notice which name is heavily mentioned in that report? Must be an election coming, all the dirty laundry coming out now.
1 Like
And silverskin pickled onionsâ:rofl:
2 Likes
Only just read your response. I havenât researched an answer to the questions I am going to ask in relation to your response. So my questions are with interest rather than with fact.
Is it actually Sunaks system or one that he has inherited - so has he proposed the current system in order to benefit? You seem to suggest it is his system - I know that this statement may have been taken out of context.
Additionally, has he exploited the system or was it his wife? Is there any evidence that he has advised her on how to beat the system?
Look I donât like the rich getting richer and playing the system but it is common practice. In politics across all parties and in business in general.
You still havenât to my knowledge told me who you would like to replace Boris.
I was going to stand on a ârebuild the economyâ platform, which would have made me unique among the candidates, having not contributed to breaking it in the first place.
I donât really know how much simpler he can make this.
This is the job description of the the CotE from the government website.
- The Chancellor of the Exchequer is the governmentâs chief finance minister and one of the most senior members of the Cabinet. They are responsible for setting levels of taxation and public spending across the UK and announce changes to these each year in the annual Budget statement. The Chancellor of the Exchequer has overall responsibility for HM Treasury.*
He is responsible for the UKâs finances, and its tax income.
For Sunak (or his wife) to be claiming non-don status to avoid paying tax is reprehensible. Itâs bad enough to be incredibly wealthy and use loopholes to avoid tax. But the Chancellor of the Exchequer doing it? Jesus Christ.
I donât really understand why you are fixated on whether he personally put the rules in place to benefit, or whether heâs using loopholes already in place in order to benefit. It really doesnât matter. Paying your tax (if youâre rich) is a choice. Itâs a matter of morality, and as at the minute all weâre willing to do is ask billionaires really nicely if they wouldnât mind putting a little bit back into the society they are bleeding dry, we should expect the man in charge to be leading by example.
On the subjectâŚ
Regarding who Iâd vote for, from the candidates it would be Tom Tug-on-that. He seems alright, but he hasnât got a hope in hell, as he doesnât seem fucking bonkers.
4 Likes
So the current laws on Non-dom have been in place for 200 years.
In your extract from the CotE his role is to set levels of taxation and public spending. At no point does it state that the position includes changing the law. This surely is something that is voted in? Yes or No?
I am not fixated on whether he put these rules in place or not. I merely asked you if he actually created this loop hole. It appears not!
Again, I asked you whether it was him exploiting loop holes. Have you considered that his wife runs a large business and pays someone/a team to manage her companies finances/taxes, which as part of their role is to manage anything HMRC related/reduce costs.
I wonât resort to your minor ridicule in terms of simplicity as I am not trying to be personal. I have asked you questions which you have in my opinion side stepped/not answered.
If you based your point of view on his performance in his role as the CotE then yes, it is more merit based. Again, to reiterate, I do not support anyone who is guilty of tax avoidance, I merely suggested in an earlier post that he would be seen as a favourite because of his handling of Coronavirus. I donât think he got everything right but I feel he tried to support people/businesses.
Again, I still await your opinion on whom should be the next PM 
The bar should not be so low, that we only consider it a problem if its illegal.
A few months back, I went to a restaurant where they have no prices and have a system of paying what you think the meal is worth. Its thriving because most people have a moral compass. I could be a dick and just pay $1 but vast majority of people enter the spirit it was intended.
Likewise its fairly normal for food stands in NZ. If people grow produce or have spare food they put it at this stands. People just take what they need. There is a social responsibility. Those in power (and have the most) should not look at situations with the view of how can they exploit it to their own benefit.
The spirit of laws and social responsibility do matter. Its quite frankly shocking how many MPs and their family members claim non-dom status. With Zahawi, Javid and Rishi Sunak (three Chancellors in a row implicated) its appalling. Remember these gets set the standards and rules. Who gets taxed.
Non-dom status is quite simple. Its intended for those who donât see the UK as their permanent home. If Your saying on tax forms you or your family are not committed to the UK how on earth can you be an MP?
Just look at the moral hand-wringing of those same people with Jimmy Carr.
8 Likes
I agree with a lot of what you say.
My issue is, is that many of you see me as defending the current government. Far from it, I like you I get taxed - it is above the national average - so yeah I am not happy about it. My taxes, like yours have been mismanaged by different Governments for numerous of years and at times spent on people who donât deserve my/our money but I accept it.
Again, it was not Sunak who manipulated the Tax system it was wife and from my understanding on laws very much outdated. My girlfriend has 1 job, do you think I know how much she earns and what her Tax entitlement is? NO!! So how is he supposed to know the ins ands out of all her businesses tax affairs??
Look, if evidence comes to light that he actively encouraged his Wife to avoid tax and the ways of doing so, I would support your point of view. However, there is no evidence to support this.
I appreciate you attaching the twitter info. I havenât read it because what it says wouldnât surprise me. If it was indeed factual.
I hope that at no point I have come across as condescending or insulting. Hopefully, the future, under whatever government, brings us all fortune
1 Like
1 Like
The loophole that Sunak and his wife were exploiting was attempted to be closed off by Osborne, the previous Tory Chancellor. Sunak did not carry that work forward.
Wonder why?
Worth also noting I would expect someone to know if their wife has non Dom status, especially since he was also on a green card for some time.
He knew what was going on.
5 Likes
Yep Sunak is an absolute cunt. And whatever happens regarding the leadership, I hope as much of his life remaining as possible is filled with pain and suffering and he experiences the misery and despair he seems to think he is entitled to inflict on others.
Notwithstanding the above, he may be the least worst option as next PM (Iâm uncertain) and if he does become PM I hope - unlikely as it may be - he can manage to avoid the worst excesses of current tory policy.
1 Like
A man whose wife owns a company with hundreds of millions invested into the Russian economy is a massive security risk at this moment. I canât imagine he would be able to get high level security clearance right now. He shouldnât even be eligible to run.
7 Likes
No, you donât.
âEat out to help outâ resulted in thousands of deaths, and probably is the biggest single reason we ended up in a second lockdown.
5 Likes
Weâre not talking about his girlfriend. Weâre talking about his wife, and the mother of his children. And YES. As Chancellor and prospective party leader, his wifeâs tax affairs are a matter of public interest.
3 Likes
He was slow in offering that support, having to be pushed into doing so and it clearly didnt go far enough ( for example not enough support for self employed and sick pay should have been increased, furlough was arguably ended too soon). So iâm not willing to give him that much credit for it. Then add things like the eat out to help out stuff that @Mascot mentionsâŚ
2 Likes
Millions who were furloughed would disagree. Hundreds of thousands of small business owners would also disagree.
Disagree. If you could prove your self employed income for a period, you could claim. If you couldnât, you probably were dodging the tax system. If youâd just set up, you were fucked, that was a mistake. Furlough lasted way too long, should have ended when all restrictions did.
If only Sunakâs taxation diligence extended to his own friends and family.
2 Likes