4 thoughts on “UK Uncut is wrong about tax avoidance”

  1. Posted 11/02/2011 at 12:26 | Permalink

    We have to stop thinking about “corporations” when we think about tax and think about “owners”. Are the beneficiaries of life insurance and pension funds “under-taxed” when it comes to their ownership of company shares? In the case of pension funds they cannot be because they are supposed to be tax exempt – so any corporation tax is a leakage to them. Individual rich owners of companies (ie private as opposed to public companies) should be dealt with on their own merits and not thought about through the prism of the corporate tax system. If the tax rules that apply to Mrs. Green are wrong (which, as it happens, I don’t think they are) then the tax rules relating to non-doms and non-residents should be changed. Most tax avoidance is the avoidance of double tax or tax that is not justified by the tax status of the end-owners of the relevant corporations.

  2. Posted 10/03/2011 at 12:39 | Permalink

    Taxing businesses is pointless. All profit should be paid as dividend or re-invested. Shareholders should then pay income tax on the dividends they receive. One less tax – Lawson would approve.

  3. Posted 02/08/2011 at 13:41 | Permalink

    I do feel many of the British public are easily caught up in rhetoric and media and make something so complex too simplistic in their minds, Usually when it comes to politics I’m at the end of my teather with the British Public seeing as they seem so ill-informed, although I am British myself. I think many will defend UK Uncut without questioning. I’m not completely agaisnt UK Uncut, but they can definitely be improved. Also they decided to proest outside Fortnum and Mason, eventhough the more likely place to protest would be Primark, they are connected but Primark have made profit, and F&M made losses. Why not primark? They are more “direct” “culprit” even thought it’s not illegal. I also heard cases of tourists being scared by the crowds of protesters whether they were violent or not. Yes, just what we need. We don’t need to lose tourism. I can tell you what it’s like losing tourism, I live in a town which gets most of its revenue from tourists. We’re nearly dead with jobs and all shops going to discount or closing. No, private sectors can’t hold up by themselves. So go away UK uncut. If you come to Weston you’ll see they’re losing like students and regular employees. All our cuts are affecting our private sector shops. (Of course they may do well elsewhere, perhaps, if they have anything outside the UK). But, yes, sort out the tax system. We need someone who understands it, the differences and similarities between public and private sectors.

    Unfortunately, against UK uncut if your last phrase, giving credit to the Coalition, UK uncut are all fit to blame the coalition and only the coalition in the majority. I’m a modern mature-minded liberal so I think that parties should be able to get on, I don’t think it’s the end of the world when Centre-Right meets Centre-Left – they have something in common. But it looks all one-sided Clegg is ready, but the Cons aren’t, they seem childish as ever. And that also goes for my local candidates. Labour and Lib Dem were fair, Con was a childish arse. Not saying all are. I like some Cons. Ken Clarke (you know why) for one.

    If UK Uncut are fit to complain and think they know enough, I’d like to see them come up with a workable plan. I’ll give them plenty of time.

  4. Posted 21/10/2012 at 21:03 | Permalink

    How lucky the Institute of Economic Affairs people are to live in a world where £40 billion is a negligible amount of money because it is less than £150 billion. Of course we can do without a Defence Budget or an Education budget. They are both around the £40 billion mark. What are these people on?

Comments are closed.