Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by J_D, Mar 2, 2010.
The heart of the site is the forum area, including:
Classic New Labour attack.
Alan Johnson, ex Communist and Marxist is attacking Ashcroft over his Patriotism, because he is a non-dom. Ashcroft, as many of you will know, is a major supporter of the armed forces and gives (very) generously to military charities. Alan Johnson is a member of the Labour party (nuff said really).
Peter Mandelson, Labour Peer wants a lords investigation into his financial background. Lord Mandelson, a man so inept at financial fiddling that he has had to resign not once, but twice from the government.
Let's leave out Lord Paul and Cohen (and others)
No where has any Labour politican or their lackeys in the press (yes, you Nick Robinson) have stated that what Ashcrof has done is illegal or worthy of a HMRC investigation - because they know that HMRC are more than happy with the financial arrangements of Ashcroft.
If you pay tax here and you are eligible to vote then what is the problem?
As far as I am concern it is the moral duty of every taxpayer to pay the least amount of tax they are legally able to.
Hypocracy knows no limits.
Mandelson, one of the most corrupt men to weedle his way into public office wants another Lord investigated for dodgey doings.....
We really ought to hang a few to teach them all a lesson.
Right, two quick questions from someone who knows very very little about UK politics.
i) If Lord Johnson earns some/all of his money abroad, why should he pay tax on it in the UK? Does he pay tax on it in whichever country he earns it?
ii) Is the attack by Labour over the fact that he's not paying UK tax, or the fact that he's a 'non-dom'?
Again, I know they're Johnny Aged 5 questions, but the stories I've read assume a base level of political knowledge which I don't have.
Any help appreciated
Political posturing for points (in the lead up to the general election), no more. Mandleson knows quite well that there would be no investigation which would have to include funding of all parties (including Labour) by non-doms. No doubt there would be awkward questions to answer about Lord Paul, Sir Regggie Cohen and Lakshmi Mittal, and the Government wouldn't want that now, would it?
Basically if you work out of the UK and the country you work in has a reciprocal tax arrangement with the UK, you pay tax in that country and not in the UK. You can only return to the UK a max of 90 days a year. Not sure how donations work, but I guess he can spend his money as he likes. Wasn't Mittal a big lender to the Labour Party at one time, and I'm fairly sure he is non-dom. You have to watch you don't loose voting rights by being out of the country, and I think only voters can contribute to political parties.
Probably mostly attacked as an opportune target pre-election.
Mandelscum trying to put Michael Ashcroft down, Amazing one is a lying, thieving, cringing, Rio bumming commie shite, the other a self made man for Belize, I know which one I would trust,well almost
ZANU NL does their hypocrisy know no-bounds.
He pays tax on what he earns in the UK, the clue is in the words "what he earns in the UK".
Just like Lord Paul, Mittal and Geoffrey Robinson, ho thats right Mandelbum financial backer.
I would love the lot of them to fcuk off back under the rock from whence they came.
Question, why are the Tories not making more noise about this, come on CMD grow a pair and start shouting.
Ashcroft is UK Tax resident but non domiciled, which essentially means that he already pays tax on all his UK sourced earnings. These are not small!
In common with all other non-doms, he does not pay tax though on non UK income and gains as long as he does not remit these to the UK. So for a non Brit. coming to work here it is a very good deal and there for a reason: keep your non Uk source wonga outside the UK and you do not suffer tax.
Dangerous move by Labour though. Consider the following, all of whom are (allegedly) non doms:
â¢ Lord Paul â Â£69,250 in donations to Labour, including Â£45,000 to Gordon Brownâs leadership campaign.
â¢ Lakshmi Mittal - Â£4.125 million in donations to Labour.
â¢ Sir Ronald Cohen - Â£2.55 million in donations to Labour.
â¢ Sir Christopher Ondaatje - Â£1.7 million in donations to Labour.
â¢ Sir Gulam Noon - Â£532,826 in donations to Labour.
â¢ William Bollinger - Â£510,725 in donations to Labour.
â¢ Mahmoud Khayami - Â£985,000 in donations to Labour including Â£5,000 to Hazel Blearsâ deputy leadership campaign.
â¢ Dr David Potter - Â£90,000 in a donation to Labour.
Perhaps Lord Mandleson will welcome an inquiry into his close contacts with Russian oligarchs?
I'm with you on this one Jagman. Lord Mindyerbum is a person who the present Mrs Chance described last night when she saw him on the news as "I wouldn't trust him one inch". This could get her into trouble as we should really be speaking in centimetres but as she pointed out, an inch is longer than a centimetre!
Hanging's too good for the likes of him. Give him and his fat cat cronies in Westminster a ticket on the next plane to A'stan and make men of them!
It's really the old clash between tax evasion (bad accountant, and illegal) and tax avoidance (Good accountant, and legal.)
As the old quote goes:
âNo man in this country is under the least obligation, moral or otherwise, so as to arrange his legal relations to his business or to his property as to enable the Inland Revenue to put the largest possible shovel into his
storeâ (Lord Clyde in Ayrshire Pullman Motor Services & Ritchie v CIR, 1929, 14 TC 754).
If Lord A has so arranged his affairs, that is totally legal. He probably pays a firm of very expensive accountants and lawyers roughly what he avoids in taxes.
If Lord M wants to allow the Men from the Ministry free rein to stampede all over someones else's tax arrangements for political points, he is in serious danger of making a rod for his own back. There are many people on all sides of the political world who have 'creative' tax arrangements, and they won't thank him for opening this can of worms.
People who live in glass houses and all that...
Don't know if people heard the article this morning on R4 about this. The paperwork that the Lord's would require to review are held by Mandy's own Cabinet Office.
Means he already has the documentation to carry out a review if he wanted! I bet he has seen the papers involved and is just waiting for the FOI request from one of the Daily's to free it up.
Means all this was was a way to show up the Lords as an organisation that seems to want to protect their own and the well meaning Mandy (contriteful and sorry I'm sure) with another opportunity to play silly buggers.
Stinks of his normal crafty backstabbing approach.
He will make this one run
The Conservatives can't sit on this one. They need to go on the offensive about the names given by another poster earlier.
Got to hand it to Labour. they are playing the dirty game far better than the Tories at the mo.
Separate names with a comma.