Greedy, grabbing, immoral, unethical, Tory GIT!!!

Lord Ashcroft has continued to avoid millions of pounds of tax despite promising to become a full UK taxpayer.

The Conservative peer transferred ownership of his main UK company, the Impellam Group, to a trust for the benefit of his children, Panorama has found.

Lord Ashcroft, who is set to resign as deputy chairman of the Conservative Party, transferred his £17m stake in Impellam on 5 April.

The next day, on 6 April, a new law forced people sitting in the House of Lords to pay tax on their worldwide income and assets.

Tax lawyer Richard Frimston told Panorama that Lord Ashcroft would have faced a hefty inheritance tax bill under the new legislation if he had made the change one day later.

"If that had been done on the following day, assets worth say £17m going into trust would have been subject to tax at 20%, which would have created an immediate inheritance tax charge of something in the region of £3.4m.

"So that was avoided by doing it on 5 April as opposed to waiting until 6 April."

As much a SCUM as a Chav claiming benefit because they don't fancy work!!

 

 

Politician in "not a f**king idiot" shocker!!

 

Yes, just sounds like he made a sound financial judgement based upon the upcoming law change.

Come on Pete, you can't tell me you wouldn't do the same in the situation, e.g. I've got £50k in some sort of savings account, leave it there until April 6th and pay 20% tax on it or move it to another account and pay no tax. Of course you would move it

 

Whilst I agree that taxing the estate is effectively taxing the money that has already paid tax, who person really suffers is the recipient, but they have received in come that they would not have had really. I suppose the taxation on that basis it not really unfair.

What I do find unpleasant about IHT is that it's valued on the estate before it's paid out. What would seem fairer would to only trigger IHT if a single person received more than the limit for IHT, not the estate as a whole.

Geezer

 

Indeed, and there will no doubt be a rush to buy things this before the VAT change in Jan. Are these people going to be robbing the country, or just operating within the law to save themselves some money?

 

And so what?
Is there some law in this country that says you have to pay more tax than the law says you have to?
You want to get a grip fella.

 

100% agree

 

I'm quite glad we have someone like this in Parliament. Better to have people with their own mind than some lefty declaring they are willing to give their left ******** to please the PC Plonkers

 

Sounds like common sense to me

 

tax avoidance is perfect legal, what do you think the duty free shop is at the airport?

 

I've never understood why one should be asked to pay tax in UK for work outside UK in the first place?

dl

 

Well, I didn't expect much support for my stance on the Tory loving SN - but, thought that I would have agreement that this Tax avoidance stinks!

OK, then, the local Chav who is 'entitled' to £50,000 a year for his 5 kids, from 5 different women is also acting within the rules and system ....... so, I want to hear not one bleet about it being unfair from you lot posting above!

 

.
No doubt the chav is labour scum

 

I just don't understand why you think anyone should want to pay more tax than the law says they have to.
What this has to do with people claiming benefits is completely beyond my understanding.
Please don't feel obliged to try and enlighten me. I fear the connection between the two is as tenuous as your grip on reality.

 

Agreed. I would have done the same.

 

Methinks he's lost this one

 

obviously nothing -- as has been pointed out both perfectly legal

what pslewis point is - if I understand him, is that the benefit claimant seems to attract quite a lot of critics on this forum whereas tax dodgers (albiet legal ones) do not.

I don't know the figures but i suspect the amount "lost" to Tax avoidance/evasion (for the sake of the arguement I make no distinction) amounts to many billions where as the amount lost to benefit fraud is counted in the 100's of millions - i.e. pretty small fry in the grand scheme of things

but I am sure pslewis will be along to clear up any confusion

 

I don't see what the point you're making pete, are you saying you wouldn't the same?

 

Have you ever used the system to avoid tax Pete, or would you if you had the chance? Wouldn't you say that it is the fault of those who made up that system for losing that tax money? Did NL institute that system? Perhap's you coud enlighten us-I have to say that I don't know.

Rich people seem to be well ahead of the game in this respect.

Les

 

I see Panorama has pulled their documentary after they received "new" information.

 

Rich people ( of whatever polotical persuasion ) tend to be clever (not always obviously) and clever people will do what they can to reduce their outgoings,


its not rocket science

Which of course is why lewis doesnt understand of course lol

 

Yes thats the real way its done of course.

Les

 

For the sake of posting an opinion on this thread - that is quite some qualification.
I think it would be fair to comment that someone who is not paying more tax than they have to, is not putting more into the system than they have to.
Someone who is on benefits is taking out of the system.
I don't see how the two may be considered in any way the same, but for the sake of argument - I accept that there are some who do.
What would really interest me would be to know who among us pays more tax than they have to - because this is what some people think Mr Ashcroft should be doing.
Perhaps there are a few on here who put in a cheque for couple of extra K when it is tax time or perhaps refuse to cash in their rebates and so on.
Or perhaps not - words are so much cheaper than deeds.

 

thank you for being so understanding

 

And thank you for being so sincere.

 

+1

mb