Boris Becker jailed for trying to hide assets following bankrupcy

So, Boris Becker is jailed for hiding assets. Turns out it's Thatcher's fault. Who would have thought it?

Lloyd Moore said

So, Boris Becker is jailed for hiding assets. Turns out it's Thatcher's fault. Who would have thought it?

No. You misread me on purpose. :) I am saying different money crimes involving similar amounts of money are treated differently depending on who is committing them. Rich people are treated with kid gloves. Becker is no longer rich so he is treated like an ordinary person. But we all know that, UK law is rich man's law, it is how the Russian oligarchs could shut people up about laundering money until the government was embarrassed by the Ukraine invasion.

However, Thatcher did change HMRC's attitude to tax avoidance, that is a fact and no government since has told HMRC to impose the law, a law which really only effects rich people.

Edited by K-arl

K-arl said

Carlos Tax avoidance was a crime in the 70s, prople went to prison for it. The Tories under Thatcher made it legimate. It is still technically a crime but the HMRC don’t act Upon it.

Just so we know what we are talking about, avoidance is not using legal forms of tax efficiency but using tax law in a way it wasn’t intended. The first accountants to do this were the accountats of the Beatles and they ended up in prison. This is why the Stones ended up im France in tax exile because was the only way to avoid tax.

Osborne in the 10s then effectively gave tax evaders amnesties and sweetheart deals claiming HMRC would get more money that way. Other European countries prosecute and imprison tax evaders, the UK treats it as less than a parking fine. It’s like complimenting thieves on their thievery.

An ordinary person diddling the state of a few hundred quid would have their faces hit the back wall of a prison cell. Rob the state of millions and you are a hero. It’s no wonder this government flaunts its corruption and seems rather proud of it.

Edited by K-arl

Sorry but you are completely wrong.  I am legally trained (so in this case IAAL!) and am a Chartered Accountant.  Tax AVOIDANCE has never, repeat never, been a criminal offence.  As I have already said TAX EVASION is the criminal act, always has been always will be.

Successive governments….not just the Tories (though your obvious prejudices might think wrongly differently) but Labour as well have changed the tax rules over years allowing or preventing avoidance (ie legal) schemes and making or stopping certain others being regarded as evasion (ie illegal).  This is the LAW….and I have spent my career dealing with it.

If you are talking about morality then that is different.  I may agree with you that certain perfectly legal avoidance schemes should be made illegal, but while the law is as it is they are not.  You may believe that certain illegal evasion schemes should be punished more severely, and I might agree with you but the law is the law.

Anyway why do you care, you live in Netherlands, where I’m sure have their fair share of tax avoiders and evaders but in different ways?  Maybe you should focus on your governments foibles…..eh?

Edited by Carlos

Carlos said

K-arl said

Carlos Tax avoidance was a crime in the 70s, prople went to prison for it. The Tories under Thatcher made it legimate. It is still technically a crime but the HMRC don’t act Upon it.

Just so we know what we are talking about, avoidance is not using legal forms of tax efficiency but using tax law in a way it wasn’t intended. The first accountants to do this were the accountats of the Beatles and they ended up in prison. This is why the Stones ended up im France in tax exile because was the only way to avoid tax.

Osborne in the 10s then effectively gave tax evaders amnesties and sweetheart deals claiming HMRC would get more money that way. Other European countries prosecute and imprison tax evaders, the UK treats it as less than a parking fine. It’s like complimenting thieves on their thievery.

An ordinary person diddling the state of a few hundred quid would have their faces hit the back wall of a prison cell. Rob the state of millions and you are a hero. It’s no wonder this government flaunts its corruption and seems rather proud of it.

Edited by K-arl

Sorry but you are completely wrong.  I am legally trained (so in this case IAAL!) and am a Chartered Accountant.  Tax AVOIDANCE has never, repeat never, been a criminal offence.  As I have already said TAX EVASION is the criminal act, always has been always will be.

Successive governments….not just the Tories (though your obvious prejudices might think wrongly differently) but Labour as well have changed the tax rules over years allowing or preventing avoidance (ie legal) schemes and making or stopping certain others being regarded as evasion (ie illegal).  This is the LAW….and I have spent my career dealing with it.

If you are talking about morality then that is different.  I may agree with you that certain perfectly legal avoidance schemes should be made illegal, but while the law is as it is they are not.  You may believe that certain illegal evasion schemes should be punished more severely, and I might agree with you but the law is the law.

Anyway why do you care, you live in Netherlands, where I’m sure have their fair share of tax avoiders and evaders but in different ways?  Maybe you should focus on your governments foibles…..eh?

Edited by Carlos

Most of the changes regarding offshore structuring for tax planning, asset protection and what is regarded as money laundering have been planned and implemented by OECD. There was a time I could have bearer share and total nominee incorporated structures.....that's has over the past 25yrs diminished compared to some of the creative structuring that used to be available. Goodness knows what governments are going to do once all planned reforms take effect and they've pissed the revenue up the wall.

indemnity . I agree. In the 80s and 90s I worked in Compliance for company that had an Offshore bank.  In the beginning individuals would pitch up with suitcases full of cash - of all denominations and currencies - and our bank would hoover it up.  By the end of my time it was difficult for even the most legitimate of enterprises to get deposits in without numerous hoops to jump through. The change was astounding!

It does piss me off though that we were whiter than white in the 90s and found it relatively easy to spot ‘wrong uns’ when a behemoth like HSBC or Deutsche Bank ‘couldn’t’ do it in the noughties when the information available to them was so much greater and easier to obtain.   It seems ‘one rule for the big uns and another for the small uns will forever apply.  And as for appropriate penalties for egregious breaches….don’t make me laugh.

Edited by Carlos

Carlos said

K-arl said

Carlos Tax avoidance was a crime in the 70s, prople went to prison for it. The Tories under Thatcher made it legimate. It is still technically a crime but the HMRC don’t act Upon it.

Just so we know what we are talking about, avoidance is not using legal forms of tax efficiency but using tax law in a way it wasn’t intended. The first accountants to do this were the accountats of the Beatles and they ended up in prison. This is why the Stones ended up im France in tax exile because was the only way to avoid tax.

Osborne in the 10s then effectively gave tax evaders amnesties and sweetheart deals claiming HMRC would get more money that way. Other European countries prosecute and imprison tax evaders, the UK treats it as less than a parking fine. It’s like complimenting thieves on their thievery.

An ordinary person diddling the state of a few hundred quid would have their faces hit the back wall of a prison cell. Rob the state of millions and you are a hero. It’s no wonder this government flaunts its corruption and seems rather proud of it.

Edited by K-arl

Sorry but you are completely wrong.  I am legally trained (so in this case IAAL!) and am a Chartered Accountant.  Tax AVOIDANCE has never, repeat never, been a criminal offence.  As I have already said TAX EVASION is the criminal act, always has been always will be.

Successive governments….not just the Tories (though your obvious prejudices might think wrongly differently) but Labour as well have changed the tax rules over years allowing or preventing avoidance (ie legal) schemes and making or stopping certain others being regarded as evasion (ie illegal).  This is the LAW….and I have spent my career dealing with it.

If you are talking about morality then that is different.  I may agree with you that certain perfectly legal avoidance schemes should be made illegal, but while the law is as it is they are not.  You may believe that certain illegal evasion schemes should be punished more severely, and I might agree with you but the law is the law.

Anyway why do you care, you live in Netherlands, where I’m sure have their fair share of tax avoiders and evaders but in different ways?  Maybe you should focus on your governments foibles…..eh?

Edited by Carlos

I am not wrong. My wife was a personal wealth accountant at E&Y in the City of London for part of her 20 year employment and she worked in a team for seriously rich of the time. But we can be pedantic about it, various forms of tax avoidance breaks various laws, all of which could, if HMRC desired, end up in prosecutions. Since the 80s there has been a convention that many forms of tax avoidance won't be pursued. However, when Arthur Andersen went down all the large accountant companies were in fear because of there but for the grace of good. They expected the government to start imposing laws that were by convention ignored. 

I am sure the courts didn't send accountants to prison in the 70s for none tax avoidance.

Edited by K-arl

K-arl said

Carlos said

K-arl said

Carlos Tax avoidance was a crime in the 70s, prople went to prison for it. The Tories under Thatcher made it legimate. It is still technically a crime but the HMRC don’t act Upon it.

Just so we know what we are talking about, avoidance is not using legal forms of tax efficiency but using tax law in a way it wasn’t intended. The first accountants to do this were the accountats of the Beatles and they ended up in prison. This is why the Stones ended up im France in tax exile because was the only way to avoid tax.

Osborne in the 10s then effectively gave tax evaders amnesties and sweetheart deals claiming HMRC would get more money that way. Other European countries prosecute and imprison tax evaders, the UK treats it as less than a parking fine. It’s like complimenting thieves on their thievery.

An ordinary person diddling the state of a few hundred quid would have their faces hit the back wall of a prison cell. Rob the state of millions and you are a hero. It’s no wonder this government flaunts its corruption and seems rather proud of it.

Edited by K-arl

Sorry but you are completely wrong.  I am legally trained (so in this case IAAL!) and am a Chartered Accountant.  Tax AVOIDANCE has never, repeat never, been a criminal offence.  As I have already said TAX EVASION is the criminal act, always has been always will be.

Successive governments….not just the Tories (though your obvious prejudices might think wrongly differently) but Labour as well have changed the tax rules over years allowing or preventing avoidance (ie legal) schemes and making or stopping certain others being regarded as evasion (ie illegal).  This is the LAW….and I have spent my career dealing with it.

If you are talking about morality then that is different.  I may agree with you that certain perfectly legal avoidance schemes should be made illegal, but while the law is as it is they are not.  You may believe that certain illegal evasion schemes should be punished more severely, and I might agree with you but the law is the law.

Anyway why do you care, you live in Netherlands, where I’m sure have their fair share of tax avoiders and evaders but in different ways?  Maybe you should focus on your governments foibles…..eh?

Edited by Carlos

I am not wrong. My wife was a personal wealth accountant at E&Y in the City of London for part of her 20 year employment and she worked in a team for seriously rich of the time. But we can be pedantic about it, various forms of tax avoidance breaks various laws, all of which could, if HMRC desired, end up in prosecutions. Since the 80s there has been a convention that many forms of tax avoidance won't be pursued. However, when Arthur Andersen went down all the large accountant companies were in fear because of there but for the grace of good. They expected the government to start imposing laws that were by convention ignored. 

I am sure the courts didn't send accountants to prison in the 70s for none tax avoidance.

Edited by K-arl

You really do need to read more carefully.

The aamout of nosense in this post that appears to be down to sloppy readin (or sloppy understanding?)is staggering.

" various forms of tax avoidance breaks various laws, " NO. If it is AVOIDANCE IT IS LAWFUL. IF IT IS UNLAWFUL IT IS EVASION.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I do broadly agree that Thatcher has a lot to answer for, her "Greed is good" attitude was an attack on decency but she is certainly not alone in tweaking the law to suit the rich.

Jerome Razoir said

K-arl said

Carlos said

K-arl said

Carlos Tax avoidance was a crime in the 70s, prople went to prison for it. The Tories under Thatcher made it legimate. It is still technically a crime but the HMRC don’t act Upon it.

Just so we know what we are talking about, avoidance is not using legal forms of tax efficiency but using tax law in a way it wasn’t intended. The first accountants to do this were the accountats of the Beatles and they ended up in prison. This is why the Stones ended up im France in tax exile because was the only way to avoid tax.

Osborne in the 10s then effectively gave tax evaders amnesties and sweetheart deals claiming HMRC would get more money that way. Other European countries prosecute and imprison tax evaders, the UK treats it as less than a parking fine. It’s like complimenting thieves on their thievery.

An ordinary person diddling the state of a few hundred quid would have their faces hit the back wall of a prison cell. Rob the state of millions and you are a hero. It’s no wonder this government flaunts its corruption and seems rather proud of it.

Edited by K-arl

Sorry but you are completely wrong.  I am legally trained (so in this case IAAL!) and am a Chartered Accountant.  Tax AVOIDANCE has never, repeat never, been a criminal offence.  As I have already said TAX EVASION is the criminal act, always has been always will be.

Successive governments….not just the Tories (though your obvious prejudices might think wrongly differently) but Labour as well have changed the tax rules over years allowing or preventing avoidance (ie legal) schemes and making or stopping certain others being regarded as evasion (ie illegal).  This is the LAW….and I have spent my career dealing with it.

If you are talking about morality then that is different.  I may agree with you that certain perfectly legal avoidance schemes should be made illegal, but while the law is as it is they are not.  You may believe that certain illegal evasion schemes should be punished more severely, and I might agree with you but the law is the law.

Anyway why do you care, you live in Netherlands, where I’m sure have their fair share of tax avoiders and evaders but in different ways?  Maybe you should focus on your governments foibles…..eh?

Edited by Carlos

I am not wrong. My wife was a personal wealth accountant at E&Y in the City of London for part of her 20 year employment and she worked in a team for seriously rich of the time. But we can be pedantic about it, various forms of tax avoidance breaks various laws, all of which could, if HMRC desired, end up in prosecutions. Since the 80s there has been a convention that many forms of tax avoidance won't be pursued. However, when Arthur Andersen went down all the large accountant companies were in fear because of there but for the grace of good. They expected the government to start imposing laws that were by convention ignored. 

I am sure the courts didn't send accountants to prison in the 70s for none tax avoidance.

Edited by K-arl

You really do need to read more carefully.

The aamout of nosense in this post that appears to be down to sloppy readin (or sloppy understanding?)is staggering.

" various forms of tax avoidance breaks various laws, " NO. If it is AVOIDANCE IT IS LAWFUL. IF IT IS UNLAWFUL IT IS EVASION.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I do broadly agree that Thatcher has a lot to answer for, her "Greed is good" attitude was an attack on decency but she is certainly not alone in tweaking the law to suit the rich.

Well, yes, true. Tax avoidance is multifarious.  Government since Osborne was chancellor gives out amnesties, where other countries give out prison sentences. But it's not for nothing the UK protects 19 tax havens, which I suspect the threats emanating from Brussels was one of the main reasons behind Brexit. 

Edited by K-arl

K-arl said

No. You misread me on purpose. :) I am saying different money crimes involving similar amounts of money are treated differently depending on who is committing them. Rich people are treated with kid gloves. Becker is no longer rich so he is treated like an ordinary person. But we all know that, UK law is rich man's law, it is how the Russian oligarchs could shut people up about laundering money until the government was embarrassed by the Ukraine invasion.

However, Thatcher did change HMRC's attitude to tax avoidance, that is a fact and no government since has told HMRC to impose the law, a law which really only effects rich people.

 

 

Edited by K-arl

Why the references to tax avoidance? Becker tried to steal money from his creditors not the government. None of this has anything to do with tax avoidance/evasion, nor your claim that HMRC looks after the rich. 

heard he asked the court clerk  how long his sentence was in months the reply " thirty love " 

Peanuts said

heard he asked the court clerk  how long his sentence was in months the reply " thirty love " 

;-)  

Jerome Razoir Thanking you for attempting to clarify the point I was trying to make to K-arl .  In technical accounting terminology, as you say, avoidance is always an option within the law.  For example, A company I worked for asked me to write a Board paper on ‘what tax should we pay’ and their decision was only to use those straightforward avoidance rules which made sense within the business processes we used.  That is, they eschewed using any complex or ‘artificial’ avoidance techniques which, though legal, made no business sense.

Again as you pointed out supposed ‘avoidance’ schemes which turn out to be illegal (some made so retrospectively, which I’m not happy about in principle) are by definition ‘evasion’….a subject to criminal prosecution.

He also mentioned the Stones etc leaving the country ‘exiled on Main Street’ (IIRC) but I think he will find that this was there way of fleeing a 95% ‘supertax’ regime (introduced under Labour) which gave rise to the whole ‘avoidance industry’ of the 60s, 70s and early 80s.  I remember Thatcher reducing the top level to 40% in the late 80s (IIRC) and my wife and I agreeing that it was a good move for us and the economy BUT ……that Thatcher would probably have been better leaving the top rate at 50 or even 60%....a more symbolic nod to the fact that higher earners should contribute more.

Jerome Razoir said

K-arl said

Carlos said

K-arl said

Carlos Tax avoidance was a crime in the 70s, prople went to prison for it. The Tories under Thatcher made it legimate. It is still technically a crime but the HMRC don’t act Upon it.

Just so we know what we are talking about, avoidance is not using legal forms of tax efficiency but using tax law in a way it wasn’t intended. The first accountants to do this were the accountats of the Beatles and they ended up in prison. This is why the Stones ended up im France in tax exile because was the only way to avoid tax.

Osborne in the 10s then effectively gave tax evaders amnesties and sweetheart deals claiming HMRC would get more money that way. Other European countries prosecute and imprison tax evaders, the UK treats it as less than a parking fine. It’s like complimenting thieves on their thievery.

An ordinary person diddling the state of a few hundred quid would have their faces hit the back wall of a prison cell. Rob the state of millions and you are a hero. It’s no wonder this government flaunts its corruption and seems rather proud of it.

Edited by K-arl

Sorry but you are completely wrong.  I am legally trained (so in this case IAAL!) and am a Chartered Accountant.  Tax AVOIDANCE has never, repeat never, been a criminal offence.  As I have already said TAX EVASION is the criminal act, always has been always will be.

Successive governments….not just the Tories (though your obvious prejudices might think wrongly differently) but Labour as well have changed the tax rules over years allowing or preventing avoidance (ie legal) schemes and making or stopping certain others being regarded as evasion (ie illegal).  This is the LAW….and I have spent my career dealing with it.

If you are talking about morality then that is different.  I may agree with you that certain perfectly legal avoidance schemes should be made illegal, but while the law is as it is they are not.  You may believe that certain illegal evasion schemes should be punished more severely, and I might agree with you but the law is the law.

Anyway why do you care, you live in Netherlands, where I’m sure have their fair share of tax avoiders and evaders but in different ways?  Maybe you should focus on your governments foibles…..eh?

Edited by Carlos

I am not wrong. My wife was a personal wealth accountant at E&Y in the City of London for part of her 20 year employment and she worked in a team for seriously rich of the time. But we can be pedantic about it, various forms of tax avoidance breaks various laws, all of which could, if HMRC desired, end up in prosecutions. Since the 80s there has been a convention that many forms of tax avoidance won't be pursued. However, when Arthur Andersen went down all the large accountant companies were in fear because of there but for the grace of good. They expected the government to start imposing laws that were by convention ignored. 

I am sure the courts didn't send accountants to prison in the 70s for none tax avoidance.

Edited by K-arl

You really do need to read more carefully.

The aamout of nosense in this post that appears to be down to sloppy readin (or sloppy understanding?)is staggering.

" various forms of tax avoidance breaks various laws, " NO. If it is AVOIDANCE IT IS LAWFUL. IF IT IS UNLAWFUL IT IS EVASION.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I do broadly agree that Thatcher has a lot to answer for, her "Greed is good" attitude was an attack on decency but she is certainly not alone in tweaking the law to suit the rich.

I had to shoot off to deal family matters but this puts the point I was making succinctly.  Is tax avoidance legal.  

Let me quote. In 2013, a senior official at a Big Four accounting firm testified to the UK’s Public Accounts Committee, a government watchdog, that they would sell tax schemes, ie tax “avoidance” structures, to clients even if they thought there was only a 25 per cent chance they would survive a court challenge.

This quote is exactly what I said my wife was saying and she worked for one of the big four, E&Y to be exact and she said a lot of avoidance borders on illegal and probably is illegal. 

K-arl said

Jerome Razoir said

K-arl said

Carlos said

K-arl said

Carlos Tax avoidance was a crime in the 70s, prople went to prison for it. The Tories under Thatcher made it legimate. It is still technically a crime but the HMRC don’t act Upon it.

Just so we know what we are talking about, avoidance is not using legal forms of tax efficiency but using tax law in a way it wasn’t intended. The first accountants to do this were the accountats of the Beatles and they ended up in prison. This is why the Stones ended up im France in tax exile because was the only way to avoid tax.

Osborne in the 10s then effectively gave tax evaders amnesties and sweetheart deals claiming HMRC would get more money that way. Other European countries prosecute and imprison tax evaders, the UK treats it as less than a parking fine. It’s like complimenting thieves on their thievery.

An ordinary person diddling the state of a few hundred quid would have their faces hit the back wall of a prison cell. Rob the state of millions and you are a hero. It’s no wonder this government flaunts its corruption and seems rather proud of it.

Edited by K-arl

Sorry but you are completely wrong.  I am legally trained (so in this case IAAL!) and am a Chartered Accountant.  Tax AVOIDANCE has never, repeat never, been a criminal offence.  As I have already said TAX EVASION is the criminal act, always has been always will be.

Successive governments….not just the Tories (though your obvious prejudices might think wrongly differently) but Labour as well have changed the tax rules over years allowing or preventing avoidance (ie legal) schemes and making or stopping certain others being regarded as evasion (ie illegal).  This is the LAW….and I have spent my career dealing with it.

If you are talking about morality then that is different.  I may agree with you that certain perfectly legal avoidance schemes should be made illegal, but while the law is as it is they are not.  You may believe that certain illegal evasion schemes should be punished more severely, and I might agree with you but the law is the law.

Anyway why do you care, you live in Netherlands, where I’m sure have their fair share of tax avoiders and evaders but in different ways?  Maybe you should focus on your governments foibles…..eh?

Edited by Carlos

I am not wrong. My wife was a personal wealth accountant at E&Y in the City of London for part of her 20 year employment and she worked in a team for seriously rich of the time. But we can be pedantic about it, various forms of tax avoidance breaks various laws, all of which could, if HMRC desired, end up in prosecutions. Since the 80s there has been a convention that many forms of tax avoidance won't be pursued. However, when Arthur Andersen went down all the large accountant companies were in fear because of there but for the grace of good. They expected the government to start imposing laws that were by convention ignored. 

I am sure the courts didn't send accountants to prison in the 70s for none tax avoidance.

Edited by K-arl

You really do need to read more carefully.

The aamout of nosense in this post that appears to be down to sloppy readin (or sloppy understanding?)is staggering.

" various forms of tax avoidance breaks various laws, " NO. If it is AVOIDANCE IT IS LAWFUL. IF IT IS UNLAWFUL IT IS EVASION.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I do broadly agree that Thatcher has a lot to answer for, her "Greed is good" attitude was an attack on decency but she is certainly not alone in tweaking the law to suit the rich.

I had to shoot off to deal family matters but this puts the point I was making succinctly.  Is tax avoidance legal.  

Let me quote. In 2013, a senior official at a Big Four accounting firm testified to the UK’s Public Accounts Committee, a government watchdog, that they would sell tax schemes, ie tax “avoidance” structures, to clients even if they thought there was only a 25 per cent chance they would survive a court challenge.

This quote is exactly what I said my wife was saying and she worked for one of the big four, E&Y to be exact and she said a lot of avoidance borders on illegal and probably is illegal. 

Boy you still don’t get it do you.  You are proving my point.  (Oh, and by the way I was a Principal in a ‘big Four’ practice when they were the ‘big eight’ and so made decisions concerning just these points.)

Our tax department would create and sell avoidance schemes that in their view were completely legal, because that is what avoidance is ….COMPLETELY LEGAL.  They would however point out to clients that this was our interpretation only and that the Revenue might take a completely different view.  They would also point out that should that be the case there would be a Revenue challenge which we would fight.  If we win the challenge the avoidance scheme stays exactly what it is….a tax avoidance scheme and COMPLETELY LEGAL.  If we lose the client must be clear that the scheme ceases immediately to be tax avoidance and becomes TAX EVASION as the scheme is now ILLEGAL.

There is no such thing as an illegal tax avoidance scheme.  If any scheme which started out as an attempt at avoidance is found to be illegal it is tax evasion ….QED.

Carlos said

K-arl said

Jerome Razoir said

K-arl said

Carlos said

K-arl said

Carlos Tax avoidance was a crime in the 70s, prople went to prison for it. The Tories under Thatcher made it legimate. It is still technically a crime but the HMRC don’t act Upon it.

Just so we know what we are talking about, avoidance is not using legal forms of tax efficiency but using tax law in a way it wasn’t intended. The first accountants to do this were the accountats of the Beatles and they ended up in prison. This is why the Stones ended up im France in tax exile because was the only way to avoid tax.

Osborne in the 10s then effectively gave tax evaders amnesties and sweetheart deals claiming HMRC would get more money that way. Other European countries prosecute and imprison tax evaders, the UK treats it as less than a parking fine. It’s like complimenting thieves on their thievery.

An ordinary person diddling the state of a few hundred quid would have their faces hit the back wall of a prison cell. Rob the state of millions and you are a hero. It’s no wonder this government flaunts its corruption and seems rather proud of it.

Edited by K-arl

Sorry but you are completely wrong.  I am legally trained (so in this case IAAL!) and am a Chartered Accountant.  Tax AVOIDANCE has never, repeat never, been a criminal offence.  As I have already said TAX EVASION is the criminal act, always has been always will be.

Successive governments….not just the Tories (though your obvious prejudices might think wrongly differently) but Labour as well have changed the tax rules over years allowing or preventing avoidance (ie legal) schemes and making or stopping certain others being regarded as evasion (ie illegal).  This is the LAW….and I have spent my career dealing with it.

If you are talking about morality then that is different.  I may agree with you that certain perfectly legal avoidance schemes should be made illegal, but while the law is as it is they are not.  You may believe that certain illegal evasion schemes should be punished more severely, and I might agree with you but the law is the law.

Anyway why do you care, you live in Netherlands, where I’m sure have their fair share of tax avoiders and evaders but in different ways?  Maybe you should focus on your governments foibles…..eh?

Edited by Carlos

I am not wrong. My wife was a personal wealth accountant at E&Y in the City of London for part of her 20 year employment and she worked in a team for seriously rich of the time. But we can be pedantic about it, various forms of tax avoidance breaks various laws, all of which could, if HMRC desired, end up in prosecutions. Since the 80s there has been a convention that many forms of tax avoidance won't be pursued. However, when Arthur Andersen went down all the large accountant companies were in fear because of there but for the grace of good. They expected the government to start imposing laws that were by convention ignored. 

I am sure the courts didn't send accountants to prison in the 70s for none tax avoidance.

Edited by K-arl

You really do need to read more carefully.

The aamout of nosense in this post that appears to be down to sloppy readin (or sloppy understanding?)is staggering.

" various forms of tax avoidance breaks various laws, " NO. If it is AVOIDANCE IT IS LAWFUL. IF IT IS UNLAWFUL IT IS EVASION.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I do broadly agree that Thatcher has a lot to answer for, her "Greed is good" attitude was an attack on decency but she is certainly not alone in tweaking the law to suit the rich.

I had to shoot off to deal family matters but this puts the point I was making succinctly.  Is tax avoidance legal.  

Let me quote. In 2013, a senior official at a Big Four accounting firm testified to the UK’s Public Accounts Committee, a government watchdog, that they would sell tax schemes, ie tax “avoidance” structures, to clients even if they thought there was only a 25 per cent chance they would survive a court challenge.

This quote is exactly what I said my wife was saying and she worked for one of the big four, E&Y to be exact and she said a lot of avoidance borders on illegal and probably is illegal. 

Boy you still don’t get it do you.  You are proving my point.  (Oh, and by the way I was a Principal in a ‘big Four’ practice when they were the ‘big eight’ and so made decisions concerning just these points.)

Our tax department would create and sell avoidance schemes that in their view were completely legal, because that is what avoidance is ….COMPLETELY LEGAL.  They would however point out to clients that this was our interpretation only and that the Revenue might take a completely different view.  They would also point out that should that be the case there would be a Revenue challenge which we would fight.  If we win the challenge the avoidance scheme stays exactly what it is….a tax avoidance scheme and COMPLETELY LEGAL.  If we lose the client must be clear that the scheme ceases immediately to be tax avoidance and becomes TAX EVASION as the scheme is now ILLEGAL.

There is no such thing as an illegal tax avoidance scheme.  If any scheme which started out as an attempt at avoidance is found to be illegal it is tax evasion ….QED.

I'm not talking about your tax department. I'm talking about the top four accountancy firms, as mentioned in the Parliamentary report!  One my ex wife used to work for, E&Y and she said, (if you reread what I wrote she said in the thread) what the Big Four accountancy official said in the parliamentary report, not everything they do is known to be legal and is probably illegal but because it's not tested in court by HMRC, they do it. In the 90s and 00s HMRC were notorious about sweetheart deals and this was seen as HMRC giving tax firms a nod and a wink. Don't flag something by asking if something is legal was the culture. This was why when Arthur Andersen went down (for other reasons with ENRON) the large accountancy firms were crapping themselves. I suggest you read the parliamentary report.

Edited by K-arl