Politically I would not agree with many of his policies however in terms of his finances, and only his finances, he has done nothing wrong.
Every process was legal, had proper documentation and was done according to all rules and regulations that were applicable.
Why is Mr. Cameron needing to justify his finances when the biggest companies in the UK have off shore banking and pay a minimal amount of tax and not once they get questioned?
It was estimated the amount of tax not being paid by the big UK based corporations was approximately equal to the cuts the UK government had placed on public sector services and other areas.
The most interesting aspect of this is many off shore tax havens are actually commisioned by the UK government. And of course it is within their power to shut them down with immediate effect - but you must ask why won't they?
I simply do not understand how people can focus on Mr. Cameron possibly structuring his finances to re order corporation tax, inheritance or income tax amounting to thousands when the largest companies are doing the same with billions? Why are these questions not being asked?
Regarding Taxation, David Cameron Has Done Nothing Wrong Watch
- Thread Starter
- 10-04-2016 11:56
- 10-04-2016 11:58
- 10-04-2016 12:00
Cameron hasn't done anything wrong, the whole thing is about his shares in his fathers company Blairmore which he paid tax on when he sold the shares in the uk, so he hasn't even avoided any tax.
- 10-04-2016 12:03
I blame the 'Twitter tax experts' for making a big deal out of it. These 'experts' just so happen to be 19 year old SJWs.
They ignored the actual tax experts who were saying that what he did was perfectly okay providing his tax returns were in order.
It's interesting to note that Corbyn this morning defended Cameron and the '£200,000 gift'.
- Community Assistant
- 10-04-2016 12:09
Well, he called this sort of thing 'immoral' when other people benefited from it. Amusingly, Osborne's comments about it being like theft have disappeared too.
Yes, Cameron appears to have paid tax on the capital gain from selling the shares.
However the rise in value of those shares - and the inheritance from his father / money from his mother - would have been less had the company been based in the UK and paid UK taxes. Avoiding those, despite having beneficial owners in the UK, was clearly and explicitly the whole point of setting it up as it was.
To use Osborne's analogy, he's paid tax on the income, but it was stolen money he's paid tax on.
- 10-04-2016 12:22
Because he's making the decisions to not close loopholes that have allowed him and other people to not pay tax. Even if he's not benefiting now, he has in the past and is not acting to prevent the problem in the future. Him and Osborne want to claim that their government will make everyone pay their share of tax but are not making the super-rich and big businesses pay their share. They are cutting services for the most vulnerable because 'there's no money' but are benefiting from offshore banking.
- 10-04-2016 14:30
Nobody said it's illegal. How are people not getting this? this guy is in favour of a nanny state. His so-called Big Society can only be achieved with moderate to high taxation. The one he dodges even if it's legal to do so.