planetf1.com

Well, talk about hypocritical. He launches a very public attack on Jimmy Carr about his off shore money meddling and has actually done it himself.

The worse bit is his lying/avoidance of the truth over the past week.

Monday: He said his finances were a private matter.

Tuesday am: I have no shares, no offshore funds, nothing like that. This following a question about any dealings he's possibly had with offshore tax saving schemes. (He didn't lie, but avoided a significant point)

Tuesday pm: Statement that his family do no benefit from any offshore funds. (Again not a lie, but again avoiding a critical point)

Wednesday: Statement that there are no offshore funds that he, his wife or family will benenif from in the future. (Not a lie it would appear, but guess what, another avoidance of a significant point)

Thursday:Finally admits he benefited from shares held in an offshore fund set up by his late father although it was subject to UK taxes in a normal way.

So, he finally admitted he invested in shares in an offshore company and without doubt he knew was a tax saving initiative. He made nearly a £20,000 profit on his shares. The timings of his sales of these shares was convenient to say the least.

What a total hypocrite. He should step down immediately.

I know there is nothing illegal about what he has done, but it completely goes against a number of very high profile statements he and his party have made over a number of years about how they feel about tax avoidance.

As the Tory's tag line goes,' We're all in this together'. Yeah right!

I'm just sick of all the lies, evading questions, hypocrisy, bitchiness and irrelevant bullsh*t in politics in the UK in general!

I don't think he should step down cause who the hell in the conservative government would be an adequate replacement to run the party? They're all as corrupt and self interested as each other with no one seemingly bothered about the country as a whole bit more about their own lives.

Bring on Star Trek communism!

To be fair, I'd be surprised if there were many MPs who haven't got any dodgy accounts. If he stood down they would have to make sure they picked someone 'clean' rather than someone 'good'. Though that might help the Brexit campaign, so off he goes!

Asphalt_World wrote:Well, talk about hypocritical. He launches a very public attack on Jimmy Carr about his off shore money meddling and has actually done it himself.

The worse bit is his lying/avoidance of the truth over the past week.

Monday: He said his finances were a private matter.

Tuesday am: I have no shares, no offshore funds, nothing like that. This following a question about any dealings he's possibly had with offshore tax saving schemes. (He didn't lie, but avoided a significant point)

Tuesday pm: Statement that his family do no benefit from any offshore funds. (Again not a lie, but again avoiding a critical point)

Wednesday: Statement that there are no offshore funds that he, his wife or family will benenif from in the future. (Not a lie it would appear, but guess what, another avoidance of a significant point)

Thursday:Finally admits he benefited from shares held in an offshore fund set up by his late father although it was subject to UK taxes in a normal way.

So, he finally admitted he invested in shares in an offshore company and without doubt he knew was a tax saving initiative. He made nearly a £20,000 profit on his shares. The timings of his sales of these shares was convenient to say the least.

What a total hypocrite. He should step down immediately.

I know there is nothing illegal about what he has done, but it completely goes against a number of very high profile statements he and his party have made over a number of years about how they feel about tax avoidance.

As the Tory's tag line goes,' We all in this together'. Yeah right!

All governments, everywhere, are actively trying to defend, aid and protect the elite's wealth and property. Always did and always will.
Never, ever try and fool yourself and think we are all in this together. Not even in communist Russia was everyone in it together.

James14 wrote:

Asphalt_World wrote:Well, talk about hypocritical. He launches a very public attack on Jimmy Carr about his off shore money meddling and has actually done it himself.

The worse bit is his lying/avoidance of the truth over the past week.

Monday: He said his finances were a private matter.

Tuesday am: I have no shares, no offshore funds, nothing like that. This following a question about any dealings he's possibly had with offshore tax saving schemes. (He didn't lie, but avoided a significant point)

Tuesday pm: Statement that his family do no benefit from any offshore funds. (Again not a lie, but again avoiding a critical point)

Wednesday: Statement that there are no offshore funds that he, his wife or family will benenif from in the future. (Not a lie it would appear, but guess what, another avoidance of a significant point)

Thursday:Finally admits he benefited from shares held in an offshore fund set up by his late father although it was subject to UK taxes in a normal way.

So, he finally admitted he invested in shares in an offshore company and without doubt he knew was a tax saving initiative. He made nearly a £20,000 profit on his shares. The timings of his sales of these shares was convenient to say the least.

What a total hypocrite. He should step down immediately.

I know there is nothing illegal about what he has done, but it completely goes against a number of very high profile statements he and his party have made over a number of years about how they feel about tax avoidance.

As the Tory's tag line goes,' We all in this together'. Yeah right!

All governments, everywhere, are actively trying to defend, aid and protect the elite's wealth and property. Always did and always will.
Never, ever try and fool yourself and think we are all in this together. Not even in communist Russia was everyone in it together.

Whilst I 99.9% agree - as far as I know Bevan genuinely cared about the poor. Goes to show there is always an exception to pretty much every rule!

I've always said that the last people who should be elected to positions of power are those that want these jobs... Trouble is its v rare for the genuinely good and un-greedy to be interested in political jobs.

I never have believed their tag line of 'We're all in this together'. Just pointed it out as it becomes more and more pathetic by the week.

Let's not forget this wonderful 2009 'vote for us' poster


source: Yorkshire conservatives

They've been dong a great job about that since 2010! The NHS is in a bigger shambles now than before. It's boll*cks propaganda like this which annoys me so much, especially with the Tory's. Back when we first got the coalition, Gordon Brown said plain and simple, there is no way we will not have to increase VAT. Whereas David Cameron said that the conservatives would not increase VAT if they were voted in. And what happened, one of the first things that the new government did was to increase VAT no just to the original 17.5%, but to 20% (which has cost me personally over £45k since then). I expect nothing less from the Tory's than doing whatever suits them best regardless of what promises they give us before an election.

(I also hate that I had to go onto a conservative site to find that poster!)

I'm no supporter of this government by any means but I don't see what Cameron has really done wrong here aside from mis-reading public reaction by not being totally transparent from the start. He invested a relatively small sum in an offshore fund and paid the amount of tax on it he was supposed to. He didn't hide anything. It's not just that there's nothing illegal happening here, I'm also failing to see anything even immoral.

There are plenty of actual crooks out there stealing taxpayers' money that we could be focussing on instead.

j man wrote:I'm no supporter of this government by any means but I don't see what Cameron has really done wrong here aside from mis-reading public reaction by not being totally transparent from the start. He invested a relatively small sum in an offshore fund and paid the amount of tax on it he was supposed to. He didn't hide anything. It's not just that there's nothing illegal happening here, I'm also failing to see anything even immoral.

There are plenty of actual crooks out there stealing taxpayers' money that we could be focussing on instead.

For me at least, it's just what you said, he's not been transparent and is trying to not tell the whole truth to get out of what he's done.

Yes, he may have paid the correct UK taxes on his investment, but that doesn't mean that he's paid as much tax as he would have had to if it had been an investment in the UK rather than a tax heaven. He openly said that he had made a profit on it, but I would assume that he didn't pay tax on annual profits made which he would have done if it had been an investment within the UK.

Although it wasn't the end of his political career, do you remember 'I did not have sexual relations with that woman'? I guess the difference between the 2 not-quite-truths is that with Clinton, his opposition in government wanted it to slander him whereas the American public couldn't care less. And with Cameron, his colleagues and opposition are all probably doing or have done similar things and but a a larger percentage of the UK population don't approve. Neither act was illegal, but they still hold a lot of sway with voters and opinions towards them both publicly and politically.

Read what he has said over the years about people investing their money earned in the UK in offshore companies to avoid paying UK tax levels.

Now take in to account that he invested some of his own money in an offshore account and thus made a profit out of a company that was not paying UK tax. The fact it was his fathers either makes it worse or is of no significance depending on your outlook.

What can't be ignored is that there would be no way whatsoever that he was under any impression that the company he invested in was paying full UK tax. Therefore he is a complete hypocrite.

Had he invested his money in a UK based company then he may have earn't less money on it, partly down to the fact that the company would have been paying higher tax in to the country he is Prime Minister of.

Is it any surprise he chose to sell his shares just before becoming Prime Minister? No. If he believed there is nothing wrong with what he did, why cash them in then?

The fact that his parents also funded his time through an incredibly expensive upbringing including one of the most expensive private schools, funded by parents that were investing offshore just adds to the frustrations a lot of us are feeling.

Asphalt_World wrote:Read what he has said over the years about people investing their money earned in the UK in offshore companies to avoid paying UK tax levels.

Now take in to account that he invested some of his own money in an offshore account and thus made a profit out of a company that was not paying UK tax. The fact it was his fathers either makes it worse or is of no significance depending on your outlook.

What can't be ignored is that there would be no way whatsoever that he was under any impression that the company he invested in was paying full UK tax. Therefore he is a complete hypocrite.

Had he invested his money in a UK based company then he may have earn't less money on it, partly down to the fact that the company would have been paying higher tax in to the country he is Prime Minister of.

Is it any surprise he chose to sell his shares just before becoming Prime Minister? No. If he believed there is nothing wrong with what he did, why cash them in then?

The fact that his parents also funded his time through an incredibly expensive upbringing including one of the most expensive private schools, funded by parents that were investing offshore just adds to the frustrations a lot of us are feeling.

Sums it up for me.

For the poster above speaking about the legality and morality of it - if this was Gary Barlow or Jimmy Carr or someone else that David Cameron had openly criticised for using tax techniques I wouldn't mind so much. Who wouldn't cut their tax bill, given the chance?

When you are the apparent leader of the country, who has made various statements criticising those who use offshore tax tricks, repeatedly pretended to be clamping down on tax tricks whilst often doing the opposite, then its a different thing entirely.

So, a Labour MP calls Cameron 'dodgy' and gets thrown out of parliament.

Last year, Cameron called a large number of MP's 'terrorist sympathisers' and that's apparently OK.

This teaches us what exactly?

Asphalt_World wrote:So, a Labour MP calls Cameron 'dodgy' and gets thrown out of parliament.

Last year, Cameron called a large number of MP's 'terrorist sympathisers' and that's apparently OK.

This teaches us what exactly?

It's almost like some of the rules of the commons are comically outdated making the UK parliament look like a bunch of fannies half the time. Every time someone says something there is a rabble on one side. Witty comeback attempted and the other side begins a rabble. Certain things are banned and not banned. I do like parliamentary pointing (with the index finger bent over) but that's hugely silly too.

I'm all for a bit of tradition. I do think that when we see the British versions of a more modern parliament (in Scotland, Wales and NI) we can make the process a lot better.

You can always tell when politicians are not saying the truth, their lips move and sound comes out.

Asphalt_World wrote:Read what he has said over the years about people investing their money earned in the UK in offshore companies to avoid paying UK tax levels.

Now take in to account that he invested some of his own money in an offshore account and thus made a profit out of a company that was not paying UK tax. The fact it was his fathers either makes it worse or is of no significance depending on your outlook.

What can't be ignored is that there would be no way whatsoever that he was under any impression that the company he invested in was paying full UK tax. Therefore he is a complete hypocrite.

Had he invested his money in a UK based company then he may have earn't less money on it, partly down to the fact that the company would have been paying higher tax in to the country he is Prime Minister of.

Is it any surprise he chose to sell his shares just before becoming Prime Minister? No. If he believed there is nothing wrong with what he did, why cash them in then?

The fact that his parents also funded his time through an incredibly expensive upbringing including one of the most expensive private schools, funded by parents that were investing offshore just adds to the frustrations a lot of us are feeling.

I'm not from UK, but what is wrong with investing money into companies that aren't paying UK tax? Was the company dodging UK taxes or simply not operating UK? Since when it is wrong to invest money into Tesla or Apple that mostly pay taxes in US? If he pay taxes from his investments profit, where is any wrongdoing?

dizlexik wrote: I'm not from UK, but what is wrong with investing money into companies that aren't paying UK tax? Was the company dodging UK taxes or simply not operating UK? Since when it is wrong to invest money into Tesla or Apple that mostly pay taxes in US? If he pay taxes from his investments profit, where is any wrongdoing?

It was set up where it was set up specifically so it didn't have to pay UK tax.

I struggle to blame people for using loopholes. When you're responsible for those loopholes, and you're prone to some bluster and rhetoric around people who do use those loopholes, and you also happen to be an MP, then there's a different set of standards you need to abide by.

Strange morals in this country where you can survive hypocritical financial manipulation but can't survive an affair in public office.

dizlexik wrote:

Asphalt_World wrote:Read what he has said over the years about people investing their money earned in the UK in offshore companies to avoid paying UK tax levels.

Now take in to account that he invested some of his own money in an offshore account and thus made a profit out of a company that was not paying UK tax. The fact it was his fathers either makes it worse or is of no significance depending on your outlook.

What can't be ignored is that there would be no way whatsoever that he was under any impression that the company he invested in was paying full UK tax. Therefore he is a complete hypocrite.

Had he invested his money in a UK based company then he may have earn't less money on it, partly down to the fact that the company would have been paying higher tax in to the country he is Prime Minister of.

Is it any surprise he chose to sell his shares just before becoming Prime Minister? No. If he believed there is nothing wrong with what he did, why cash them in then?

The fact that his parents also funded his time through an incredibly expensive upbringing including one of the most expensive private schools, funded by parents that were investing offshore just adds to the frustrations a lot of us are feeling.

I'm not from UK, but what is wrong with investing money into companies that aren't paying UK tax? Was the company dodging UK taxes or simply not operating UK? Since when it is wrong to invest money into Tesla or Apple that mostly pay taxes in US? If he pay taxes from his investments profit, where is any wrongdoing?

It's true that is not that it is against any law to do what Cameron's father did, nor in fact is it illegal for David to invest in his fathers company.

The issue so many people are deeply concerned about here is that David Cameron, along with other senior figures in the Tory party, have constantly talked about how these loopholes should be shut and how immoral it is (in their opinion). They have made huge announcements over the years about how this should not be allowed, they have publicly denounced other rich people about doing such things, they have mocked them in fact.

Then we find out that that David Cameron's father had been doing such a thing. Now that's one thing and is beyond David's control of course. However, David and his wife investing their own money, money they have earn't in the UK in this offshore company is 100% their choice.

It's no coincidence that he cashed them in just prior to becoming PM, but cashing them in prior to coming to power is irrelevant. He has made money from an offshore company, something he has spoken many times about being the kind of thing that should not be happening.

Finally, his avoidance to admit any of this had happened over the course of a week, despite being pressed to do so, really sums it all up. He was desperate to not mention it, but had to in the end.

I am sure there is more to come, probably from George Osborne I suspect.

Asphalt_World wrote:

dizlexik wrote:

Asphalt_World wrote:Read what he has said over the years about people investing their money earned in the UK in offshore companies to avoid paying UK tax levels.

Now take in to account that he invested some of his own money in an offshore account and thus made a profit out of a company that was not paying UK tax. The fact it was his fathers either makes it worse or is of no significance depending on your outlook.

What can't be ignored is that there would be no way whatsoever that he was under any impression that the company he invested in was paying full UK tax. Therefore he is a complete hypocrite.

Had he invested his money in a UK based company then he may have earn't less money on it, partly down to the fact that the company would have been paying higher tax in to the country he is Prime Minister of.

Is it any surprise he chose to sell his shares just before becoming Prime Minister? No. If he believed there is nothing wrong with what he did, why cash them in then?

The fact that his parents also funded his time through an incredibly expensive upbringing including one of the most expensive private schools, funded by parents that were investing offshore just adds to the frustrations a lot of us are feeling.

I'm not from UK, but what is wrong with investing money into companies that aren't paying UK tax? Was the company dodging UK taxes or simply not operating UK? Since when it is wrong to invest money into Tesla or Apple that mostly pay taxes in US? If he pay taxes from his investments profit, where is any wrongdoing?

It's true that is not that it is against any law to do what Cameron's father did, nor in fact is it illegal for David to invest in his fathers company.

The issue so many people are deeply concerned about here is that David Cameron, along with other senior figures in the Tory party, have constantly talked about how these loopholes should be shut and how immoral it is (in their opinion). They have made huge announcements over the years about how this should not be allowed, they have publicly denounced other rich people about doing such things, they have mocked them in fact.

Then we find out that that David Cameron's father had been doing such a thing. Now that's one thing and is beyond David's control of course. However, David and his wife investing their own money, money they have earn't in the UK in this offshore company is 100% their choice.

It's no coincidence that he cashed them in just prior to becoming PM, but cashing them in prior to coming to power is irrelevant. He has made money from an offshore company, something he has spoken many times about being the kind of thing that should not be happening.

Finally, his avoidance to admit any of this had happened over the course of a week, despite being pressed to do so, really sums it all up. He was desperate to not mention it, but had to in the end.

I am sure there is more to come, probably from George Osborne I suspect.

Well, I don't know much about UK politics and politicians I was just curious.

Asphalt doesn't like Cameron / Tories - that's all you really need to know.




PS Offshore trusts have existed for years, they're not a secret, and previous governments could have done something about it but didn't.
So, I don't care if Cameron is the world's greatest hypocrite, provided he actually does something about it - unless of course I win the Euromillions and want to set up my own offshore trust.

This should be no surprise to anyone that even remotely follows politics outside the establishment media agenda, all par for the course really.

There are far worse things that go on every week and no one seems to bat an eye e.g. the dodgy PFI, NHS, infrastructure deals being awarded to private organisations that members of the establishment have vested interests in.

As someone mentioned earlier the problem is the movement of wealth amongst the elite, not just in this country but throughout the world. It seems that the wealth is continuing to move the wrong way and the poor continue to bear the brunt.

The sad thing is; this problem is unlikely to be solved merely by voting a certain way, it is not a party or person that is the problem, rather it is the obsolete and corrupt system that we all live under.

Jimbox01 wrote:Asphalt doesn't like Cameron / Tories - that's all you really need to know.




PS Offshore trusts have existed for years, they're not a secret, and previous governments could have done something about it but didn't.
So, I don't care if Cameron is the world's greatest hypocrite, provided he actually does something about it - unless of course I win the Euromillions and want to set up my own offshore trust.

I don't like hypocrites in the Labour Party, the SNP or any other political parties. Neither do I like hypocrites in any area of life that I come across.

Asphalt_World wrote:

Jimbox01 wrote:Asphalt doesn't like Cameron / Tories - that's all you really need to know.




PS Offshore trusts have existed for years, they're not a secret, and previous governments could have done something about it but didn't.
So, I don't care if Cameron is the world's greatest hypocrite, provided he actually does something about it - unless of course I win the Euromillions and want to set up my own offshore trust.

I don't like hypocrites in the Labour Party, the SNP or any other political parties. Neither do I like hypocrites in any area of life that I come across.

That covers just about everyone to a degree. (unless we're talking about the strict definition of the word)

Jimbox01 wrote:

Asphalt_World wrote:

Jimbox01 wrote:Asphalt doesn't like Cameron / Tories - that's all you really need to know.




PS Offshore trusts have existed for years, they're not a secret, and previous governments could have done something about it but didn't.
So, I don't care if Cameron is the world's greatest hypocrite, provided he actually does something about it - unless of course I win the Euromillions and want to set up my own offshore trust.

I don't like hypocrites in the Labour Party, the SNP or any other political parties. Neither do I like hypocrites in any area of life that I come across.

That covers just about everyone to a degree. (unless we're talking about the strict definition of the word)

True, but most people aren't in the position of power that political party leaders are. The point about being hypocritical to different degrees is a valid point. I would say that running a country as voted by a democracy means that the amount of hypocrisy you are allowed is pretty small, especially when you are so vocal about something one week, and then found to be making use of it the next.

minchy wrote:

j man wrote:I'm no supporter of this government by any means but I don't see what Cameron has really done wrong here aside from mis-reading public reaction by not being totally transparent from the start. He invested a relatively small sum in an offshore fund and paid the amount of tax on it he was supposed to. He didn't hide anything. It's not just that there's nothing illegal happening here, I'm also failing to see anything even immoral.

There are plenty of actual crooks out there stealing taxpayers' money that we could be focussing on instead.

For me at least, it's just what you said, he's not been transparent and is trying to not tell the whole truth to get out of what he's done.

Yes, he may have paid the correct UK taxes on his investment, but that doesn't mean that he's paid as much tax as he would have had to if it had been an investment in the UK rather than a tax heaven. He openly said that he had made a profit on it, but I would assume that he didn't pay tax on annual profits made which he would have done if it had been an investment within the UK.

Although it wasn't the end of his political career, do you remember 'I did not have sexual relations with that woman'? I guess the difference between the 2 not-quite-truths is that with Clinton, his opposition in government wanted it to slander him whereas the American public couldn't care less. And with Cameron, his colleagues and opposition are all probably doing or have done similar things and but a a larger percentage of the UK population don't approve. Neither act was illegal, but they still hold a lot of sway with voters and opinions towards them both publicly and politically.

But why does he have to restrict all his investments to UK based companies? In a global economy you can invest in whatever company you want anywhere in the world, and so long as you pay the correct amount of UK tax on the profit you make then there is no wrongdoing in my eyes. I don't see a whole lot of difference between this and me paying into my ISA, which incidentally I set up for the specific purpose of avoiding tax.

I'm not even sure about the hypocrisy accusation to honest. Wasn't Cameron's original criticism aimed at people who hide their money away in offshore bank accounts to avoid income tax, rather than what he has done which is invest in a foreign company which doesn't pay its tax in the UK and declare all of it in his tax return? They are two entirely different things. There was an interview with a tax specialist on the BBC the other day who stated that if Cameron was really trying to dodge taxes then there are much better ways of doing it.

I never thought I'd see the day where I stick up for David Cameron and the Tory party, but I really think people are making a mountain out of a molehill here. For me the breaking news here is that having seen their tax returns, our politicians are actually much more honest than I ever gave them credit for.

j man wrote: I never thought I'd see the day where I stick up for David Cameron and the Tory party, but I really think people are making a mountain out of a molehill here. For me the breaking news here is that having seen their tax returns, our politicians are actually much more honest than I ever gave them credit for.

The releasing of tax returns did make me chuckle a bit.

After all of politicians were trying to hide their earnings from the Inland Revenue the obvious place to find it would be on their tax return

Black_Flag_11 wrote:

j man wrote: I never thought I'd see the day where I stick up for David Cameron and the Tory party, but I really think people are making a mountain out of a molehill here. For me the breaking news here is that having seen their tax returns, our politicians are actually much more honest than I ever gave them credit for.

The releasing of tax returns did make me chuckle a bit.

After all of politicians were trying to hide their earnings from the Inland Revenue the obvious place to find it would be on their tax return

Well there was still more tax being paid on there than I was expecting!

I really can't see what Cameron is supposed to have done wrong in regards to these investments to be honest. We live in a global economy and every single one of us can invest money in whatever company we chose. Many of us do so indirectly from our savings accounts anyway.

The ridiculous, hyperbolic reaction to a man not braking the law and paying all taxes due shows exactly why Cameron didn't want to announce it.

mikeyg123 wrote:I really can't see what Cameron is supposed to have done wrong in regards to these investments to be honest. We live in a global economy and every single one of us can invest money in whatever company we chose. Many of us do so indirectly from our savings accounts anyway.

The ridiculous, hyperbolic reaction to a man not braking the law and paying all taxes due shows exactly why Cameron didn't want to announce it.

Nobody is saying he broke any rules. People are annoyed because he had done something he has spoken out against in such strong ways over his time as PM including publicly naming people.

As far as I can see, and I'm probably wrong, the Tory government's (and Cameron's) aim was not to crack down on UK residents or companies who legitimately derive taxable income from overseas / offshore investments (and pay tax on their income / profits), they wanted to stop overseas based companies and individuals from avoiding taxes on profits / gains made in the UK, plus close some of the most absurd and abused loopholes - e.g. tax relief schemes (such as film tax relief) that haven't achieved their intended purpose and are mainly used as tax loopholes, or ridiculous schemes like the one Jimmy Carr used.

No government is ever going to ban offshore / overseas investment by anyone domiciled in the UK, and they won't ever stop overseas corporations trading in the UK or wealthy individuals investing in the UK, but they could and should make sure that UK tax is paid on profits derived from activities or investment's in the UK.

So, in my most humble opinion:
* A global corporation or individual that uses offshore shell companies or other such mechanisms to avoid paying UK tax is wrong.
* Exploiting tax reliefs purely to avoid/minimise tax, rather than the intended purpose, is also wrong.
* Obviously dodgy schemes setup solely for the purpose of avoiding tax are wrong.
* A UK resident investing in an offshore trust or company to get a better return on their investment, or to allow more flexible retirement planning etc. is perfectly OK - provided they declare the income and pay tax when it's due.**

Cameron (and the Tories) problems are/were:
* They weren't clear enough about what it was they were doing and trying to achieve in the first place - making sweeping statements about cracking down on tax avoidance, without qualifying what was actually meant, was pretty stupid in hindsight.
* People simply don't understand and can't distinguish between offshore investments and UK tax avoidance - 'offshore' = dodgy therefore Cameron is dodgy.
* Pro-Brexit campaigners (and media) have used the situation as a stick to bash and discredit Cameron - the whole thing's been overblown for political purposes.
* The opposition (and anyone who's anti-Cameron) have milked the situation for all it's worth.
* Cameron is a bit slimly and lots of people just don't like him - I don't particularly like him but it doesn't automatically make him any more dishonest, untrustworthy or hypocritical than any other MP.

I may be wrong, but I can't find anything anywhere to suggest David Cameron has ever said that legitimate offshore investments are in any way wrong, dodgy, or should be cracked down on.
I can't find any statements from him saying that efficient tax planning is morally wrong.
If he never said those things, then why is he a hypocrite - if he did, then I'd be interested to see the full statement.


**If you put money in an ISA or pension or buy share in a company, the chances are some of your money is held offshore, but it makes no difference to the amount of tax you pay, it's just the way the financial market works.

These comments are what was said on two separate cases. Neither of the people involved broke any laws. It's the principle that's at stake here.

Cameron responding to questions about Philip Green who is an massive tax avoider (and donates hugely to the Tory party).
'I am not getting into an individual's tax affairs on air'

Cameron talking about Jimmy Carr who avoided UK tax by using an offshore company (and is certainly not a Tory).
'He's taking money and putting it into some very dodgy tax avoidance scheme.

Spot the difference.

Asphalt_World wrote:These comments are what was said on two separate cases. Neither of the people involved broke any laws. It's the principle that's at stake here.

Cameron responding to questions about Philip Green who is an massive tax avoider (and donates hugely to the Tory party).
'I am not getting into an individual's tax affairs on air'

Cameron talking about Jimmy Carr who avoided UK tax by using an offshore company (and is certainly not a Tory).
'He's taking money and putting it into some very dodgy tax avoidance scheme.

Spot the difference.

With reference to the Philip Green quote, you do realise the BBC were forced to apologise for what John Humphreys said during that interview, don't you? Humphreys was pressuring Cameron to answer a question based on inaccurate and misleading information, and Cameron declined to answer. Green / Arcadia have been investigated by HMRC and according to them pay all taxes due in the UK - they don't have a problem with what he does.

Jimmy Carr on the other hand had already been investigated by HMRC and found guilty, and the scam he was using to avoid taxes was pretty crude and obvious anyway.

However, I fully understand the points you're trying to make and don't necessarily entirely disagree, but all your example really achieves is to highlight what all politicians do - .i.e. score as many points as possible when ever possible, and evade answering difficult direct questions when ever possible.

So, what specifically did Cameron say in the past that now makes him an even bigger hypocrite than he probably already was?

Jimbox01 wrote:

Asphalt_World wrote:These comments are what was said on two separate cases. Neither of the people involved broke any laws. It's the principle that's at stake here.

Cameron responding to questions about Philip Green who is an massive tax avoider (and donates hugely to the Tory party).
'I am not getting into an individual's tax affairs on air'

Cameron talking about Jimmy Carr who avoided UK tax by using an offshore company (and is certainly not a Tory).
'He's taking money and putting it into some very dodgy tax avoidance scheme.

Spot the difference.

With reference to the Philip Green quote, you do realise the BBC were forced to apologise for what John Humphreys said during that interview, don't you? Humphreys was pressuring Cameron to answer a question based on inaccurate and misleading information, and Cameron declined to answer. Green / Arcadia have been investigated by HMRC and according to them pay all taxes due in the UK - they don't have a problem with what he does.

Jimmy Carr on the other hand had already been investigated by HMRC and found guilty, and the scam he was using to avoid taxes was pretty crude and obvious anyway.

However, I fully understand the points you're trying to make and don't necessarily entirely disagree, but all your example really achieves is to highlight what all politicians do - .i.e. score as many points as possible when ever possible, and evade answering difficult direct questions when ever possible.

So, what specifically did Cameron say in the past that now makes him an even bigger hypocrite than he probably already was?

He has continually spoken about the immoral way in which people earn money in the UK yet invest it offshore to avoid paying much tax on it, certainly not tax that the UK, the country the money was earn't in benefits from. I am not saying this is illegal, just pointing out his point of view. Despite this personal view of his, he is happy to invest in his fathers company which was doing everything he tells us he disagrees with and then spends 4 days avoiding the inevitable admission that he had in fact done so. If he really believed what he did would not be a conflict on interest, why avoid saying it for 4 days?

Asphalt_World wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:I really can't see what Cameron is supposed to have done wrong in regards to these investments to be honest. We live in a global economy and every single one of us can invest money in whatever company we chose. Many of us do so indirectly from our savings accounts anyway.

The ridiculous, hyperbolic reaction to a man not braking the law and paying all taxes due shows exactly why Cameron didn't want to announce it.

Nobody is saying he broke any rules. People are annoyed because he had done something he has spoken out against in such strong ways over his time as PM including publicly naming people.

If you thinking about Jimmy Carr you can't really compare. He evaded paying tax that was due and was found guilty by the HMRC. Cameron is benefiting from the same laws most of us benefit from one way or another.

mikeyg123 wrote:

Asphalt_World wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:I really can't see what Cameron is supposed to have done wrong in regards to these investments to be honest. We live in a global economy and every single one of us can invest money in whatever company we chose. Many of us do so indirectly from our savings accounts anyway.

The ridiculous, hyperbolic reaction to a man not braking the law and paying all taxes due shows exactly why Cameron didn't want to announce it.

Nobody is saying he broke any rules. People are annoyed because he had done something he has spoken out against in such strong ways over his time as PM including publicly naming people.

If you thinking about Jimmy Carr you can't really compare. He evaded paying tax that was due and was found guilty by the HMRC. Cameron is benefiting from the same laws most of us benefit from one way or another.

He claims to be against ALL people benefiting from offshore accounts where large sums of money are invested and not taxed like they would be if they were banked in their own country. He has done the same.

Asphalt_World wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

Asphalt_World wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:I really can't see what Cameron is supposed to have done wrong in regards to these investments to be honest. We live in a global economy and every single one of us can invest money in whatever company we chose. Many of us do so indirectly from our savings accounts anyway.

The ridiculous, hyperbolic reaction to a man not braking the law and paying all taxes due shows exactly why Cameron didn't want to announce it.

Nobody is saying he broke any rules. People are annoyed because he had done something he has spoken out against in such strong ways over his time as PM including publicly naming people.

If you thinking about Jimmy Carr you can't really compare. He evaded paying tax that was due and was found guilty by the HMRC. Cameron is benefiting from the same laws most of us benefit from one way or another.

He claims to be against ALL people benefiting from offshore accounts where large sums of money are invested and not taxed like they would be if they were banked in their own country. He has done the same.

But Cameron didn't put any money in an offshore bank account to avoid UK taxes. He invested it in an foreign business, and then declared his profits to HMRC.

There is a difference. You can't restrict people from investing in foreign companies.

j man wrote:

Asphalt_World wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

Asphalt_World wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:I really can't see what Cameron is supposed to have done wrong in regards to these investments to be honest. We live in a global economy and every single one of us can invest money in whatever company we chose. Many of us do so indirectly from our savings accounts anyway.

The ridiculous, hyperbolic reaction to a man not braking the law and paying all taxes due shows exactly why Cameron didn't want to announce it.

Nobody is saying he broke any rules. People are annoyed because he had done something he has spoken out against in such strong ways over his time as PM including publicly naming people.

If you thinking about Jimmy Carr you can't really compare. He evaded paying tax that was due and was found guilty by the HMRC. Cameron is benefiting from the same laws most of us benefit from one way or another.

He claims to be against ALL people benefiting from offshore accounts where large sums of money are invested and not taxed like they would be if they were banked in their own country. He has done the same.

But Cameron didn't put any money in an offshore bank account to avoid UK taxes. He invested it in an foreign business, and then declared his profits to HMRC.

There is a difference. You can't restrict people from investing in foreign companies.

No you can't, but he doesn't agree with doing this, according to previous comments he's made.

Asphalt_World wrote:

Jimbox01 wrote:

Asphalt_World wrote:These comments are what was said on two separate cases. Neither of the people involved broke any laws. It's the principle that's at stake here.

Cameron responding to questions about Philip Green who is an massive tax avoider (and donates hugely to the Tory party).
'I am not getting into an individual's tax affairs on air'

Cameron talking about Jimmy Carr who avoided UK tax by using an offshore company (and is certainly not a Tory).
'He's taking money and putting it into some very dodgy tax avoidance scheme.

Spot the difference.

With reference to the Philip Green quote, you do realise the BBC were forced to apologise for what John Humphreys said during that interview, don't you? Humphreys was pressuring Cameron to answer a question based on inaccurate and misleading information, and Cameron declined to answer. Green / Arcadia have been investigated by HMRC and according to them pay all taxes due in the UK - they don't have a problem with what he does.

Jimmy Carr on the other hand had already been investigated by HMRC and found guilty, and the scam he was using to avoid taxes was pretty crude and obvious anyway.

However, I fully understand the points you're trying to make and don't necessarily entirely disagree, but all your example really achieves is to highlight what all politicians do - .i.e. score as many points as possible when ever possible, and evade answering difficult direct questions when ever possible.

So, what specifically did Cameron say in the past that now makes him an even bigger hypocrite than he probably already was?

He has continually spoken about the immoral way in which people earn money in the UK yet invest it offshore to avoid paying much tax on it, certainly not tax that the UK, the country the money was earn't in benefits from. I am not saying this is illegal, just pointing out his point of view. Despite this personal view of his, he is happy to invest in his fathers company which was doing everything he tells us he disagrees with and then spends 4 days avoiding the inevitable admission that he had in fact done so. If he really believed what he did would not be a conflict on interest, why avoid saying it for 4 days?

The fact that Cameron's dad setup Blairmore Holdings has been in the public domain since 2012, so why has it only just become such a huge issue?
The Panama papers only confirmed what was already known, so who has a vested interest in discrediting him? Nothing to do with Brexit - surely!

Anyway, the fund Cameron's dad setup was based outside the UK which therefore meant it wasn't liable to pay UK tax on it's profits. It may or may not have invested in UK companies, but it's trading activities were conducted outside of the UK, so unlike Google etc. it wasn't channelling profits from the UK to an offshore company because it didn't operate in the UK in the first place - it was an offshore investment fund.
For investors, the fact that profits weren't taxable meant they'd get a better return than if they'd put their money into a UK based fund because there was more profit to reinvest, but they were still liable to tax when they cashed in their investment - as soon as money was paid out to an investor it was potentially liable to tax. I have no idea how Ian Cameron managed his private affairs but there is no evidence to suggest he, or anyone else involved in the fund, used it to avoid their personal tax liabilities.

These are the only quotes I can find by Cameron that could suggest hypocrisy - but only where transparency is involved.

“If you want to arrange your tax affairs so you support your pension, you plan effectively for your family, that is one thing, and that is acceptable,” he said. “But frankly some of these schemes where people are parking huge amounts of money offshore and taking loans back just to minimise their tax rates, it is not morally acceptable. It isn’t morally right to do that.”

Cameron's letter calling for more transparency about tax information and the ownership of companies was sent to leaders in Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands, Gibraltar, Anguilla, Montserrat, the Turks and Caicos Islands, Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man.

"I respect your right to be lower tax jurisdictions. I believe passionately in lower taxes as a vital driver of growth and prosperity for all.

"But lower taxes are only sustainable if what is owed is actually paid – and if the rules to achieve this are set and enforced fairly to create a level playing field right across the world. There is no point in dealing with tax evasion in one country if the problem is simply displaced to another."
"Put simply, that means we need to know who really owns and controls each and every company,"

Jimmy Carr, among many others, had money paid into an offshore trust in lieu of salary (or dividends?) and then received interest free loans which were never paid back. This is an obvious scam designed specifically to avoid tax and national insurance and not even remotely similar to the activities of Blairmore and similar funds.


Obviously I could be wrong about all of this, but to me at least it looks very much like the Brexit MP's and media have done a hatchet job on Cameron. If it was such a big deal, then why didn't it explode four years ago when the news first came out?

David Cameron unveils the new "evil Tory theme tune"

So the country is set to be run by May and Hammond. Makes you wonder what role they've got lined up for Clarkson.

Meanwhile in the Labour Party, Corbyn's smear campaign is in full swing I see
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-36771205