OT. The futures Bright, the Futures Brexit!!!

[Andy_Faber]

Pedant. Typical accountant, stop hiding behind semantics and address the morality issue.

The morals are all the same - the businessman/corporation aims not to pay penny one more than he/it legally has to, the scrounger aims to claim every penny it legally can. Both are equally immoral/ammoral

The two main differences -

the order of magnitude for the businessman/corporation is greater

The scrounger inputs zero into the economy

The irony is, if the scrounger could only 'see the future' and invested in training, self-sacrifice and in general not being such a scroat he/she could be in the realms of the businessman in due course.

[Andy_Faber]

you would. You'd be daft not to. Imagine telling your life/partner/friend/us 'I gave HMRC £100,000 more in tax than I needed to, but its OK because I saved the £5,000 that a tax accountant would have cost me'.....

[ramAnag]

It seems to me me that your morals are 'it's OK to steal a bit of money but not too much '. Is it OK to give someone a black eye, but not fracture their skull. Your bit of 'black economy' is a posh word for stealing. If you're living in a greenhouse don't throw stones.

Hang on a moment Ram...I don't think I'm actually the one 'throwing stones'. I'm simply being honest...I've never fiddled or avoided tax in my life but I have done some cash in hand jobs and I have, on occasions, paid cash for jobs I've had done.
You started all this by adopting the high moral ground over your snooker playing acquaintance. I get where you're coming from in that instance, but there's no point in getting all feisty with me just because I've posed two moral questions - 1) Is there any real difference between making the most of the benefits system and avoiding tax by paying or receiving cash? 2) Are there no instances where the fine lines between 'loopholes' and evasion are blurred by the clever complicity of certain accountants?
By the way...the only 'benefit' I have ever claimed has been child benefit/allowance but then I've been fortunate and never been out of work. Seems to me you might be the one throwing stones...but very selectively and only at the windows on 'Benefit Street'.

'Is it okay to give someone a black eye but not fracture their skull?' Not sure I understand the point but, I think we'd all agree...it's certainly better.

[Trickytreesreds]

Suspect you mean 'benefit scrounger' and 'tax scrounger' was a Freudian slip, but we're back to 'visibility' again. You seem to take offence only at what you can see around you, but supposing a self employed businessman made a very good living but then made it even better by employing a 'clever accountant' to find loopholes that meant he avoided paying the taxes he owes. Why is that so much better...because he lives in Self Employed Avenue rather than Benefit Street?

I agree ramanag with this hardheartedly.

I think my gripe is, when I walk in the local and see the same doleites in there everyday.
They are supposed to be living on benefits for necessities. It is supposed provide help for those who need it.
Unfortunately, it has become a "career" to some and I fund it. That isn't right and has to stop.
It's probably why I take my stance on cheap labour from abroad. These scammers should be forced into these jobs or they get nothing.
What we have created(especially Labour), is a culture of happy with less and as long as someone else pays for it, I'm happy.
This is where I would throw some serious money into career enforcement. Advisers who match candidates to jobs.
Any thing we then need to fill, comes from the movement of Labour.

Your points about the rich and corporate are valid and do need addressing. I feel they are a separate argument though.
For a change I am in agreement with you in the main.

[ramAnag]

Well there's a turn up Tricky.
Seeing as we keep returning to people in the pub, I'll get anecdotal just one more time to make this point. There's a guy in my old local who I used to know well. Runs his own small business in Derby, 'hail fellow well met' sort of chap. Former Rotarian or Round Table member...one of those 'you scratch my back...' groups anyway. Always kept banging on about, despite owning his own business, how 'poor' he was and how he could only afford to pay himself about £11,000 per year.
Owns a £400,000 house on a big plot, couple of horses etc but claims family income supplement...or certainly used to.
What's actually happened is that, in collusion with his accountant - because frankly he's too thick to have come up with this on his own - he 'appears' to only have a salary of around £11,000 but it's absolute bollux. That's his declared income and I know for certain that he earns considerably more and has a number of other 'nice little (untaxed) earners' on the side.
To me he is 100% as bad as the more stereotypical benefit cheats, quite possibly worse, but because he's middle class, mixes in more affluent rural circles and doesn't venture into Tesco in his pyjamas - no I don't think people should either - he isn't stigmatised.
I'm not for one moment defending scroungers but I wonder how many of the self employed are 'at it' in this way...I doubt he's an isolated or extreme case.

[Trickytreesreds]

Well there's a turn up Tricky.
Seeing as we keep returning to people in the pub, I'll get anecdotal just one more time to make this point. There's a guy in my old local who I used to know well. Runs his own small business in Derby, 'hail fellow well met' sort of chap. Former Rotarian or Round Table member...one of those 'you scratch my back...' groups anyway. Always kept banging on about, despite owning his own business, how 'poor' he was and how he could only afford to pay himself about £11,000 per year.
Owns a £400,000 house on a big plot, couple of horses etc but claims family income supplement...or certainly used to.
What's actually happened is that, in collusion with his accountant - because frankly he's too thick to have come up with this on his own - he 'appears' to only have a salary of around £11,000 but it's absolute bollux. That's his declared income and I know for certain that he earns considerably more and has a number of other 'nice little (untaxed) earners' on the side.
To me he is 100% as bad as the more stereotypical benefit cheats, quite possibly worse, but because he's middle class, mixes in more affluent rural circles and doesn't venture into Tesco in his pyjamas - no I don't think people should either - he isn't stigmatised.
I'm not for one moment defending scroungers but I wonder how many of the self employed are 'at it' in this way...I doubt he's an isolated or extreme case.

I agree completely.
But that's a system fault, as how can a guy "earning" 11 k live in a 400k house?

It's like signing on, whilst travelling there by 4.2 l Jag.
More a case of the system, not looking into these things correctly.

I have signed on twice in my life and got run through the grinder. Luckily it was only for a couple of weeks each time, but very unpleasant. The opinion I formed was, if you are fresh meat they slice and dice you. The longer you sit on the books, the less they seem to care.
Mugs like me, are back on the tax road paying for those that don't.

So it seems we have a 3 way deal here.

1.Professional doleites, with the intention of paying nowt
2.Professional self employed book cookers, with no intention of paying the correct amount
3. Corporate book cookers who evade paying anything at all if they can.

I wonder if anyone has ever tried to guesstimate what we lose?

I bet it's a sum, to wipe out our national debt

[roger_ramjet]

Mangara - you say you have done some cash in hand jobs but never fiddled your tax. Am I therefore right in concluding that you declared these cash in hand jobs on your tax return and to your then employers so that they could ensure your NI calculations correctly reflected the other income?

[roger_ramjet]

As to your friend on 11k salary then I have, based on the facts as you present them, nothing but contempt for him. However 11k is a magic number. Its the figure usually booked as salary for the self employed paying themselves via thei own company. The next 32k of income is paid as dividends and is untaxed on the individual BUT his company pays 20% tax instead. Thus he may say he pays no tax, but in this scenario his company pays it for him so noone loses. This does however legally save NI contributions - but youll have to pay to find out how and why!! 😊😊

[ramAnag]

Mangara - you say you have done some cash in hand jobs but never fiddled your tax. Am I therefore right in concluding that you declared these cash in hand jobs on your tax return and to your then employers so that they could ensure your NI calculations correctly reflected the other income?

God there's no escaping your pedantry today is there Rog? Answered that elsewhere...apart from typical student stuff - private tuition, bar work etc - little bit of decorating work and some writing...didn't amount to much, certainly not enough to justify the services of your colleagues. But you're right I'm a very naughty boy.

But Tricky makes a good point - yes I did just say that!! - there are the three types of 'scroungers' he identifies and the latter two may well be benefitting from a whole industry of accountants which is costing the country billions, yet we only demonise the obvious ones. Why?

P.S. The 11k guy is certainly no 'friend' of mine.

[Andy_Faber]

As to your friend on 11k salary then I have, based on the facts as you present them, nothing but contempt for him. However 11k is a magic number. Its the figure usually booked as salary for the self employed paying themselves via thei own company. The next 32k of income is paid as dividends and is untaxed on the individual BUT his company pays 20% tax instead. Thus he may say he pays no tax, but in this scenario his company pays it for him so noone loses. This does however legally save NI contributions - but youll have to pay to find out how and why!! 😊😊

Just to be up to date, from this tax year its taxed at 7.5% and then 32.5% depending on total income so this guy is either ignorant of tax law or telling fibs