If Transam does not like the answers, he will be along shortly to change the question. You will NOT get your point across so don't bother banging your heads.
Net closing in on tax-dodgers
- Thread starter JohnD
- Start date
Sponsored Links
D
Doggit
I think there's a difference between the tax laws that can benefit the wealthy, and the tax deals that HMRC make with the likes of Starbucks in order to persuade them to run their businesses here. There does need to be an international agreement whereby companies can't make low tax countires their base for tax purposes, when they only have a nominal staff in that country, but the HMRC does have the powers to determine if an international company is abusing the rules. Starbucks themselves agreed to pay more tax when challenged by the public outcry, but wouldn't have had to do so if they knew they weren't playing fast and lose with the regs. Many companies actually negotiate with the HMRC as to the amount of tax they have to pay, and then the negotiators seem to end up working for that company when they leave the HMRC.
Shocking but wouldn't surprise me one bit.
Sponsored Links
If Transam does not like the answers, he will be along shortly to change the question. You will NOT get your point across so don't bother banging your heads.
E
EddieM
they should also clamp down on any any consumer who is caught paying cash in order to dodge paying vat
No it is a consumers right to pay with cash if they want. It is the service / goods providers legal duty to levy VAT on the amount if they are registered.
There is - you can't afford to take advantage of them.
Presumably it's either that or nothing.
There isn't. It's called competition. No different than Tesco and Asda attracting customers.
They do - so, presumably, they aren't (abusing).
I don't know. Another sop?
Did they think it better than losing customers.
There you go (if true). Nothing but the national interest at heart.
A conflict of interest surely ?
Do politicians worry about that when they stop being politicians?
I thought it was standard practice.
Middle East peace envoy springs to mind.
I thought it was standard practice.
Middle East peace envoy springs to mind.
In politics I always assumed taking envelopes was part of the game. I mean, considering ex-prime ministers go on to the board of multinational companies, Cameron, Blair, Brown, after they leave office.. corruption is just sort of built into the system.
Back on the subject of Newham council, if that article is true they are in major breach of the DPA and would be fined many millions, that should be the focal point of the thread. The DPA is there for a reason and applies to local authorities as much as any other company. Also what business does HMRC have in naming and shaming people with debt, surely that's against DPA as well?
Back on the subject of Newham council, if that article is true they are in major breach of the DPA and would be fined many millions, that should be the focal point of the thread. The DPA is there for a reason and applies to local authorities as much as any other company. Also what business does HMRC have in naming and shaming people with debt, surely that's against DPA as well?
- Joined
- 25 Apr 2016
- Messages
- 2,630
- Reaction score
- 627
- Country
Doesn't work - Such places have a limit (set by HMG) on the amount of cash they can accept. you did that expect to be reported to HMG.
When I bought my only new, delivery milage car, I tried to pay in cash as I wanted feel like I owned it and I'd paid for it. The dealers limit was £5K in cash without me providing very detailed proof of how I came by the cash...
Do you have proof of that?
It's not that they wouldn't accept the cash.
Or - why did you not just give them proof?
Here is my cash withdrawal slip.
It's not that they wouldn't accept the cash.
Or - why did you not just give them proof?
Here is my cash withdrawal slip.
E
EddieM
Not really their fault. It's due to anti laundering rules. Bit of a PITA.
Sponsored Links