FlyTheNest

rebeccariots2 wrote:

norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS 1h1 hour ago
Its understood "quite likely" Chancellor will publish his tax returns "within next few days"

Chancellors, PMs and Cabinet should have to provide full transparency over income, tax affairs etc - including unearned income. If you're making policy that affects the incomes of the public - you need to show your own interests.

Exactly

'Afternoon, everyone
How goes the world today?
I haven't looked at the news yet

HindleA wrote:Scrutinised to the nth degree,in the most intimate of details,guilty until proven innocent,beholden to "tax payer" and questioned as to sustainability as to the fundamentals of a reasonable life=necessary.

Tax-return =witch hunt.

Wealthy, influential people make their own rules for their own benefit

That threshold of shareholdings that need declaring has got to come down, surely?

I reckon it can be the same as that "average family income" they like to use against poor families in private rented accommodation.

PorFavor wrote:

5m ago 13:29
Corbyn has not been able to publish his tax return yet because he does not have a copy

Jeremy Corbyn has promised to publish his own tax return. But there has been a hold-up - because he does not have a copy. (Politics Live, Guardian)

I don't think there's anyone who would (honestly) say that there's anything sinister about this - but rather a cock-up, surely, if he can't come up with it in time for this afternoon. Can you imagine what hay David Cameron will make of it?


Edited to add

Although it has to be borne in mind that David Cameron hasn't made public his actual tax return. Maybe that's the best line to take (the best line of attack whatever the circumstances, probably).

Someone should tell the BBC political journalists that. Radio 4 this morning kept telling us that Cameron had published his tax return.

Rowson.
Column for Tribune, 15th April 2016: On Cameron’s Money
https://martinrowson.wordpress.com/2016 ... ons-money/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

In Cameron’s case, he was trying to make everyone shut up and leave him alone by invoking his grieving old mother, on the basis that only the vulture-hearted would care more about money, corruption and power than about a sweet old granny’s tears. Trading a fast getaway for your family’s emotional capital indicates not simply the levels of shamelessness bad money can buy you at Eton, but also a almost pathological conflation of the national interest with Cameron’s own. “L’etat, c’est moi” hardly does it justice.

PorFavor wrote:

5m ago 13:29
Corbyn has not been able to publish his tax return yet because he does not have a copy

Jeremy Corbyn has promised to publish his own tax return. But there has been a hold-up - because he does not have a copy. (Politics Live, Guardian)

I don't think there's anyone who would (honestly) say that there's anything sinister about this - but rather a cock-up, surely, if he can't come up with it in time for this afternoon. Can you imagine what hay David Cameron will make of it?


Edited to add

Although it has to be borne in mind that David Cameron hasn't made public his actual tax return. Maybe that's the best line to take (the best line of attack whatever the circumstances, probably).

The post's been updated:

Corbyn has not been able to publish his tax return yet because he does not have a copy

Jeremy Corbyn has promised to publish his own tax return. But there has been a hold-up - because he does not have a copy.

According to Labour, MPs have to submit their tax returns by paper and Corbyn sent his only copy to HM Revenue and Customs.

John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, told BBC News:

He does his own tax returns, I believe. He submitted [it] and I think he’s trying to get it back from HMRC.

Bit of a muck up not to keep a copy?

A tax return only reflects what the person has actually declared. Doesn't mean they haven't got/earned more.

Willow904 wrote: You misunderstand me.

This is indubitably true! My apologies.

Willow904 wrote: What I was referring to as a "fad" was the propagandistic exercise of publishing self-selected pieces of financial information by the likes of Goldsmith and Cameron in a sudden frenzy of faux openness when it suits them. A system of public tax returns for public officials sounds great, but random offerings by random MPs feels like a fad to me. Corbyn has said he'd like to see much more to be declared in the resgister of members interests. I'd rather have something more concrete like that, than a similarly edited expose from Osborne which is designed to be titillating to satsify the masses rather than giving us the true transparency we need.

I think you're right - and to save all the farting about, let's just do what the Scandinavians do. Publish the lot - salaries, tax paid, etc.

I also think we should have a rule about work outside the HoC while a person is a Member of Parliament - representing their constituents and legislating is a full-time job (or it should be) and if they've got too much time on their hands they could do their own research and stop spending our money on SPADs. I was horrified when Clegg admitted that he had never read the Health and Social Care Act.

We know MPs are paid £74K (or more) and we can work out vaguely how much income tax and NI they pay on that - but so many of them have other jobs, directorships, etc. they have other sources of income we know nothing about. We pay them handsomely to concentrate on what we elect them for, and they really shouldn't have time for anything other than their duties as MPs/ministers.

I also think we should have new rules on political donations - the Tories are basically bought by the rich to do their bidding.
They moan about unions funding Labour, but at least the unions can say that they are representative of a lot of people.

I'm aware that this is asking a lot - but if we want more transparency from our leaders, it's worth making a few other changes too.

Like you, Willow, I can do without Osborne or whoever publishing a letter from an accountant. I know what he is paid by us and I know he will more than likely be paying all the right income tax in the same way that Cameron's little letter outlined in his case.
We will never find out what they've got stashed elsewhere and how they've covered their arses; but we should be allowed to know where their political donations come from and how clean that money is.

Perceptive article by Matthew Norman on Cameron's luck - and his fatal flaw.

Cameron, a very clever man

That's debatable IMHO - he's well educated with a good (if selective) memory, but not outstandingly intelligent - unless you class deviousness as cleverness

... is astonishingly thick when it comes to anticipating how complacent his blithe sense of entitlement makes him appear. Anyone with imagination would have given the almost £500,000 he and Samantha have pocketed since 2010 from renting out their Notting Hill home away.

Only an emotional dunce would be unable to picture how it looks, in the age of the food bank and benefits raids, for a wealthy family to profit by an extra £100, 000 a year because Joanna and Johnny Tax-Payer graciously fund two lavish homes. How much imagination does it take before you give that income to charity?

The sin here is not avarice, but smugness. I do not know David Cameron, but I know the breed. At university, when they were known as Sloanes, I lived with and liked them. They were kind and gentle people, if you’ll forgive the generalisation.

Raised in large rural houses, with London flats in Kensington and Knightsbridge, it was not their fault that they knew nothing of hardship. As teenagers, they had nice cars, went skiing in Klojsters for Easter and to Umbrian villas in the summer, held dinner parties and went to balls. Their lives were precise replicas of their parents’ lives, only with less fancy cutlery. The one think they lacked was any interest in the world beyond their own.

Some of them, friends to this day, developed the curiosity that leads to insight and empathy. Cameron apparently did not. That doesn’t make him a bad man. And, though it may foreshorten his time in office, it isn’t a resignation issue. But it does make him a huge disappointment.

Ultimately, like one of those characters in Greek myth whose sense of entitlement outraged the gods, his good luck was also his curse.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/dav ... 77406.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That's a good point about the PM living in Downing Street and letting their London home out.

Is this right? Taken from Bracknell Labour.

I hate to defend Cameron on this but the press reporting has been misleading at best. Blairemore holdings was HMRC registered and the U.K. Based shareholders did pay tax on profits from the scheme. The reason it was offshore was to allow the fund to carry out investments which U.K. Regulation would not allow due to the risky nature of the investments.

It sounds different from what I've been reading about the company.

Jezza can order a copy from HMRC. I believe that's what he's done.

Kuenssberg obviously been tipped off about Cameron's approach when he speaks:

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Jesus.

Laura Kuenssberg ‏@bbclaurak 20m20 minutes ago

Hour until Cameron's tax statement in Commons, an hour for Corbyn to find his tax return or else PM has easy comeback to almost any Labour Q

So when someone asks about him trying to protect offshore trusts from EU regulation, he can say "whadabout Corbyn's tax return?"

yahyah wrote:Kuenssberg obviously been tipped off about Cameron's approach when he speaks:

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

LK can FRO. I'm annoyed (at myself) being able to "hear the sneer" when I read that tweet.

But that's obviously the line the Cam fans in the media will be pushing.
The right wingers are already drooling that 'Wurzel' has lost his paperwork and will have to resign and/or be prosecuted by HMRC for not keeping his records.

ohsocynical wrote:Is this right? Taken from Bracknell Labour.

I hate to defend Cameron on this but the press reporting has been misleading at best. Blairemore holdings was HMRC registered and the U.K. Based shareholders did pay tax on profits from the scheme. The reason it was offshore was to allow the fund to carry out investments which U.K. Regulation would not allow due to the risky nature of the investments.

It sounds different from what I've been reading about the company.

Blairmore Holdings was originally incorporated in the Bahamas in 1989. It moved to Ireland in 2010.

In the Blairmore Holdings prospectus for 2006, it says that the fund is not resident in the UK for UK tax purposes.

There is more information on this here - http://www.uk.businessinsider.com/ian-c ... gs-2016-04" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It includes where the fund was based and the home address given for Ian Cameron - a "care-of" address in Nassau, Bahamas.

What has been posted on your Bracknell Labour site is not correct. OhSo.

RobertSnozers wrote:

Tubby Isaacs wrote:Bit of a muck up not to keep a copy?

Why? The information's always available from HMRC if you need it. I can't think of any circumstances other than today's why Corbyn would suddenly need a copy. It doesn't rank up there with, for example, forgetting to declare profits from an offshore investment fund on the register of interests.

Ironically, if Corbyn had a firm of accountants dealing with it, he'd be able to get hold of it almost immediately.

Yeah, that's true. Unfortunate though.

Might be some clerk who hates Cameron having Corbyn's request land in his hands. He could send it off quickly and make Cameron look very silly.

ephemerid wrote:

ohsocynical wrote:Is this right? Taken from Bracknell Labour.

I hate to defend Cameron on this but the press reporting has been misleading at best. Blairemore holdings was HMRC registered and the U.K. Based shareholders did pay tax on profits from the scheme. The reason it was offshore was to allow the fund to carry out investments which U.K. Regulation would not allow due to the risky nature of the investments.

It sounds different from what I've been reading about the company.

Blairmore Holdings was originally incorporated in the Bahamas in 1989. It moved to Ireland in 2010.

In the Blairmore Holdings prospectus for 2006, it says that the fund is not resident in the UK for UK tax purposes.

There is more information on this here - http://www.uk.businessinsider.com/ian-c ... gs-2016-04" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It includes where the fund was based and the home address given for Ian Cameron - a "care-of" address in Nassau, Bahamas.

What has been posted on your Bracknell Labour site is not correct. OhSo.

"Resident for tax in UK" isn't the claim being made. It's that it was registered with HMRC in the UK (bit of confusing wording, admittedly). That way, HMRC are alert to making sure that tax is raised when the gain comes "onshore" to the UK.

I don't know if it were registered with the UK tax authorities. Assume it would be, or else Cameron would be very wary of declaring it because it might put the other investors in shtuck.

Tubby Isaacs wrote:Might be some clerk who hates Cameron having Corbyn's request land in his hands. He could send it off quickly and make Cameron look very silly.

Or he just publishes his March pay slip which has everything listed, and covers the whole of the last years tax. He can say he will publish the return when HMRC send it to him. He's stated often enough he only has his MP's salary, so it shouldnt be a problem.

Temulkar wrote:

Tubby Isaacs wrote:Might be some clerk who hates Cameron having Corbyn's request land in his hands. He could send it off quickly and make Cameron look very silly.

Or he just publishes his March pay slip which has everything listed, and covers the whole of the last years tax. He can say he will publish the return when HMRC send it to him. He's stated often enough he only has his MP's salary, so it shouldnt be a problem.

Good idea. I hope he does this if the tax return doesn't turn up.

I am in despair again after a few days of hope.

Have to go out at 3.45. Not sure I will be able to watch TV.

Maeght wrote:

Temulkar wrote:

Tubby Isaacs wrote:Might be some clerk who hates Cameron having Corbyn's request land in his hands. He could send it off quickly and make Cameron look very silly.

Or he just publishes his March pay slip which has everything listed, and covers the whole of the last years tax. He can say he will publish the return when HMRC send it to him. He's stated often enough he only has his MP's salary, so it shouldnt be a problem.

Good idea. I hope he does this if the tax return doesn't turn up.

I am in despair again after a few days of hope.

Have to go out at 3.45. Not sure I will be able to watch TV.

It will really make no difference even if Cameron "triumphs" (again)

Once somebody has been toxicifed, they stay toxic (as some of his predecessors as PM will attest)

AnatolyKasparov wrote:

Maeght wrote:

Temulkar wrote: Or he just publishes his March pay slip which has everything listed, and covers the whole of the last years tax. He can say he will publish the return when HMRC send it to him. He's stated often enough he only has his MP's salary, so it shouldnt be a problem.

Good idea. I hope he does this if the tax return doesn't turn up.

I am in despair again after a few days of hope.

Have to go out at 3.45. Not sure I will be able to watch TV.

It will really make no difference even if Cameron "triumphs" (again)

Once somebody has been toxicifed, they stay toxic (as some of his predecessors as PM will attest)

I think he will resign at the summer recess to give the tories time to decide on his replacement. Unless of course the Brexit vote goes for leave, in which case it would be the morning after, and hopefully followed by a quick general election.

http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Inde ... 64f22acce5" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Housing Bill in the Lords.

Temulkar wrote:

AnatolyKasparov wrote:

Maeght wrote: Good idea. I hope he does this if the tax return doesn't turn up.

I am in despair again after a few days of hope.

Have to go out at 3.45. Not sure I will be able to watch TV.

It will really make no difference even if Cameron "triumphs" (again)

Once somebody has been toxicifed, they stay toxic (as some of his predecessors as PM will attest)

I think he will resign at the summer recess to give the tories time to decide on his replacement. Unless of course the Brexit vote goes for leave, in which case it would be the morning after, and hopefully followed by a quick general election.

April has been bad for Cameron, May and June don't look great either. Shame.
As for those of the left not wanting Cameron to go. Can I just say...

Jeremy Corbyn's tax return just about to arrive according to Guardian's Anushka Ashthana.

Here we go

Temulkar wrote:

AnatolyKasparov wrote:

Maeght wrote: Good idea. I hope he does this if the tax return doesn't turn up.

I am in despair again after a few days of hope.

Have to go out at 3.45. Not sure I will be able to watch TV.

It will really make no difference even if Cameron "triumphs" (again)

Once somebody has been toxicifed, they stay toxic (as some of his predecessors as PM will attest)

I think he will resign at the summer recess to give the tories time to decide on his replacement. Unless of course the Brexit vote goes for leave, in which case it would be the morning after, and hopefully followed by a quick general election.

I agree, apart from the general election bit. I can't see the Tories risking an election until the boundaries have been redrawn in their favour.

Cameron coming out fighting.

He says offshore investment funds like Blairmore are an “entirely standard practice”.

He says organisations like the BBC, the Guardian, the Mirror Group and Islington council have offshore investment funds.

Ooh, take that hypocritical lefties!

They didn't cover them up, did they?

Tubby Isaacs wrote:

He says offshore investment funds like Blairmore are an “entirely standard practice”.

He says organisations like the BBC, the Guardian, the Mirror Group and Islington council have offshore investment funds.

Ooh, take that hypocritical lefties!

They didn't cover them up, did they?

Hypocrisy. Check.
Memory of dead father/son. Check.
Strawman. Check.
Politics of envy and champagne socialists still to go. Come on Dave, you can get a full house!

Protecting his mother from intrusion to her privacy, like any good son would. Check

Am I missing something? Old man Cameron was running an investment fund from the UK and lying about it?

Which minister has just been told off by Bercow for 'shrieking' ?

yahyah wrote:Protecting his mother from intrusion to her privacy, like any good son would. Check

Yeah, press regulation. Nothing to do with him.

Cameron says most crown dependencies and overseas territories have agreed to provide UK law enforcement authorities with information about beneficial ownership. Only Guernsey and Anguilla have not yet signed up, but they are expected to soon, he says.

This sounds, on the face of it, pretty positive.

Tubby Isaacs wrote:

Cameron says most crown dependencies and overseas territories have agreed to provide UK law enforcement authorities with information about beneficial ownership. Only Guernsey and Anguilla have not yet signed up, but they are expected to soon, he says.

This sounds, on the face of it, pretty positive.

announced a year ago apparently
bloody bbc cut out half way through JC's speech so Pienaar could tell us how fab tcc is.

A selection of comments and 'opinions'.

Kevin Maguire ‏@Kevin_Maguire 4m4 minutes ago
Labour MPs heard Cameron's defence is silence. Tories heckling Corbyn's attack

Sunny Hundal ‏@sunny_hundal 5m5 minutes ago
Jeremy Corbyn sounding very confident in hammering Cameron on tax havens, now in Parliament. Cameron looks a bit embarrassed.

Dan Hodges ‏@DPJHodges 7m7 minutes ago
Corbyn is one of the worst parliamentary performers I have ever seen.

Wonder what Sparrow's verdict is going to be.

Osborne's only declared £3 for bank interest.
Over £44,000 income from dividends, which must mean income from shares.

So we are to believe he has no savings in a less risky place than company shares ?
No mad money savings ? Nothing for a rainy day that he can get quick access to ?

The take of DFH genuinely astounds me.

yahyah wrote:Osborne's only declared £3 for bank interest.
Over £44,000 income from dividends, which must mean income from shares.

So we are to believe he has no savings in a less risky place than company shares ?
No mad money savings ? Nothing for a rainy day that he can get quick access to ?

Who knows yahyah - hard to believe he wouldn't have. But then he's only published an edited summary of financial information - not his actual return - as did Cameron. It's not a good look IMO.

Editing to add - contrast with Corbyn, McDonnell and even Sturgeon who have provided their returns.

AnatolyKasparov wrote:The take of DFH genuinely astounds me.

I will not look at his tweets.
It's taken four weeks and a lot of medication to get my blood pressure down to a safe level.
Not risking it by getting angry with him.

AnatolyKasparov wrote:The take of DFH genuinely astounds me.

I saw it and thought pretty much the same. It's any opportunity to sneer and deride ...

frightful_oik wrote:

Tubby Isaacs wrote:

Cameron says most crown dependencies and overseas territories have agreed to provide UK law enforcement authorities with information about beneficial ownership. Only Guernsey and Anguilla have not yet signed up, but they are expected to soon, he says.

This sounds, on the face of it, pretty positive.

announced a year ago apparently
bloody bbc cut out half way through JC's speech so Pienaar could tell us how fab tcc is.

Really? They editorialized rather than show the Leader of the Opposition replying in full? That is scandalous.

Now you mention, it did sound fishy- Jersey are more secretive than Guernsey. Are we to believe they've made some far-reaching decision on the hoof because the PM wants them to?

Saw in Private Eye that Dan Hodges and another writer ditched by the Telegraph were earning £180,000 between the two of them.

If they were on half each, £90,000 payment for the crud that he churns out ?

Gaby Hinsliff ‏@gabyhinsliff 5m5 minutes ago
PM so far; gosh, having shares overseas nowadays is terribly normal really, & my dad was lovely. JC so far: normal people hate tax dodgers

James Forsyth ‏@JGForsyth 4m4 minutes ago
David Cameron is now paying tribute to Jimmy Carr...

They're going to have fun with this.

rebeccariots2 wrote:

yahyah wrote:Osborne's only declared £3 for bank interest.
Over £44,000 income from dividends, which must mean income from shares.

So we are to believe he has no savings in a less risky place than company shares ?
No mad money savings ? Nothing for a rainy day that he can get quick access to ?

Who knows yahyah - hard to believe he wouldn't have. But then he's only published an edited summary of financial information - not his actual return - as did Cameron. It's not a good look IMO.

Editing to add - contrast with Corbyn, McDonnell and even Sturgeon who have provided their returns.

When you've got people like Sarah Montague referring to Cameron's tax return details being released you know there's a perception issue. It's a tough quandary for the Brexit supporting, tax haven loving news folks. How to batter Dave without getting blood spatter on themselves?