metalblue
Well-Known Member
no debating with someone who lives in a world of alternate facts - the ones he makes up.
Name one fact I’ve made up.
no debating with someone who lives in a world of alternate facts - the ones he makes up.
just remove non-dom status and have people pay tax where they actually live - they haven't even got a home in India - about the only continent they haven't got one
Actually he was confusing domicile, residence AND citizenship.
still, why let silly things like facts stop you from spouting shite about stuff you don’t understand?
By all means explain…
Simply if you are wealthy you can pay people to tell you how to avoid paying tax. The ordinary man in the street who is not self-employed has no such advise available.
The result is we the Plebs pay all the tax we should by law, whilst the wealthy do not. They still pay more than we do though.
Totally different debate but I’d have no issues in removing non dom.
There’s still a possibility whilst people stick up for him and his wife. They don’t know what they are talking about, but people are only having a go at him because he’s their beloved Tory poster boy.Well the story is now developing into they had Green cards during his first year as chancellor, so in theory they must have been paying US tax on international earnings.
However the most likely thing is she's been funnelling her money off to a tax haven, as do most non-doms. Something that was dodged in their statement to the press.
I don't think the debate here should be whether non-dom status is right or wrong to exist, that's far too wide and far reaching a subject.
It's that the associated benefits of being in a marriage with a globe trotting international non-dom is 100% incompatible with the office of Chancellor of the Exchequer of the UK, and it's even more mind boggling when said chancellor putting taxes up during a cost of living crisis.
He's absolutely cooked as Chancellor and he'll never be PM now.
Agree 100% people can't expect him to give up his wifes citizenship, but he will have to give up his ambitions of holding one of the 4 great offices of state.
We both know that you have no idea what impact residence has on what taxes you pay, no idea what impact nationality has on what taxes you pay and no idea what impact domicile has on what taxes you pay, but you have waded in making a series of points that are wrong.
you’re welcome.
Well the story is now developing into they had Green cards during his first year as chancellor, so in theory they must have been paying US tax on international earnings.
However the most likely thing is she's been funnelling her money off to a tax haven, as do most non-doms. Something that was dodged in their statement to the press.
I don't think the debate here should be whether non-dom status is right or wrong to exist, that's far too wide and far reaching a subject.
It's that the associated benefits of being in a marriage with a globe trotting international non-dom is 100% incompatible with the office of Chancellor of the Exchequer of the UK, and it's even more mind boggling when said chancellor putting taxes up during a cost of living crisis.
He's absolutely cooked as Chancellor and he'll never be PM now.
Agree 100% people can't expect him to give up his wifes citizenship, but he will have to give up his ambitions of holding one of the 4 great offices of state.
I don’t doubt she (like most wealthy people) has been smart with what taxes she pays within the laws of the land - and there is absolutely a conversation to be had about governments allowing certain loopholes that exploit the spirit of the law if not the law itself.
Trouble is the system is too complicated and governments are always playing catch-up. Identifying the problem is much much easier than identifying the solution. All I’ve ever heard is pie in the sky ideas or taxing the easy pickings more - I don’t have the answers either beyond ripping the whole thing up and starting again. Some of the stuff being done on a global level definitely appear steps in the right direction.
Agree on that 100% and non-dom will still be probably being discussed 50 years from now.
But my point is, he can't fill the role of Chancellor while his wife is doing that.
It's not compatible with asking the public to pay an ever increasing amount of personal taxes, and actually the largest tax burden since the 40s.
To be honest Boris and the rest of them will know he's done they are just letting his reputation get further into the mud before he goes, so they never have to deal with him in a leadership contest.
I reckon he'll stand down as an MP at the next election.
I'd be interested to know to what extent there are objective rules for determining whether someone is genuinely a non-dom. Because obviously anyone can claim anything on their tax form, but there is presumably a way to say, "no, actually you're taking the piss there. Pay up."I don’t doubt she (like most wealthy people) has been smart with what taxes she pays within the laws of the land - and there is absolutely a conversation to be had about governments allowing certain loopholes that exploit the spirit of the law if not the law itself.
killing off the competition.Agree on that 100% and non-dom will still be probably being discussed 50 years from now.
But my point is, he can't fill the role of Chancellor while his wife is doing that.
It's not compatible with asking the public to pay an ever increasing amount of personal taxes, and actually the largest tax burden since the 40s.
To be honest Boris and the rest of them will know he's done they are just letting his reputation get further into the mud before he goes, so they never have to deal with him in a leadership contest.
I reckon he'll stand down as an MP at the next election.
I'd be interested to know to what extent there are objective rules for determining whether someone is genuinely a non-dom. Because obviously anyone can claim anything on their tax form, but there is presumably a way to say, "no, actually you're taking the piss there. Pay up."
I applied to do a master's course recently, and they said I wasn't entitled to home fees because I've not been resident in the UK for 10 years. But if I can show that I've maintained a UK address, bank account, NHS registration, and that my work contracts overseas are temporary, I would qualify. I wonder what non-doms have to show to prove it.
I get the point of the non-dom status. If you want to attract talented workers to the UK, it's a bonus to be able to say that they will only pay UK tax on the stuff they earn here (although again, funny how that doesn't apply to lorry drivers or nurses, because the fees involved show that it's only for the super rich). But that has to be linked to a temporary work contract of some kind, and once that contract is up and you choose to stay, you're then taxed as a resident. The idea that someone can be living in the UK for 15 years and still claiming these tax breaks is taking the piss.
LOL at the idea she pays tax in India. She pays £30k a year to maintain a tax break she had for nothing for 15 years. On the basis I pay well over £10k a year in tax I can quite confidently say I have payed more tax than she has in the time she has lived here (however long that is). I think a number of us on here could say that.Having lived and worked abroad myself I’ve got some idea of the complexities of maintaining a life in both countries. Which points are wrong exactly? I don’t think anyone is saying she has broken the law by paying Indian tax on Indian income that remains in India.
Cheers.They won’t have to jump through the same hoops as you I suspect. It’s not a tax break in this specific case exactly, but maybe the answer to non dom is - after a specific period - you pay the greatest tax on where you live or where you earn it - there is an inherent fairness in that. So specifically on dividends - India is 15%, UK is (for her) 39.35%. She would pay 15% to Indian treasury and remaining 24.35% to UK in return she is freely allowed to bring the money in to the UK. She absolutely shouldn’t pay best part of 55% in tax, that’s unfair.
Hope you managed to get on your masters course mate.
LOL at the idea she pays tax in India. She pays £30k a year to maintain a tax break she had for nothing for 15 years. On the basis I pay well over £10k a year in tax I can quite confidently say I have payed more tax than she has in the time she has lived here (however long that is). I think a number of us on here could say that.
It might be legal but its wrong. We have every right to pissed off about it.
Its also something that is quiet easily changed. I worked in the US many years back - there i could do 2 years tax free then if you stayed on you had to pay tax going forward and back pay for the 2 years you didn't. It's not hard to change 15 years to 2 and scrap the £30k sweet deals.
Well the story is now developing into they had Green cards during his first year as chancellor, so in theory they must have been paying US tax on international earnings.
However the most likely thing is she's been funnelling her money off to a tax haven, as do most non-doms. Something that was dodged in their statement to the press.
I don't think the debate here should be whether non-dom status is right or wrong to exist, that's far too wide and far reaching a subject.
It's that the associated benefits of being in a marriage with a globe trotting international non-dom is 100% incompatible with the office of Chancellor of the Exchequer of the UK, and it's even more mind boggling when said chancellor putting taxes up during a cost of living crisis.
He's absolutely cooked as Chancellor and he'll never be PM now.
Agree 100% people can't expect him to give up his wifes citizenship, but he will have to give up his ambitions of holding one of the 4 great offices of state.