Panama tax evasion

[Peppino Impastato]

 

To be fair they said it was morally wrong to engage in it, not to benefit from it.

I don't think either is immoral to engage in though, no. I think it is amoral.

 

Spoken like a true lawyer. At least we know he considers his dad immoral though. And Osborne thinks Cameron's dad was 'morally repugnant'.

Osborne, btw, not for you for actual humans reading, had a £4 million trust fund in the Caymans in 2010. He also makes a lot of money from the family company which doesn't pay any tax but pays out million pound dividends, and he personally stole £150 thousand from the taxpayer by flipping his second home.

Same guy refers to benefit fraudsters as 'no better than a common mugger' and 'stealing from the country'.

That's Tories for you.

[Crossbill]

Peppino Impastato, on 06 Apr 2016 - 18:19, said:

Spoken like a true lawyer.

 

It's exactly the sort of squirming that gets you let off on a technicality, while the judge feels the need to condemn you.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

Oh my god shut up you moron

The lap-dog appears.

Toddle off son - the big boys are talking now.

[Jambomo]

To be fair they said it was morally wrong to engage in it, not to benefit from it.

I don't think either is immoral to engage in though, no. I think it is amoral.

I don't see how you can think it's amoral.

I can understand someone thinking that it's a persons moral obligation to pay the tax due in the country. I can understand (though I don't personally agree) that someone might disagree that they should have to pay tax to the state and feel that they are not morally obliged to pay more than is their due and might use these loopholes to avoid it.

Unless you hold the 'shut up, do what you are told and don't think about it' approach to tax then most people hold some opinion on the morality of taxation in general, and that it extends to avoiding paying the tax that is due is no great surprise.

[Granny Danger]

Ad Lib sticking up for Cameron really shouldn't be shocking anyone here.

This.

[Peppino Impastato]

 

The lap-dog appears.

Toddle off son - the big boys are talking now.

Why are you here then manchild?

[DeeTillEhDeh]

 

Why are you here then manchild?

Did it take your single brain cell that long for such a witty retort?

[welshbairn]

The idea that wealthy people who hide their wealth in UK controlled overseas territories to hide it from the taxman being merely amoral is some kind of Arthur Daly kind of ethics. Especially when the people who allow it to happen either take advantage of it or encourage their relatives to do so, and there is a deliberate attempt to force the poorest and most disadvantaged out of welfare protections. Legal does not equal moral.

[Peppino Impastato]

 

Did it take your single brain cell that long for such a witty retort?

Your mums a witty retort

[DeeTillEhDeh]

 

Your mums a witty retort

Oo er missus . . . we have one here.

[Ad Lib]

I don't see how you can think it's amoral.

I can understand someone thinking that it's a persons moral obligation to pay the tax due in the country. I can understand (though I don't personally agree) that someone might disagree that they should have to pay tax to the state and feel that they are not morally obliged to pay more than is their due and might use these loopholes to avoid it.

Unless you hold the 'shut up, do what you are told and don't think about it' approach to tax then most people hold some opinion on the morality of taxation in general, and that it extends to avoiding paying the tax that is due is no great surprise.

I don't consider tax to be an intrinsically moral issue. I consider a government's record in terms of how equitably it raises revenue through taxation and other means to be an ethical issue. I consider how a government spends the money it raises to be an ethical issue. I consider complying or not complying with the law to be an ethical question.

I do not consider the choice between two legal actions, neither of which in and of themselves have a moral quality, to be a moral question.

[Peppino Impastato]

 

I don't consider tax to be an intrinsically moral issue. I consider a government's record in terms of how equitably it raises revenue through taxation and other means to be an ethical issue. I consider how a government spends the money it raises to be an ethical issue. I consider complying or not complying with the law to be an ethical question.

I do not consider the choice between two legal actions, neither of which in and of themselves have a moral quality, to be a moral question.

Of course they have a moral quality.

The only way they wouldn't is if the same option was open to everybody, which it patently isn't. Don't worry I'll keep you right as far as morals go, I'll be your moral compass.

[Kaz]

Regardless of the rights or wrongs can you imagine this story was linked to a member of the Scottish Government? Alex Salmond? As it is the story has barely merited a peep from the many 'proud and patriotic Scot's' I know.

[ICTChris]

Regardless of the rights or wrongs can you imagine this story was linked to a member of the Scottish Government? Alex Salmond? As it is the story has barely merited a peep from the many 'proud and patriotic Scot's' I know.

 

Apart from David Cameron's father, have there been any Scottish connections established in this?

 

I read somewhere that people previously connected with RBS had been  named?

[welshbairn]

Apart from David Cameron's father, have there been any Scottish connections established in this?

 

I read somewhere that people previously connected with RBS had been  named?

 

Not sure how long the leaked records go back but it would be great to see some of the corrupt thieves at the BoS exposed as well as the RBS boys.

[ICTChris]

Not sure how long the leaked records go back but it would be great to see some of the corrupt thieves at the BoS exposed as well as the RBS boys.

 

They go back decades.  The company that Ian Cameron set up was formed in 1982.

[Jambomo]

I don't consider tax to be an intrinsically moral issue. I consider a government's record in terms of how equitably it raises revenue through taxation and other means to be an ethical issue. I consider how a government spends the money it raises to be an ethical issue. I consider complying or not complying with the law to be an ethical question.

I do not consider the choice between two legal actions, neither of which in and of themselves have a moral quality, to be a moral question.

Taxation is often discussed in moral terms, for example discussions on Distributive Justice, Libertarianism, Economic ethics etc.

So whilst you may not consider tax to be an intrinsically moral issue, there is a significant and fairly broad history of research that disagree with you.

The only way I could see taxation being considered as amoral would only be if you are discussing the absolute mechanics of collection I.e the system which processes PAYE contributions or a computer programme which calculates VAT.

Everything else, from the principles of why we collect taxes, principles of how we collect it, rules on laws surrounding them - all of these things have a moral quality and can be a moral question.

[Ad Lib]

Taxation is often discussed in moral terms, for example discussions on Distributive Justice, Libertarianism, Economic ethics etc.

So whilst you may not consider tax to be an intrinsically moral issue, there is a significant and fairly broad history of research that disagree with you.

The only way I could see taxation being considered as amoral would only be if you are discussing the absolute mechanics of collection I.e the system which processes PAYE contributions or a computer programme which calculates VAT.

Everything else, from the principles of why we collect taxes, principles of how we collect it, rules on laws surrounding them - all of these things have a moral quality and can be a moral question.

I'm not denying that "what tax law should be" is a moral question. I'm not denying that the distributive effects of tax are not a moral question. I am denying that how you arrange your affairs within the letter of the law of the tax code is a moral question.

The first two concern the moral obligations of a government. The third concerns the moral obligations of citizens acting in accordance with the laws the government sets.

[Jambomo]

I'm not denying that "what tax law should be" is a moral question. I'm not denying that the distributive effects of tax are not a moral question. I am denying that how you arrange your affairs within the letter of the law of the tax code is a moral question.

The first two concern the moral obligations of a government. The third concerns the moral obligations of citizens acting in accordance with the laws the government sets.

I don't think that's a logical argument.

The third as you say is the moral obligation of citizens acting in accordance with government laws.

In acknowledging they have a moral obligation to pay tax within the structure of the law, then this action cannot be amoral - otherwise there would be no obligation.

Arranging your own tax affairs is, I'd argue, also a question of morality. You are morally obliged to pay tax to the government.

You can, through legal means register affairs to pay less tax, this does mean taking certain steps and actions that you know are not truly representative of your affairs (I.e saying you or your company are based in The British Virgin Isles when you know that you are in truth, a British domicile or business or setting up pretend companies altogether) but you are allowed to.

The moral question here is should you? Just because the law says you can doesn't mean that you ought to or have to. You decide whether to take advantage of those rules or not and that is a moral decision.

[strichener]

And Strichener's immediate reply that quoted the same post.

Aye. You have made an arse of this. That particular thread stopped at that post. Your later ramblings quoted a post of mine that had nothing to do with these posts. It appears that you have trouble keeping up.