives dodging taxes. They think taxation and therefore government services and spending should be minimal. No problems with them as long as they don't vote for spending increases.

    But Cameron is not that kind of conservative (apparently). He's a Big Society or "compassionate" conservative or whatever ******** term careerist politicians have invented to explain why they've got no principled stances on anything that might jeopardise their chances to rule.
    ...But these people use public services that taxes pay for; they're essentially the 'scroungers' that the media depicts benefit claimants as. And with the logic that 'just because you didn't vote for the government, that means you don't have to obey the elected government' is a really poor idea - if I didn't vote for a party that supported tuition fees, do I find a way to avoid them?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aceadria)
    Relevance?
    Shouldn't we all aspire to be a patriotic as Daves dad?
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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

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