Jump to content

Take A Deep Breath Before Reading.


D'Artagnan

Recommended Posts

On a similar note but in a far grander scale.

http://taxjustice.blogspot.de/2013/04/irish-tax-haven-creator-rings-lse-bell.html

Google had over £3 billion in sales in the UK and paid only £20 million in tax. All thanks to a scheme called "The Double irish" created by Dermot Desmond. See above

http://metro.co.uk/2015/10/12/heres-why-its-legal-for-facebook-to-pay-less-than-5000-in-british-tax-5434871/

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ffs bears den?

Personal supply companies are used by many more than the BBC and they do not prevent / avoid tax just shift the responsibility - this has more to do with the current demonisation of the BBC ( politics) and it's certainly not a Bears Den subject!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ffs bears den?

Personal supply companies are used by many more than the BBC and they do not prevent / avoid tax just shift the responsibility - this has more to do with the current demonisation of the BBC ( politics) and it's certainly not a Bears Den subject!

Explain how they don't reduce the tax due

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ffs bears den?

Personal supply companies are used by many more than the BBC and they do not prevent / avoid tax just shift the responsibility - this has more to do with the current demonisation of the BBC ( politics) and it's certainly not a Bears Den subject!

Widespread accross the oil and gas, eng & construction and commercial sectors. In oil and gas it accounts for around 60% of all workers. Companies in the sectors have been put through the wringer on this one and rules of engagement agreed with HMRC over 15 years ago. My company uses this practice as do our competitors, it being common place.

Tax planning type providers and one man band limited companies are used. They firstly reduce the overhead of the host company, but they can and do reduce the personal tax liability, but do so legally. If the person fails to pay any taxes due via these vehicles, there is precedence where HMRC can pursue the ulitimate customer in being the host company, where the person is deemed to be an employee if he/she is working there full time and the host company made responsible for the personal tax liability.

The intermediary provider are normally held under contract to check that all taxes have paid to date by way of annual returns, vat reg. etc However, in tax case law, the intermediary hold no liability as this cannot be deemed to be the persons place work. As in say the person using a ltd company, he can minimise taxible PAYE earnings, via posting profit at a 20% corporation tax rate and so pn.

The MP concerned, probably has just never heard of the practice and knows fuck all about tax law, but the point made is about the BBC setting an example in being funded by the public purse. I get that, but they are doing nowt illegal themselves, but the persons in receipt/under contract may indeed be tax avoiding or even tax evading. In the private sector that is a risk that it taken and ultimately the host companies take the liability. In the public sector, that maybe a risk too far and appear an unacceptable practice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Widespread accross the oil and gas, eng & construction and commercial sectors. In oil and gas it accounts for around 60% of all workers. Companies in the sectors have been put through the wringer on this one and rules of engagement agreed with HMRC over 15 years ago. My company uses this practice as do our competitors, it being common place.

Tax planning type providers and one man band limited companies are used. They firstly reduce the overhead of the host company, but they can and do reduce the personal tax liability, but do so legally. If the person fails to pay any taxes due via these vehicles, there is precedence where HMRC can pursue the ulitimate customer in being the host company, where the person is deemed to be an employee if he/she is working there full time and the host company made responsible for the personal tax liability.

The intermediary provider are normally held under contract to check that all taxes have paid to date by way of annual returns, vat reg. etc However, in tax case law, the intermediary hold no liability as this cannot be deemed to be the persons place work. As in say the person using a ltd company, he can minimise taxible PAYE earnings, via posting profit at a 20% corporation tax rate and so pn.

The MP concerned, probably has just never heard of the practice and knows fuck all about tax law, but the point made is about the BBC setting an example in being funded by the public purse. I get that, but they are doing nowt illegal themselves, but the persons in receipt/under contract may indeed be tax avoiding or even tax evading. In the private sector that is a risk that it taken and ultimately the host companies take the liability. In the public sector, that maybe a risk too far and appear an unacceptable practice.

I think the main issue is that the BBC can reduce it's NI contributions this way and publicly funded organizations should not be using this type of tax avoidance scheme.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ffs bears den?

Personal supply companies are used by many more than the BBC and they do not prevent / avoid tax just shift the responsibility - this has more to do with the current demonisation of the BBC ( politics) and it's certainly not a Bears Den subject!

They avoid paying employers NIC,. It says so in the article. The employee pays himself a dividend thus avoiding employees NIC and reduces tax liability.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you use that as the basis for a blog to tear them apart as they deserve to be shown up for what they are and i firmly believe you're good self is the man to do it

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with tax avoidance schemes is the Tories chums will be baw deep in them so really not much chance of the Government actually sorting the problem as it will hit their donations. And if they do I can imagine a new loophole will become available.

It hypocritical to say the least.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It always seems that those who should loudest have the most to hide. Will not hold my breath for sanctions against the bbc and you can hear them saying "ah,but aye,eh,naw"
Seems like talking about Saville and his type were not the only subject they don't want to speak about. Never could stand hypocrites.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...