welshbairn Posted February 15, 2020 Share Posted February 15, 2020 Just now, Jacksgranda said: Those probably are evasion to be quite honest, but hard to prove. The best accountants and tax lawyers are going to gravitate towards the money rather than workfor HMRC, I would imagine. You'd think it would be relatively simple to define what "legitimate business expenses" are, but obviously not. I've heard the HMRC trained graduates usually leave for the City as soon as they're any use. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted February 15, 2020 Share Posted February 15, 2020 What about putting money into an ISA rather than just a normal bank account? I'm sick of explaining that ISAs are part of the tax code and not a tax avoidance scheme, frankly. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted February 15, 2020 Share Posted February 15, 2020 I've heard the HMRC trained graduates usually leave for the City as soon as they're any use.True. HMRC spend years training these people and paying for their exams then most of them immediately f**k off to the private sector. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted February 15, 2020 Share Posted February 15, 2020 9 minutes ago, MixuFixit said: Why don't they do what the army does and require them to stay in their post for X years or pay back the fees? The fees are probably tax deductible... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mastermind Posted February 15, 2020 Author Share Posted February 15, 2020 When is Mackay going to make an appearance at his place of work? He has constituents to represent - has he submitted a sick line to explain his absence? Presumably someone from the SNP has checked on his wellbeing.He’ll have to show face at some point. Coward. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted February 15, 2020 Share Posted February 15, 2020 3 minutes ago, oaksoft said: So, guilty unless proven innocent? Hundreds of years of justice ripped up? No. If a tax consultant has a new scheme like pretending salaries are loans that don't have to be repaid, they should put it to arbitration before recommending it to clients. If they don't the client should be charged full whack until proven otherwise. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeTillEhDeh Posted February 15, 2020 Share Posted February 15, 2020 Those probably are evasion to be quite honest, but hard to prove. The best accountants and tax lawyers are going to gravitate towards the money rather than work for HMRC, I would imagine. You'd think it would be relatively simple to define what "legitimate business expenses" are, but obviously not. It would help if HMRC didn't "consult" the big accounting firms when they make changes to the system - like asking a burglar what security you should install in your house and then giving the same burglar the alarm code. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted February 15, 2020 Share Posted February 15, 2020 2 minutes ago, oaksoft said: But they already do that. Part of the tax return system is reporting tax avoidance schemes that you are using. So Rangers asked the HMRC if EBT's were cool before they started paying players using them? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted February 15, 2020 Share Posted February 15, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, oaksoft said: So who should they consult with? HMRC used to be the experts. But they've all been laid off now. Edited February 15, 2020 by Baxter Parp 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeTillEhDeh Posted February 15, 2020 Share Posted February 15, 2020 So who should they consult with?They certainly shouldn't be facilitating every bloody wheeze that the big accounting firms "advise" them to implement. Consultation should be limited to the practicalities of the tax system not the principles that it is built on. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wee Bully Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 They were designed by the Government.The whole tax code is designed by the government. Tax avoidance is simply looking at the law, and arranging your affairs in a way that means you pay less tax. If the government (the ones who are making the rules up) don’t like what you are doing, they have the power to change those rules. It is exactly like putting your money into an ISA rather than a normal bank account. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 12 minutes ago, Wee Bully said: The whole tax code is designed by the government. Tax avoidance is simply looking at the law, and arranging your affairs in a way that means you pay less tax. If the government (the ones who are making the rules up) don’t like what you are doing, they have the power to change those rules. It is exactly like putting your money into an ISA rather than a normal bank account. EBT's weren't designed by the Government and it's taken years of very expensive litigation to stop them and they still haven't got the money due. It's cheating normal taxpayers, and the onus should be on the people who come up with these scams to prove their legality in advance, not the other way around and retrospectively. They are nothing like ISAs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 34 minutes ago, Wee Bully said: The whole tax code is designed by the government. Tax avoidance is simply looking at the law, and arranging your affairs in a way that means you pay less tax. If the government (the ones who are making the rules up) don’t like what you are doing, they have the power to change those rules. It is exactly like putting your money into an ISA rather than a normal bank account. Correct 15 minutes ago, welshbairn said: EBT's weren't designed by the Government and it's taken years of very expensive litigation to stop them and they still haven't got the money due. It's cheating normal taxpayers, and the onus should be on the people who come up with these scams to prove their legality in advance, not the other way around and retrospectively. They are nothing like ISAs. EBTs aren't/weren't part of the tax code. It can't be beyond the wit of legislators to design a tax code which invalidates EBTs etc. Unless they don't want to, of course... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alta-pete Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/derek-mackay-undergoing-medical-assessment-21508788 another £1200 trousered while doing naff all for his constituents. .. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SweeperDee Posted February 17, 2020 Share Posted February 17, 2020 Not being charged. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BawWatchin Posted February 17, 2020 Share Posted February 17, 2020 Man not being charged for not breaking the law. Perhaps explains yet again why the parents went to the papers rather than the police. Politically motivated meltdowns imminent. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted February 17, 2020 Share Posted February 17, 2020 26 minutes and nothing so far. Keep hoping, BW. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mastermind Posted February 17, 2020 Author Share Posted February 17, 2020 Not quite sure why he would be charged. What he did was extremely creepy but the boy was of a (barely) legal age. Is there any sign of Mr Invisible yet? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTJohnboy Posted February 17, 2020 Share Posted February 17, 2020 Kate Forbes is to be his replacement. Very happy with this appointment - she's very easy on the eye, although that wouldn't have influenced my choice as MacKay's successor of course. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotThePars Posted February 17, 2020 Share Posted February 17, 2020 Kate Forbes is to be his replacement. Very happy with this appointment - she's very easy on the eye, although that wouldn't have influenced my choice as MacKay's successor of course.Is it because of her views on abortion, trans people, or just because you want to shag her? 1 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.