Lewes Forum thread

Go on, tell 'em what you think


Lewes Forum New message

Non Dom Hilarity

2
14
On 8 Apr 2015 at 12:01pm Paul Newman wrote:
‘If you abolish the whole status it will end up costing Britain money because some people will leave the country.’
Ed Balls ( couple of months ago) to BBC
Well who am I to argue with the Mr Balls -.........
8
4
On 8 Apr 2015 at 12:05pm True Brit wrote:
As they are using Britain as a financial safe haven, they should be prepared to pay for it !
9
2
On 8 Apr 2015 at 12:12pm Local wrote:
PN. Guess what? We all know that politicians of ALL parties change their mind, can't admit being wrong, mis-represent views, are victims of misleading press coverage, and are devious, or back-stabbed. For every snipe that is posted about one party, there is an equally bad one for the other.
It is exhausting reading the endless snipes and it is why voters are being turned off in their millions.
4
7
On 8 Apr 2015 at 12:56pm Paul Newman wrote:
Mr Balls has changed his story not his mind Troll and I think I am not alone in becoming bored with your incessant childish puppet shows.
Anyhoo as this pitiful gambit collapses it becomes apparent that even if Roman Abramovich and chums did sit meekly while Ed took their money not even the rounding error claimed would turn up.
Independent experts have spotted a basic error "most countries have double taxation treaties (DTCs). If you pay tax in one country on your earnings, you can’t be taxed again in another jurisdiction – the UK has over 100 such treaties"
When you take this into account the net tax take will not even be the "hundreds of millions " claimed .
So a token policy lasted all of two hours, what a loser.
5
2
On 8 Apr 2015 at 1:31pm Pissed off wrote:
The Toriyleaders are as usual defending their rich patrons and chums,a situation that even one or two of their MPs find totally unacceptable. Richard Bacon, the senior Conservative on the Commons spending watchdog, the public accounts committee for example.
Bacon, at a hearing of the committee last month, complained abut the non-dom system to the head of Her Majesty’s Revenue and and Customs, Edward Troup, saying under both Tory and Labour governments “you can easily spend 80% to 100% of your time in the UK because you are resident here, and be a non-dom for tax purposes.
HSBC files reveal how UK's non-dom tax concession is being exploited
Leaked files show how controversial tax status, aimed at encouraging foreign investors to spend time in UK, is used to legally hide fortunes in HSBC’s Swiss private bank
Bacon said.
“No wonder people are pissed off. It’s extraordinary, frankly, in all honesty. You are surprised that people think there is one set of rules for rich people and another set of rules for other people, when you have just told us exactly that is what there is.”
Labour will stress that foreigners in the UK for a genuine temporary short period will be able to retain non-dom status.
6
4
On 8 Apr 2015 at 1:32pm Paul Newman wrote:
Have a look at my blog for more info on the kind a man I am and the company I keep.

Check it out here »
6
1
On 8 Apr 2015 at 1:35pm Not Dominic wrote:
If it wasn't financially attractive for extremely wealthy people, why do so many have non-dom status?
To prove the value of these double taxation treaties to the UK, the Conservative party will no doubt be able to tell us how much the Treasury receives from residents of other countries who choose to pay their taxes in the UK and are 'non-doms' in their own countries.
11
 
On 8 Apr 2015 at 1:36pm Pissed off wrote:
What a disgusting blog.Typical Tory misogynist.
3
7
On 8 Apr 2015 at 1:41pm Dom Con wrote:
We need protection - vote UKIP
11
1
On 8 Apr 2015 at 1:45pm Old Bike wrote:
Is Paul Newman for real or a construct to demonstrate all that is bad about Conservatism? He comes over as such a vile, bitter and unhinged individual that he is perhaps the best reason anyone could find for not voting Tory. Keep posting Paul, you're doing a grand job!
3
2
On 8 Apr 2015 at 5:20pm David wrote:
PN. What a vile blog and disgusting company, but there you go that's Tories for you.
3
 
On 8 Apr 2015 at 5:38pm Condominium wrote:
Well said those who are red.
2
2
On 8 Apr 2015 at 5:51pm Boris wrote:
What an almighty cock up but understandable. This is what happens when you are making policy up as you go along. When this was coming out this morning all I could think of was the Thick Of It, Maolcolm Tucker would have gone mad. Poor Ed looked so silly standing there making a speech half an hour after the news channels ran with "Balls up" contradicting the policy during a radio interview back in January.
As I've said before , this Labour campaign at present is the worst I've ever known, even Labour voters on the radio this morning were saying that it was far to negative. People are starting to suss them out, Sound bites with no facts and figures won't last the distance.
 
3
On 8 Apr 2015 at 6:04pm Paul Newman wrote:
Do you think Boris ,that what you may feel is bad, is actually just a different sort of Labour campaign. Since Major Labour have tried to park in the middle ground .
In this campaign they gone the other way, hate business, hate wealth,actually advertising the intention to spend and tax and in the background really scary ideas about reforming capitalism in some new version of a planned economy. New Labour it aint .

That why , in a way I am puzzled by this latest " Hate the rich" thing , I think everyone knows Ed hates wealth so its hardly going to persuade anyone . Dragging old Blair on was truly wierd , a man who opposed Ed for Labour Leader and has since told us he us going the wrong way and will lose....eh ..how does that help
I think that given their record Labour decided the best they could possibly do was to get all their cores votes out and pick up the left wing Liberals . It meant giving up on a majority but it also meant avoiding terrible defeat .
Job done but you might as well stop talking now .
7
2
On 8 Apr 2015 at 6:11pm Doris wrote:
Labour is winning the argument.Not long to go before the nasty Tories and their rich chums are history.Street parties anybody?We will be partying in my house.
2
5
On 8 Apr 2015 at 6:19pm Boris wrote:
I think your right Paul, but I don't think it will work. Labour are telling people they are worse off, yet in reality people aren't feeling it and that is why they will be sussed. That far left ground they are moving into has competition in the shape of the laughable Green Party, I think it's a very dangerous tactic and if it goes wrong, could put the Labour party back years.
8
2
On 8 Apr 2015 at 6:28pm Horace wrote:
Your worries about the future of the Labour party are laughable.We can survive very well without your "concern" Tory boy.People ARE worse off you blind fool.Go and do something useful like donate to a food bank,creep.
8
 
On 8 Apr 2015 at 6:45pm Clifford wrote:
Boris wrote: 'Labour are telling people they are worse off, yet in reality people aren't feeling it and that is why they will be sussed.'

Boris, people KNOW they are worse off. Falling oil prices, the only thing that has gone well, is nothing to do with the government. Still, keep whistling in the dark.
1
7
On 8 Apr 2015 at 6:50pm Boris wrote:
Horace and Clifford, tell me how you are worse off.
 
5
On 8 Apr 2015 at 7:11pm Paul Newman wrote:
The coalition has been more fortunate with globally low interest rates than low oil prices but thats bit like saying Chelsea only won the Prem because of that lucky Penalty .Bad things nave also happened like the implosion of the Euro-zone our largest trading client (oil prices are neither good nor bad anyway we do export oil you know )
6
1
On 8 Apr 2015 at 7:40pm Old Bike wrote:
I've noticed striking similarities in the posts by both Paul Newman and Boris. These occur not just in the substance of the posts but in the grammatical errors as well.
It has been said that talking to yourself is the first sign of madness. Perhaps voting Tory is the second.
4
1
On 8 Apr 2015 at 7:53pm Sword of Boris wrote:
Waddya mean?Me crazy!Dig Dong ding dong.Reds,Reds,Reds everywhere and they are all STARING AT ME!
 
3
On 8 Apr 2015 at 8:15pm Country Boy wrote:
Tell me, why should a non dom pay the UK government tax on earnings they make outside of the UK? Why?
1
 
On 8 Apr 2015 at 9:23pm Murph wrote:
@Country Boy. Because it's an aberration. The concept of non-dom status does not exist in any other major country in the world and no one would propose having it now if didn’t already exist. It's a 200 year-old legacy of colonial Empire. The leading voice for many years on Tax Reform is Richard Murphy. I post this link as a response to Mr Newman.

Check it out here »
4
 
On 8 Apr 2015 at 10:10pm tax payer wrote:
Turns out the Tories edited the Balls footage by cutting off the last bit to give a false impression.Non dom status has always been a loophole for the rich. There is no problem having double taxation treaties with other countries so you don't pay twice if you live or work abroad and have to pay tax there on the same income - we have these with loads of countries, but it seems pretty obvious that people who are happy to take profits here should pay tax here. With companies it is more difficult but turnover taxes can be used on companies that operate here but are incorporated elsewhere if the choose not to run a UK subsidiary.
 
4
On 8 Apr 2015 at 10:32pm Paul Newman wrote:
“The leading voice for many years on Tax Reform is Richard Murphy.”….. *speechless* You have no idea who Richard Murphy is do you. Allow me; that is Richard Murphy the TUC propagandist left wing campaigner researcher for Polly Toynbee and long term inventor of fairy tale money.
His claims on the tax avoidance have been dismissed as wildly inaccurate by the respected and impartial Institute of Fiscal Studies. His nonsense has been a subject of mirth for years elsewhere.
The truth is of course no-one knows what will happen maybe it will raise a few hundred million as Labour claim Maybe the wealth leeching from the country the lost taxes and no dom fees , are not going offset that. Frankly I would be astonished if it netted a penny on the basis that every tax ever, has got much much less revenue in than its proponents said but that’s just years of watching actual, results.
Ok let’s be generous lets say we get a couple of hundred million from it….wooopeeee do !!
The state spends that every hour c.
Its not even loose change, meanwhile Labour have absolutely no way of getting into the £75-80 billion annual increase in debt .Where is that coming from eh.......
This is all about Ed telling us he hates rich people. Fine, we get it . If you like that sort of thing I suggest you vote for him.
 
5
On 8 Apr 2015 at 10:40pm Paul Newman wrote:
Tax Payer - the problem was that the blogger in question came up with a billion as an estimate and then admitted that his calculations had not included Double taxation treaties .
He was admitting his figures were rubbish as Labour were using them
There is another issue here by the way. If we move to a residence only tax system there are tens of thousands who are non-doms but millions domiciled but non-resident (al pensioners in Spain eg).
How are we going to get the one lot of revenue but not lose the other ?
Dunno , do Labour ?
5
 
On 8 Apr 2015 at 11:13pm Murph wrote:
@Paul Newman. "You have no idea who Richard Murphy is do you." - I've followed Richard Murphy for many years, but judging by your summary it looks like you've just read his Wikipedia entry for the first time. Am I right?
3
 
On 8 Apr 2015 at 11:25pm Foul Newman wrote:
Reds,Reds, everywhere.In my car,in my hair, inside my Mrs Thatcher mug.Flooble Booble Dooble Booble Read my bog blog. AAAAAAAAAAGGGGGHHHH...............PHHHHHHUUUUUUUTTTTT!!!
4
 
On 8 Apr 2015 at 11:51pm Murph wrote:
@Paul Newman.
Being independent is not synonymous with being either accurate or free from bias. The IFS has received criticism for right-leaning bias from Nick Clegg among many others, including Murphy. I stated that Richard Murphy is a leading voice on tax reform, and indeed he is as the founder of the Tax Justice Network which has campaigned for reform of non-dom and other tax loopholes for about ten years. The argument in favour of retaining non-dom status does not stand up to criticism. For Russian oligarchs and the like the UK has become the most attractive tax-haven but there's little evidence that this actually brining in more revenue to the country. The qualification criteria for non-dom are rather absurd too. It has a lot to do with where your father was born. See link.

Check it out here »
2
1
On 8 Apr 2015 at 11:57pm Russ Ollie Garch wrote:
Would you like a nice cup of Polonium infused tea Murph,it`s freshly made?
 
 
On 9 Apr 2015 at 6:35am Olly Gertcha wrote:
Good one Russ - lol.
 
2
On 9 Apr 2015 at 7:01am Paul Newman wrote:
Yawny yawnI know who Newton is, I might want a detail, verstehen ?
Ok
I linked to Tim Worstall on my blog- refer that for endless Muphy hate Anticipating you would say such sources are partisan I only quoted the IFS.
The IFS are no doubt criticized by Murphy but they are an infinitely more credible source than he is ( and thats understating it by a damn long way ) The Tax Payers Alliance is a lot more credible , in fact anyone is
You cannot introduce such a source and argue from authority. You can use the argument if you think you understand it sure but you were deliberately trying to mislead
I'm not interested in your links if you have something to say say it .


4 posts left

Your response


You must now log in (or register) to post
Click here to add a link »
Smile
Smile Wink Sad Confused Kiss Favourite Fishing Devil Cool

terms


 

Lewes centre of The Cosmos 64:132
Lewes centre of The Cosmos

Hi, I would like to add an event but the system won't let me. Please help! Maia Eden more
QUOTE OF THE MOMENT
There are no ordinary moments
Dan