Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

The Paradise Papers

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

The Paradise Papers

Old 6th Nov 2017, 20:15
  #41 (permalink)  

FX Guru
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Greenwich
Age: 63
Posts: 900
Originally Posted by Jet II View Post
Lewis Hamilton is tax resident in Monaco and has been for almost 10 years.
Yeah, but Hamilton was avoiding VAT which is payable in Monaco.

Anyway, it's not quite that simple. He got a VAT refund by claiming the plane was for business use only and not for pleasure but his Twitter feed is full of stuff like, flew to Vegas/Florida/Rio etc for some fun!
angels is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2017, 20:32
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: England
Posts: 643
I do not think the matter was quite as clear-cut as that.

As I understand it he declared that the use would be part private and part commercial. I think that the figures were 15% private use and 85% commercial use. Under EU rules this should have precluded any VAT refund, but the Isle Of Man ignores this rule.

If all of this is true then Hamilton did nothing which was Ilegal. It was the IOM tax office which broke the rules.
keith williams is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2017, 21:05
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Europe
Age: 41
Posts: 591
There's a clause in the VAT refund rules, stating the owner of the aircraft must be a 'real' company/operator. The company owing Lewis' jet consist of a mailbox address it shares with a few thousand other companies, and has zero employees. The IOM doesn't care to enforce that particular rule, allowing for millions of dollars of VAT refunds paid by various EU countries. In other words, the common EU citizen are helping rich people getting their private jets cheaper. Might not be legally wrong, but morally it stinks to high heaven.
SMT Member is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2017, 21:15
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Manchester, England
Age: 54
Posts: 836
Can an A340 land on the Isle of Man? Russian oligarch and Arsenal shareholder Alisher Usmanov, mentioned in these papers, has the use of M-IABU (the official owner is a Cayman company).
Curious Pax is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2017, 21:33
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: On a foreign shore trying a new wine diet. So far, I've lost 3days!
Age: 71
Posts: 395
So, as an old aged pensioner I am paying income tax to subsidise all these free-loading tax dodgers. Mmmm, I wonder when the Queen, Lewis Hamilton and Mrs. Brown's family and all the other underpayers, next need use the facilities of the NHS, they would consider how much better the corridors, where they wait for reatment, would be if they had made their real, honourable contribution? Never mind, I'll get a tax increase to pay for their free treatment in the Autumn Budget, no doubt, and if I haven't voted all the dead wood out by then, then the next election will give me the chance. I hope that I won't be charged for their treatment, but it seems to me that the UK Government isn't governing its lax overseas territories that want help when hurricanes devastate their tax havens but are more than happy to come to the UK when they need medical treatment, free, that can't be provided in their hugely wealthy tax havens. It's well overtime for a change.
On the beach is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2017, 21:35
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 72
Posts: 795
Orac: Nice impressive graph there. Totally irrelevant though. Try this for a more 'realistic' view:
The poorest 10% of households in the UK pay an average of 42% of their income in taxes. The richest 10% pay around 34%.The lowest earners pay around 7% of their income in council tax. The wealthiest pay1.5%.
Then there is VAT with the poorest paying 12.5% of their income while the richest pay 5%.
Also, given the exotic figures in your graphs; if the wealthiest 0.1% of the population own 80% of the wealth doesn't it make sense they should be paying more than the poorest 99.9%?
KelvinD is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2017, 22:15
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: West Country
Posts: 1,188
Originally Posted by angels View Post
Yeah, but Hamilton was avoiding VAT which is payable in Monaco.

Anyway, it's not quite that simple. He got a VAT refund by claiming the plane was for business use only and not for pleasure but his Twitter feed is full of stuff like, flew to Vegas/Florida/Rio etc for some fun!
so its up to the Monaco tax authorities whether they want to chase him or not..
Jet II is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2017, 22:16
  #48 (permalink)  
Está servira para distraerle.
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: In a perambulator.
Posts: 0
Top marginal rate of income tax in the UK approaches 53%. The flat rated tax paid on an income of £150,000 is about 40%.
Any comparison therefore of proportional percentages paid by low and upper tax band rate payers is purely massaging to attempt to excuse the highest tax rates of any developed nation.
Proportions of VAT may be greater among the lower income group but then were I getting benefits, courtesy of the higher rate tax payer and i was in Tesco on Sunday morning, I'd spend it too.
The great socialist leveller of course are death taxes which, in Britain, are the highest of any country in the world.
What is happening in Britain is an attempt by government to bring all private money and investments under central control. With lower taxes there wouldn't be tax havens and as Britain is about to find out next time it changes the government, a crippling outflow of capital that no government legislation, which will be draconian enough, will be able to stop.
cavortingcheetah is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2017, 02:12
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: in the wild blue yonder
Posts: 128
If the journalists could now spend as much time and the politicians as well, finding ways to not just collect tax, but minimise the State's profligate spending of money accrued from taxes that would be an even better thing.
HyFlyer is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2017, 05:35
  #50 (permalink)  
Está servira para distraerle.
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: In a perambulator.
Posts: 0
But Queenie is absolutely responsible for the style of her investments. Every portfolio investor, by which I mean one rich enough to have his or her own portfolio, completes a questionnaire by her investment house's management. This will include a request for levels of risk to be tolerated as well as areas or to be avoided on moral grounds, many investors in the USA refuse to invest in tobacco companies for example.
Brenda has been around the block a few times and she is extremely financially astute. She knows the ropes, it's her money although invested by her agent, she is responsible for how it was invested. She may choose to execute the man who invested her money for her but that does not obviate her responsibility, vicarious or not, for how and where her private money was placed in the market.
Buckingham Palace should issue a statement to the effect that HM's portfolio has been reinvested in a more politically correct fashion where it cannot cause offence and would the leader of the opposition now care, please, to withdraw his support for Mr Maduro, whose regime is responsible for so much actual death and destruction.
cavortingcheetah is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2017, 06:20
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The Luberon
Age: 68
Posts: 910
Labour has plans for Her Majesty...

sitigeltfel is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2017, 06:57
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: South East England
Posts: 304
Our problem is too much government.
They think that what other people have worked for and earned is theirs, so they tax to maximise their income, which they then largely waste. Putting 0.7% of GDP in the Swiss bank accounts of dodgy African dictators is not what we work for.
Our government massively punish success. They tax the same money three times. Once when you earn it, again when you spend it and again when you die. So you can hardly blame people who use legal means to minimise how much they are punished. Most people use ISAs, pension schemes and buy duty free.
The BBC programmes are mainly about envy. Notice how they dwelled upon a Rolex Watch and a yacht. They did zero differentiation between what is legal and what is not legal. And no mention of all the BBC "stars" using service companies to dodge tax.
The government should reduce tax rates on the rich, because what they do now is theft and punishing success is no way to run an economy. Margaret Thatcher reduced the rate of income tax for high earners. This massively INCREASED government revenue. The top 10% of earners went from paying 35% of the Government’s total income tax receipts to 48% of the total.

We need to look at Singapore and Hong Kong to see how low taxes generate wealth for an economy. They have gone from being third world dumps to being far, far richer than us. Closer to home is Estonia, a little country in the Baltic impoverished by Soviet communism. Now they have 20% VAT, 20% capital gains tax, 20% income tax (flat rate) and 20% corporation tax (only payable when money is taken out of the company). And their economy is booming. Introduce that to the UK and we would all be immensely better off.
Eclectic is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2017, 07:04
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: UK
Age: 49
Posts: 271
Surely a fairer way of collecting taxes would be to tax turnover instead of profits?

Instead of taxing profits at 20%, tax turnover by 10%.

It is simplistic, but I think that is what is needed....simple tax law, that everyone can understand, and not manipulate in their favour.
highflyer40 is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2017, 07:14
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: South East England
Posts: 304
Originally Posted by highflyer40 View Post
Surely a fairer way of collecting taxes would be to tax turnover instead of profits?

Instead of taxing profits at 20%, tax turnover by 10%.

It is simplistic, but I think that is what is needed....simple tax law, that everyone can understand, and not manipulate in their favour.
It is called VAT.
The government effectively tax both turnover and profits.
Eclectic is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2017, 07:50
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Southwold
Age: 68
Posts: 0
I have posted this on the F1 thread but I will post it again here. Because I did 50k miles a year for business I tried to reclaim the VAT on a new car. HMRC said that if I so much as went home for my tea in it one night I could not do that. The sum involved was £5,000.
Effluent Man is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2017, 08:06
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Here
Posts: 309
Originally Posted by Effluent Man View Post
I have posted this on the F1 thread but I will post it again here. Because I did 50k miles a year for business I tried to reclaim the VAT on a new car. HMRC said that if I so much as went home for my tea in it one night I could not do that. The sum involved was £5,000.
If you claim a mileage allowance from your employer, does the rate not take into account such matters as tax and depreciation on your private vehicle?
yellowtriumph is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2017, 08:10
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 62
Posts: 1,941
Not quite sure why some are gurning so much at this. Wealthy people have been saving their earnings in the most efficient manner possible since money first started.

The blame lies with successive governments not tightening/closing loopholes and not with the wealth creators/earners.
Seldomfitforpurpose is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2017, 08:17
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: South East England
Posts: 304
Originally Posted by Seldomfitforpurpose View Post
Not quite sure why some are gurning so much at this. Wealthy people have been saving their earnings in the most efficient manner possible since money first started.

The blame lies with successive governments not tightening/closing loopholes and not with the wealth creators/earners.
The problem is with governments being greedy and punishing success purely out of envy and socialist dogma.
We live in a country where at least a million successful high earners have left to pay lower tax elsewhere. Dubai, Gibraltar, Malta, Singapore, Hong Kong etc etc. We all know people who have done this.
If the government had less punishing tax rates many of these people would come back and contribute to the British economy.
Eclectic is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2017, 08:25
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,457
Weren't we were encouraged to be tax efficient - how many of those investigative journalists, I wonder, are hiding their savings from tax in an ISA?

Interesting piece in the Times today - you need to pay to read the whole article, but the gist of it is here:

Offshore investments aren’t illegal — so why the song and dance?

The Paradise Papers caper might be the only current story even more boring than Brexit, for what is being reported is that everyone is largely obeying the law. This is not, as with stories of pedestrians using zebra crossings, one of those things which normally produces headlines. There seems to be some muttering about actors paying themselves through some island somewhere but the banner leaders include the Queen investing her private money in a country she’s the head of state of. Quite remarkable behaviour we’ll all agree – and to wonder about the taxation of any returns is to forget that she isn’t in fact subject to tax laws anyway. The 75 per cent she does pay on her income is a voluntary arrangement....
Background Noise is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2017, 08:31
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Southwold
Age: 68
Posts: 0
Originally Posted by yellowtriumph View Post
If you claim a mileage allowance from your employer, does the rate not take into account such matters as tax and depreciation on your private vehicle?
Mileage allowance is a composite figure. When I was a Councillor I received 35p per mile, I am not sure what the current figure is. Clearly fuel only costs between ten and fifteen pence, the remainder covers all other costs including wear and tear and added depreciation.

In my case however it was my own business. I thought it was unfair that I could not reclaim the VAT. Had I reclaimed the purchase VAT then when I sold the car any price would have included an element for VAT which I would have repaid in that period.
Effluent Man is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.