The Jimmy Carr Crash (Full Version)

All Forums >> [On Another Note...] >> News and Hot Topics



Message


DancingClown -> The Jimmy Carr Crash (20/6/2012 9:56:35 PM)

Well, I guess most of you have read about Jimmy Carr and his tax shenanigans. Cameron's stuck his oar in and described it as "morally wrong" - Here - which has a whiff of shit about it coming from him. Apparently Gary Barlow and his Take That chums might also be implicated in the K2 scheme, although Dave is somewhat nebulous about Gazza's involvement; nothing to do with Barlow's support of him in 2010, eh?

Anyway, is this a storm in a tea-cup? Is it "morally wrong"? Or is Carr just doing what anyone else might do if they could? If you're a Carr fan has this diminished your opinion of him at all?




tommyjarvis -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (20/6/2012 10:18:46 PM)

I don't see a problem with it. Arranging your finances to minimise your costs is what sensible people do. I'd do the same thing if I could afford it.




BigKovacs -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (20/6/2012 10:20:44 PM)

I like Carr and it doesn't diminish him in my eyes becouse it's a storm in a tea cup. It only came about becouse the news was a bit slow and his piss take of Barclays 1% tax sent their ironyometers into overdrive.




Lazarus munkey -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (21/6/2012 12:01:25 AM)

It's the system, not the people who exploit it. If comedians are the nation's moral barometer we're all fucked.




jon5000 -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (21/6/2012 12:04:19 AM)

I think it's definitely morally wrong if he's paying less than he owes. But what can you do.

I guess what happens when you become wealthier is you rely less on public services so perhaps feel less entitled to contribute? Maybe he sees it as justified by reducing his tax bill to more like that of the average UK earner in face of that.

But at the end of the day tax avoidance isn't illegal so morals don't mean anything if he's entitled to do it. It should be the government who stop it.




Spaldron -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (21/6/2012 12:04:29 AM)

He's just been strung up as a scapegoat by Cameron seeing as how critical he's been of the Tories recently on 10 O' Clock Live. And as Clown said no mention of Barlow in his interview, or Philip Green, or Vodaphone, or the thousands of other tax dodging Tory cunts. Funny that.




blackduck -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (21/6/2012 9:44:22 AM)

I'd be shocked if there are any wealthy that aren't availing of tax avoidance measures. The only critisim here should be the system that allows this to take place and the people who run it. If Cameron doesn't lilke the current tax laws change them, Or how about we scrap the whole tax system and get people to pay on an honour system where everyone pay what they feel they should.

Anyway you guys are lucky, we've got Bono, dodges Irish tax then keeps telling the government how they should be spending it.




Skiba -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (21/6/2012 11:48:03 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Spaldron

He's just been strung up as a scapegoat by Cameron seeing as how critical he's been of the Tories recently on 10 O' Clock Live. And as Clown said no mention of Barlow in his interview, or Philip Green, or Vodaphone, or the thousands of other tax dodging Tory cunts. Funny that.

Don't Vofafone owe something like 3bn? So theirs is like actualy tax evasion

Cameron when asked about Green "I don't comment on individual's tax affairs"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9715000/9715304.stm




clownfoot -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (21/6/2012 12:00:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Skiba


quote:

ORIGINAL: Spaldron

He's just been strung up as a scapegoat by Cameron seeing as how critical he's been of the Tories recently on 10 O' Clock Live. And as Clown said no mention of Barlow in his interview, or Philip Green, or Vodaphone, or the thousands of other tax dodging Tory cunts. Funny that.

Don't Vofafone owe something like 3bn? So theirs is like actualy tax evasion

Cameron when asked about Green "I don't comment on individual's tax affairs"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9715000/9715304.stm


I presume he's changed his mind then... here's hoping some clever journo re-acquaints Cameron with this question so we can see how he worms out of it this time!




JessFranco -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (21/6/2012 12:29:11 PM)

Of course it's morally wrong, and hugely, hugely hypocritical of him. He was paying tax at minimum wage levels.

He has belatedly admitted it was a horrible error on his part.




Professor Moriarty -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (21/6/2012 12:42:42 PM)

Fair dues to him. In fairness, I could see him seeing his accountant being told there's a totally legal way of not paying much tax and who wouldn't go for it.

But this scheme is tax avoidance and if you know what its set up to do then of course it is completely morally wrong. I'm not getting paid, I'm just getting a loan.... which I'll never have to pay back.

Do you think he'll hand over a cheque for what he avoided paying while he was in the scheme to the tax man?




Fluke Skywalker -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (21/6/2012 12:50:14 PM)

He's a c**t as are all those who use the system to get out of paying their fair share of tax. What sickens me most about these people is they are the ones with the most money and can afford to pay taxes. It is however rather funny seeing Cameron spouting off on the subject when he knows full well there's along list of Tory donors who do the exact same thing.

The good thing is that this episode has re-focused people's minds on the subject - they should start closing all loopholes such as K2 asap. Another way rich fuckers avoid taxation is by setting up a charity and making payments into it - the only thing is the charity's primary goal is to pay for their kids university fees!




horribleives -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (21/6/2012 1:13:31 PM)

Carr's a total cunt and his 'apology' whereby he admits his financial advisor offered him the chance to legally pay less tax and he said 'yes!' makes him an even bigger one. However, Cameron's got a fucking nerve condemning him. I hope Carr and that other morally repugnant cunt Gary Barlow are just the tip of the ice berg.




Fluke Skywalker -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (21/6/2012 1:21:18 PM)

Tax avoidance costs the UK 70 billion a year - an incredible figure that would put a significant deficit in the debt we owe.




blackduck -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (21/6/2012 2:41:18 PM)

But would anyone pay more taxes than they had to? don't think this is a question of morals more a question of options. Rich people have options the rest of us can't avail of. The loopholes shouldn't be there and it's the lawmakers that should be getting it in the neck over this




Flatulent_Bob -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (21/6/2012 2:42:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fluke Skywalker
What sickens me most about these people is they are the ones with the most money and can afford to pay taxes.


Hardly surprising, when some idiot introduces 50% income tax thresholds, that people find ways around it.
No one should pay more than 40% while the government should be closing the loopholes. Although that really is a cat and mouse game and not a war you can ever "win" outright.

There are all sorts of way to "avoid" tax, I just find it amusing how many people get on their high horse about it.

How many people pay workmen cash?
How many business' claim VAT back against anything they can possibly link to the business through any means?
How about loading up on your pension contributions to keep your taxable earnings under a certain threshold?

My company has loads of opportunities to avoid some tax by buying/selling annual leave, investing, purchasing additions, etc to keep me under tax thresholds.
Interesting to try and have a moral debate, when most people will have tried to avoid some sort of payment at somepoint.




Fluke Skywalker -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (21/6/2012 2:51:42 PM)

40% + all tax loopholes closed off for both corporations and individuals would make sense - I think there are too many vested interests who will basically start warning of dire consequences to the economy, loss of jobs, talent etc. if big companies were reigned in though.




Rebenectomy -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (21/6/2012 2:53:24 PM)

A friend of mine was setting up a business last year, with help from a government start your own scheme. One of the first things the accountant attached to the scheme did was discuss how she and her partner could avoid tax. It's ingrained in the system and there's no point witch hunting those individuals who avail of it while it's common and accepted practice.




Fluke Skywalker -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (21/6/2012 2:58:30 PM)

Change the system and there would be nothing to worry about because people would then be risking fines and imprisonment.

On another note HMRC have managed to claw back 3billion from Liechtenstein based tax dodges - shows how much money can be genertated by forcing people to cough up.




thatlittlemonkey -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (21/6/2012 3:02:53 PM)

But what if it's your dad that's avoiding tax, Dave?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/apr/20/cameron-family-tax-havens




Flatulent_Bob -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (21/6/2012 3:03:19 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fluke Skywalker

Change the system and there would be nothing to worry about because people would then be risking fines and imprisonment.

On another note HMRC have managed to claw back 3billion from Liechtenstein based tax dodges - shows how much money can be genertated by forcing people to cough up.


If you want to catch all the tax dogers don't just look at the top end. How many should be paying tax at the lower end of the scale and "avoid" it. How is this any morally superior to anyone taking anything from the state that they don't 100% need (or avoiding giving it)?

How many families take Child benefits because they were entitled even though they didn't need it?
I know I did. If I and other like me didn't take it then there would be more to go round.
As I said in the thread at the time I can't see why anyone with a household income of over 25K needs help from the state to support them.

Who's to say which of these is morally ok, and which isn't?




Flatulent_Bob -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (21/6/2012 3:04:26 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: thatlittlemonkey

But what if it's your dad that's avoiding tax, Dave?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/apr/20/cameron-family-tax-havens


Guardian trolling Tory leader, what ever next?

Are we saying that the leader of the government shouldn't want these loopholes closed?




Fluke Skywalker -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (21/6/2012 3:16:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Flatulent_Bob

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fluke Skywalker

Change the system and there would be nothing to worry about because people would then be risking fines and imprisonment.

On another note HMRC have managed to claw back 3billion from Liechtenstein based tax dodges - shows how much money can be genertated by forcing people to cough up.


If you want to catch all the tax dogers don't just look at the top end. How many should be paying tax at the lower end of the scale and "avoid" it. How is this any morally superior to anyone taking anything from the state that they don't 100% need (or avoiding giving it)?

How many families take Child benefits because they were entitled even though they didn't need it?
I know I did. If I and other like me didn't take it then there would be more to go round.
As I said in the thread at the time I can't see why anyone with a household income of over 25K needs help from the state to support them.

Who's to say which of these is morally ok, and which isn't?


I think they have been cracking down on scroungers, the right wing media have certainly done their bit to demonise people. Bringing in people on invalidity benefits to be interviewed saw a third of people instantly come off those benefits.

I think the amount of money involved when you put benefits and tax avoidance side by side says it all though - there's a difference in the tens of billions but there's a disproportionate focus on benefits.





Hood_Man -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (21/6/2012 3:17:41 PM)

I have to admit, if I was in his position I'd be tempted to do the same.

If it was illegal to do so then I wouldn't because I'm a law abiding person, but if you offered me a legal way to save myself a fortune every year I'd bite your hand off.

I suppose the answer is to close these loopholes or something.




Fluke Skywalker -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (21/6/2012 3:20:54 PM)

A lot of rich people pay their taxes though and don't involve themselves in these dodges - why is that? Because morally they know it's wrong even if the system allows it.




Flatulent_Bob -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (21/6/2012 3:26:40 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fluke Skywalker

A lot of rich people pay their taxes though and don't involve themselves in these dodges - why is that? Because morally they know it's wrong even if the system allows it.


As I said above where do the morals start/finish here?
Buying drink or fags abroad to skip the duty?
Taking benefits you don't need but are entitled to is just as morally wrong. Taking child allowance to pay for after school clubs or investing for your childs University place, how is that any better.

Its also worth pointing out that the so called rich, will also be making huge contributions to the economy via VAT, paying staff, or corporation tax etc. Whereas the benefits cheats at the lower end, who you are claiming are demonised (more than bankers?) contribute much less on this level.

Avoiding paying tax is obviously wrong, but for people to make moral judgements on some and not others is just as hypercritical.
If we are purely talking morals, any action which involves you actively looking to avoid a contribution is the same. Amount and if you can afford it don't come into it.




Spaldron -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (21/6/2012 3:33:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Flatulent_Bob

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fluke Skywalker

A lot of rich people pay their taxes though and don't involve themselves in these dodges - why is that? Because morally they know it's wrong even if the system allows it.


As I said above where do the morals start/finish here?
Buying drink or fags abroad to skip the duty?
Taking benefits you don't need but are entitled to is just as morally wrong. Taking child allowance to pay for after school clubs or investing for your childs University place, how is that any better.

Its also worth pointing out that the so called rich, will also be making huge contributions to the economy via VAT, paying staff, or corporation tax etc. Whereas the benefits cheats at the lower end, who you are claiming are demonised (more than bankers?) contribute much less on this level.


Avoiding paying tax is obviously wrong, but for people to make moral judgements on some and not others is just as hypercritical.
If we are purely talking morals, any action which involves you actively looking to avoid a contribution is the same. Amount and if you can afford it don't come into it.


Like how you're going after the benefit claimants and defending the rich at the same time.




Chief Wiggum -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (21/6/2012 3:38:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thatlittlemonkey

But what if it's your dad that's avoiding tax, Dave?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/apr/20/cameron-family-tax-havens



Or for that matter, what if its your parent company ( Guardian Media Group) that's avoiding taxes, eh Guardian?

http://order-order.com/2011/02/21/the-guardian-uncut-and-full-of-cant/




Flatulent_Bob -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (21/6/2012 3:40:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spaldron


quote:

ORIGINAL: Flatulent_Bob

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fluke Skywalker

A lot of rich people pay their taxes though and don't involve themselves in these dodges - why is that? Because morally they know it's wrong even if the system allows it.


As I said above where do the morals start/finish here?
Buying drink or fags abroad to skip the duty?
Taking benefits you don't need but are entitled to is just as morally wrong. Taking child allowance to pay for after school clubs or investing for your childs University place, how is that any better.

Its also worth pointing out that the so called rich, will also be making huge contributions to the economy via VAT, paying staff, or corporation tax etc. Whereas the benefits cheats at the lower end, who you are claiming are demonised (more than bankers?) contribute much less on this level.


Avoiding paying tax is obviously wrong, but for people to make moral judgements on some and not others is just as hypercritical.
If we are purely talking morals, any action which involves you actively looking to avoid a contribution is the same. Amount and if you can afford it don't come into it.


Like how you're going after the benefit claimants and defending the rich at the same time.



Depends which bits you read, I fully expect you just to take in the bits you want to.
Did you miss the line about avoiding tax is wrong?

It was all related to the first line, who's to make moral judgements on this?

I'm saying the rich are making contributions to the public purse via Income Tax/NI, VAT, paying staff, corporation tax etc.
Whereas those claiming benefits they shouldn't be entitled to will be on paying less into the public pot.
Are you saying this is wildly inaccurate?




clownfoot -> RE: The Jimmy Carr Crash (21/6/2012 3:48:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Flatulent_Bob

Taking benefits you don't need but are entitled to is just as morally wrong. Taking child allowance to pay for after school clubs or investing for your childs University place, how is that any better.



It's not morally wrong when it was (and still should be) a universal benefit.

Anyway, 'Dwarf shortage'...




Page: [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.203125