Applebys: Something or other about planes and VAT. CM says Panic!

[NoTail 2,067]

Somehow the Lewis Hamilton story has grabbed the imagination. I can't see anything wrong with that bit unless of course the VAT rules wernt being followed.

I was more interested in the Ashcroft story. If, as alleged, he was controlling the trust then he should be in serious trouble. I bet HMRC are investigating this.

Also the oligarch control over Everton seemed rather dodgy but I am not sure I properly understood it.

[Max Power 6,756]

2 minutes ago, NoTail said:

Somehow the Lewis Hamilton story has grabbed the imagination. I can't see anything wrong with that bit unless of course the VAT rules wernt being followed.

I was more interested in the Ashcroft story. If, as alleged, he was controlling the trust then he should be in serious trouble. I bet HMRC are investigating this.

Also the oligarch control over Everton seemed rather dodgy but I am not sure I properly understood it.

I think you are right, and legislation exists to control that sort of abuse. His trustees should be in trouble for not pulling him up.

[twinkle 859]

Something to do with having controlling interests in 2 premier soccer clubs.

[notwell 5,720]

44 minutes ago, Shake me up Judy said:

Of course tax is about morals. So are rules and the law. So is politics. It's the basis of government and democracy. Without morality you just have self-interest, or even worse, ideology.

You've agreed that the wealthy should pay tax. Or do you think that they should pay 'some' tax ? How much of 'should' is acceptable ? 

Is there an ideal figure?

i suppose if we look at our own island and tax cappers that would be a start?

They pay more in a year than many will pay in 50 years. And more than likely not use most of services they are contributing to such as health and education because they’ll be private. 

Yet for some £130,000 or so in a year isn’t enough.   That’s a staggering amount of money to take as tax .

If you are asking me do I think a straight line system of PAYE at 40% or 45% etc in the uk is a fair system then the answer would be no.  It’s begging to be circumvented.

I don’t agree with the perception that someone can only be rich and get richer at the expense of someone else.   It’s a silly ideology and a lot of it seems to harp back to living in a Benefits driven (and entitlement mentality) type society. 

Its interesting that people view perhaps a tax capper as avoiding tax as being “greed” yet those people themselves are simply being greedy in expecting others to pay ridiculous levels of tax to essentially subsidise others.  And then moan about it when someone follows the rules and reduces it. 

[gettafa 6,542]

Would the fat cats have been able to bcome fat cats in a system/society that didn't shit on people at the bottom.
 

You see notwell, you have yer head so far up yer ain arse that you have lost all sight of perspective.

[twinkle 859]

FFS guys is this thread really still open WOW, the way ANS has been slashing and tearing I thought the whole site was shutting up shop,watch out watch out PJ Goebbels is about on this gig I'm thinking.

[WTF 6,050]

ANS was nobbled

 

[Max Power 6,756]

26 minutes ago, gettafa said:

Would the fat cats have been able to bcome fat cats in a system/society that didn't shit on people at the bottom.

Fat cats generally get fat because they are that way inclined. Those who haven't inherited their wealth are focused individuals who work hard to get their wealth, have an instinct for it. Generally they are job creators and wealth creators, benefiting others along the way. I'm unsure about how these people are shitting on anyone who may be less driven, hard working or fortunate? The amount of tax they do pay exceeds their cost to society and benefits those who pay little or no tax.

I guess it's natural to think that people just sit back watching tv getting wealthy and to be jealous because you don't get the same. It doesn't happen because you are not the type to do it.   

[gettafa 6,542]

I see your point, of course Max. (I just saw a notty opportunity and went for it).

That said, there is basis to what I wrote. I suppose the fact of the matter is somewhere in between.

 

 

[The Faceman 33]

48 minutes ago, twinkle said:

FFS guys is this thread really still open WOW, the way ANS has been slashing and tearing I thought the whole site was shutting up shop,watch out watch out PJ Goebbels is about on this gig I'm thinking.

I have to say I’m a bit confused too. I mean what if something RC does annoys me in the next few weeks? Would I be allowed to start a thread about it to say it’s annoyed me? Or would it be shut down instantly as the mods think that we’ve had too much about RC on these forums? It’s a dilemma I suppose. How long is long enough? Given his ability to say silly things how long is a dignified silence before we can point out how silly some of the things he says are? 

[P.K. 5,152]

2 hours ago, twinkle said:

Well stop fucking whinging on here and go get the tax laws changed. It' very simple nana.

Are you going to as well?

Didn't think so....

[P.K. 5,152]

1 hour ago, notwell said:

I don’t agree with the perception that someone can only be rich and get richer at the expense of someone else.   It’s a silly ideology and a lot of it seems to harp back to living in a Benefits driven (and entitlement mentality) type society. 

Oh dear. It would appear you either just don't understand the issue or you're being deliberately obtuse in an attempt to defend the indefensible.

When rich people dodge paying their fair share of taxes then those at the bottom of the heap lose out.

Capisce?

Like dealing with children....

[Manximus Aururaneus 1,172]

16 minutes ago, P.K. said:

Oh dear. It would appear you either just don't understand the issue or you're being deliberately obtuse in an attempt to defend the indefensible.

When rich people dodge paying their fair share of taxes then those at the bottom of the heap lose out.

Capisce?

Like dealing with children....

Could you please provide your definition of 'fair share of taxes' so that we can all discuss it.

[doc.fixit 3,030]

1 hour ago, Max Power said:

Fat cats generally get fat because they are that way inclined. Those who haven't inherited their wealth are focused individuals who work hard to get their wealth, have an instinct for it. Generally they are job creators and wealth creators, benefiting others along the way. I'm unsure about how these people are shitting on anyone who may be less driven, hard working or fortunate? The amount of tax they do pay exceeds their cost to society and benefits those who pay little or no tax.

I guess it's natural to think that people just sit back watching tv getting wealthy and to be jealous because you don't get the same. It doesn't happen because you are not the type to do it.   

........I don't pretend to understand the motivation to keep making more and more money, way more than is necessary to maintain a reasonable standard of living..............I do however understand and have experienced that a lot of moneyed individuals do try and pay minimum wages, maximum hours and take advantage of their workforce at any opportunity just to achieve the above results............I am far from jealous, I have a very satisfactory standard of life but still wonder at humans having the need to individually have more and more and more.............naïve? maybe but happy if bemused..........

[gettafa 6,542]

Yep, it's called greed. People who are only driven by one thing in life and that is to make money - more and more of it and to keep it. The power house of the Isle of Man. Greed.