• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Investing in Irish offshore fund structures....A vision that has appeared to me.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,817
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
A message from 10 Downing Street that came to me in a vision.....

"A certain recent event has brought much bluster from those who know far less than professional tax advisors on how tax liabilities are shown. It would appear that even if all due taxes on dividends and asset sales are paid, this will not satisfy those who blindly believe that tax liabilities due have been avoided.

As many of you are aware, from when the Celtic Tiger was at its highest point I have had considerable holdings in Irish administered offshore fund companies that are administered by my tax consultants and advisors and I have always meticulously paid every amount in tax that was due on any dividends and asset sale profits made. Never once has my financial affairs been questioned by any tax authority in Eire or in Great Britain. Eire, unlike other states such as the Cayman Islands, is part of the European Community.

My feelings on this matter is that pure jealously of those who have not been as fortunate as people in my financial situation is raising its head. All taxes due have been paid. Do these people want a further band of tax to be raised on top of existing tax liabilities, just to satisfy their angst?"
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,762
Location
Fenny Stratford
A message from 10 Downing Street.....

"A certain recent event has brought much bluster from those who know far less than professional tax advisors on how tax liabilities are shown. It would appear that even if all due taxes on dividends and asset sales are paid, this will not satisfy those who blindly believe that tax liabilities due have been avoided.

As many of you are aware, from when the Celtic Tiger was at its highest point I have had considerable holdings in Irish administered offshore fund companies that are administered by my tax consultants and advisors and I have always meticulously paid every amount in tax that was due on any dividends and asset sale profits made. Never once has my financial affairs been questioned by any tax authority in Eire or in Great Britain. Eire, unlike other states such as the Cayman Islands, is part of the European Community.

My feelings on this matter is that pure jealously of those who have not been as fortunate as people in my financial situation is raising its head. All taxes due have been paid. Do these people want a further band of tax to be raised on top of existing tax liabilities, just to satisfy their angst?"

could you provide a link to this statement?
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,817
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
could you provide a link to this statement?

It came to me in a vision from the Archangel Gabriel after spending far too much time making postings on the Quizzes and Games forum in the early hours of Sunday morning...:oops:

However, I too have numerous investments in similar funds and no-one has yet been seen in the paddock this afternoon, clamouring for my resignation from the RailUK and the SSC websites.....:D

What needs saying is that the sentiments expressed in the first posting are ones that I totally agree with.
 
Last edited:

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,573
Location
UK
Isn't that the same argument that Facebook, Starbucks et. al all put forward. All the legal tax requirements have been met and the full tax has been paid. It's a similar situation with the K2 scheme. All tax is paid legal and in full. This is tax avoidance not evasion :/ Morally wrong but legally legit.

Whilst I'm leaning towards the PM must resign camp. I will admit that if I was in a situation where I had enough money to "avoid" tax using these various schemes and loophole I would 100% do it. I am also in the camp that believes that HMRC should close as many as these "loopholes" and schemes as possible.

It's not even hard to admit as even as a low earner I was using various forms of "tax avoidance" By putting my kids nursery fees into childcare vouchers I was able to save the tax (approx £520pa) My TOC uses "Smart Pensions" and "Bike to work" to save NIC's and tax. Even back in the very first job I had I was given a "Benefit in Kind" as our Christmas bonuses were paid in vouchers rather than into wages as cash.

Most of us do it in some way or another. To me this is just richer people doing it on a grander scale.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,762
Location
Fenny Stratford
ok! missed that ;) If you invested in Ireland at the height of the celtic tiger market you wont have to avoid any tax anyway!

In any event this situation isn't really about whether, or not, Dave paid his tax or did anything wrong. The perception is that he and others at the top of government and society are up to no good. The perception is that they think tax isn't for them and the cost of repairing our society shouldn't concern them. There are also issues with people not being able to associate with chaps who have Cayman Island unit trusts or £500k gifts from their parents. Most of us, no mater how hard we work, will never have these things.

People aren't jealous of wealth (especially earned wealth) but find hypocrisy quite hard to swallow
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,817
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
From hearing certain comments on the radio today, I am utterly amazed that there are those expressing outrage at the two instances of £100,000 being given, without no knowledge whatsoever of the sever-year term that covers the possible death of the person donating these amounts, which will then make those liable for the relevant taxation.

Why don't these people take time to research their radio response comments as full knowledge of the facts would ensure they do not appear so bereft of knowledge on matters....:roll:
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,762
Location
Fenny Stratford
From hearing certain comments on the radio today, I am utterly amazed that there are those expressing outrage at the two instances of £100,000 being given, without no knowledge whatsoever of the sever-year term that covers the possible death of the person donating these amounts, which will then make those liable for the relevant taxation.

Why don't these people take time to research their radio response comments as full knowledge of the facts would ensure they do not appear so bereft of knowledge on matters....:roll:

Paul - You don't understand, none of that matters as most people can't relate to gifts of that size. They assume that something fishy is going on. Cameron has lost control of the story and the questions will just keep coming and each one adds to the perception that there is something hidden away waiting to be found.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,817
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
People aren't jealous of wealth (especially earned wealth) but find hypocrisy quite hard to swallow

Deliberate misconstruing of the facts of the case is a form of reverse-hypocrisy.

Does anyone think that if I wished to give very large sums of money to my sons, in the hope that I would live until 2023 when I will be 78, that it would be wrong that no tax is due?

I wonder if there are vociferous supporters of the principle of Death Duties on this website?
 

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,573
Location
UK
.

Does anyone think that if I wished to give very large sums of money to my sons, in the hope that I would live until 2023 when I will be 78, that it would be wrong that no tax is due?

Is it "wrong" to do it if I was 30, in great health, my kids were 5, and I was specifically doing so to avoid paying inheritance tax ?
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,817
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
In any event this situation isn't really about whether, or not, Dave paid his tax or did anything wrong. The perception is that he and others at the top of government and society are up to no good. The perception is that they think tax isn't for them and the cost of repairing our society shouldn't concern them.

A well-used stick to beat those Capitalists in positions of state power with, but there are those who gloss over past excesses of the leaders of former Communist Warsaw Pact countries, such as Ceauescu, whose wealth excesses for exceeded those in Britain today. Even David Cameron has never had a totally extravagant property as one that Ceauescu had.
 

Gutfright

Member
Joined
22 Jan 2016
Messages
639
A well-used stick to beat those Capitalists in positions of state power with, but there are those who gloss over past excesses of the leaders of former Communist Warsaw Pact countries, such as Ceauescu, whose wealth excesses for exceeded those in Britain today. Even David Cameron has never had a totally extravagant property as one that Ceauescu had.

Hell yeah Paul! Beat that strawman!! Beat that strawman good!!! :roll:
 

furnessvale

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2015
Messages
4,631
Paul - You don't understand, none of that matters as most people can't relate to gifts of that size. They assume that something fishy is going on. Cameron has lost control of the story and the questions will just keep coming and each one adds to the perception that there is something hidden away waiting to be found.

Especially when fed nonsense by the media.

The media love nothing more than MAKING the news, rather than simply reporting it. If they can do so by toppling a Government minister they are full of it.

Now they smell blood, they fancy their chances of toppling a PRIME minister and they certainly aren't going to let the truth get in the way!
 

Chew Chew

Member
Joined
29 Aug 2010
Messages
513
A well-used stick to beat those Capitalists in positions of state power with, but there are those who gloss over past excesses of the leaders of former Communist Warsaw Pact countries, such as Ceauescu, whose wealth excesses for exceeded those in Britain today. Even David Cameron has never had a totally extravagant property as one that Ceauescu had.

And what happened to Ceaușescu? He was put up against a wall and shot.

Whilst I'm not saying that should happen to Cameron, or anybody else for that matter, the PM of a country who is part of a government introducing swinging welfare cuts and is claiming "we're all in this together" needs to be squeaky clean and he isn't.

His responses to questions over the last week has been abysmal and has shown that he cannot be trusted.

What he may have done may not be illegal but, IMO, for someone in charge of a government it is immoral.
 

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,461
'All taxes due have been paid' could equally read 'absolutely no tax has been paid because I've made damned sure that I've arranged my affairs in such a way that none was due'. I suggest DC owes Jimmy Carr an apology, at the very least.

What should be remembered in all this is that all Cameron's real enemies, and those who loathe him most personally, are all card-carrying members of the Conservative and Unionist Party, just as many of us who cannot abide the Communist Party and its many manifestations could be said to be of the left: personally, I think we are literally mad (a phrase once used by Enoch Powell in a different context) to be letting the Chinese government get their hands on any of our infrastructure. We'll all be their serfs within a generation.
 

Barn

Established Member
Joined
3 Sep 2008
Messages
1,464
'All taxes due have been paid' could equally read 'absolutely no tax has been paid because I've made damned sure that I've arranged my affairs in such a way that none was due'. I suggest DC owes Jimmy Carr an apology, at the very least.

Jimmy Carr and some of the corporations in the news recently have used unusual accounting treatments to shift profits around the world.

DC has taken UK money (on which tax had presumably already been paid) and bought shares overseas, paying tax on income and liable in principle for capital gains tax on disposal. If that's tax avoidance, it's not very good tax avoidance. Are people suggesting that British citizens be banned from buying shares overseas? Check where your pensions are invested before doing so.

I'm not a personal fan of DC (especially not in 2016) but this is led by an overexcited media targeted at (a) Brexit supporters, (b) people who hate the Tories anyway and always will and (c) people who hear the word "offshore" and take no time to think any further.
 

Chew Chew

Member
Joined
29 Aug 2010
Messages
513
I thought the stated share dealing settlements were made PRIOR to his current role. Is this not the case or have the media been "economical with the truth"?

Sorry Paul, I didn't make myself very clear.

That someone who is in charge of a government, or indeed an MP, has ever been involved with stuff like that is immoral.

Anyway, who knows what else might be to come?
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,817
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
Sorry Paul, I didn't make myself very clear.

That someone who is in charge of a government, or indeed an MP, has ever been involved with stuff like that is immoral.

Anyway, who knows what else might be to come?

Well, that does not say very much for my personal morality, for although I have never stood for public office of any type, but did spend over thirty years in the top echelon of Senior Management with contracts well into seven figures under my remit, prior to my retirement, I most certainly have had large personal financial sums invested in the type of offshore accounts that are referred to in the title of this thread.

I still perform consultancy work, free of charge, for three charities. Should I regard myself as not a fit person to perform that role and resign from that post, because of something totally unrelated to the work that I so perform without recompense?
 

telstarbox

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2010
Messages
6,000
Location
Wennington Crossovers
It's not even hard to admit as even as a low earner I was using various forms of "tax avoidance" By putting my kids nursery fees into childcare vouchers I was able to save the tax (approx £520pa) My TOC uses "Smart Pensions" and "Bike to work" to save NIC's and tax. Even back in the very first job I had I was given a "Benefit in Kind" as our Christmas bonuses were paid in vouchers rather than into wages as cash.

Most of us do it in some way or another. To me this is just richer people doing it on a grander scale.

Tax relief on pensions, cycle to work etc is not comparable to the Panama schemes.

Firstly, these reliefs are explicitly backed by the government for the public good (to encourage people to save for their retirement and to reduce car use respectively), and more importantly, they are set out in the Budget each year which is subject to public knowledge and scrutiny. The Panama schemes are by their nature secret and not for the 'little people' to use.
 

Barn

Established Member
Joined
3 Sep 2008
Messages
1,464
Tax relief on pensions, cycle to work etc is not comparable to the Panama schemes.

The Panama schemes are by their nature secret and not for the 'little people' to use.

Have you specified that your pension fund must only have UK holdings?
 

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,573
Location
UK
Tax relief on pensions, cycle to work etc is not comparable to the Panama schemes.

The "Smart Pension" is not the standard tax relief on pensions. Its an additional scheme to reduce the employers and employees National Insurance contributions.

Firstly, these reliefs are explicitly backed by the government for the public good (to encourage people to save for their retirement and to reduce car use respectively), and more importantly, they are set out in the Budget each year which is subject to public knowledge and scrutiny. The Panama schemes are by their nature secret and not for the 'little people' to use.

Secret, Government backed, etc still puts them as valid methods of reducing your tax bill. Its just a matter of scale. Just because I am unaware that some schemes exist doesn't mean they are secret. My neighbour has an accountant who uses creative ways of reducing his tax bill. There are many schemes to reduce your tax liability some are more accessible to others. As those who are in such schemes are wont to quote. They are all legal and often government backed. Its just as unfair that I can save a load of tax on my nursery fees than another parent who has to scrimp and save.

It's worth noting that some schemes over the years that the government has put a stop to various tax saving schemes that employers use.

My point is that we are just as guilty of finding ways to avoid paying tax. As long as its legal then people will continue to do it. David Cameron using this scheme to his advantage is no different to me doing the same with what's available to me.
 

Chew Chew

Member
Joined
29 Aug 2010
Messages
513
Well, that does not say very much for my personal morality

Your own personal morals are for you and you alone to decide.

If you are happy with the decisions you've made then it won't matter what opinion anybody else has about them.

I have never stood for public office of any type

So you've never been a "do as I say, not as I do" then.

I'm just not comfortable with people hiding away money that could do good in the UK and then proclaiming that they are looking to help people when they are doing the exact opposite.

I most certainly have had large personal financial sums invested in the type of offshore accounts that are referred to in the title of this thread.

Okay Paul, we get it. You've got a decent wedge behind you. All your talk about how much money you have is a bit vulgar.

752091-system__resources__image-857440.jpg
 

Barn

Established Member
Joined
3 Sep 2008
Messages
1,464
I'm just not comfortable with people hiding away money that could do good in the UK and then proclaiming that they are looking to help people when they are doing the exact opposite.

The profit on a good unit trust should produce more income (and this more income tax) than leaving the money in a UK savings account.

Facebook, Starbucks et al are booking UK income elsewhere. They are using the UK to generate profit and not paying their fair share. That's bad.

What's happening here is people choosing to invest their UK tax-paid savings in investments of their choice and then paying UK-tax on the proceeds.

They're completely different things despite them both having offshore in their description.

What would you do? Ban Britons from owning any foreign shares?
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,762
Location
Fenny Stratford
The profit on a good unit trust should produce more income (and this more income tax) than leaving the money in a UK savings account.

Facebook, Starbucks et al are booking UK income elsewhere. They are using the UK to generate profit and not paying their fair share. That's bad.

What's happening here is people choosing to invest their UK tax-paid savings in investments of their choice and then paying UK-tax on the proceeds.

They're completely different things despite them both having offshore in their description.

What would you do? Ban Britons from owning any foreign shares?

As I said none of that matters. The perception is that people with money invested in overseas unit trusts or investment vehicles are up to no good. The normal person on the Clapham omnibus doesn't have any frame of reference with these kinds of investments and they think they are dodgy.

The man on the Clapham omnibus, of course, is a reasonably educated and intelligent but nondescript person, against whom the defendant's conduct can be measured in a legal case. It extends here I feel.

Cameron and his cronies are rich and the inference is that they use these terribly legal investment vehicles to save their money out of sight of the UK authorities who might ask some awkward questions. Nothing legally wrong with that, however when you start to consider these terribly legal investment vehicles are parked up in any number of dodgy tax havens where people ( obviously not Dave!) avoid or evade their tax liabilities at home it all starts to smell a bit fishy.

It then starts to hum quite bit when you consider that we have to cut payments to disabled/sick/poor/unemployed people AND cut important public services because we are in such a mess financially while Dave and his chums lecture us on the need for austerity and touch choices. HIS tough choices aren't the same as ours. This debate shows that and that the Tory party has no idea of the anger this has generated as they don't seem to be able to grasp why this is an issue.

I would like the same kind of answers from Gideon and Boris about their affairs. That might be more interesting.
 

EM2

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
7,522
Location
The home of the concrete cow
What would you do? Ban Britons from owning any foreign shares?
I would ban Britons owning foreign shares IF those shares could have been bought through UK-managed funds or the Stock Exchange.
From what I've read of Blairmore, many of the shares held were in blue chip companies such as BA and Coca-Cola. There is no reason why those shares should be bought through a fund based offshore.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,817
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
From what I've read of Blairmore, many of the shares held were in blue chip companies such as BA and Coca-Cola. There is no reason why those shares should be bought through a fund based offshore.

Many of the shares offered by these Irish offshore funds were in companies in emerging markets whose names would not be as well known as those you cite for obvious reasons.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,762
Location
Fenny Stratford
Dave also hasn't helped the perception problem by seemingly having to have every statement on the facts dragged out of him. I get he wanted to preserve his own privacy and that of his family but he has badly misjudged the public mood. He should have come clean on day one, released all the facts and closed down the story.

For the record I don't think he has done anything legally wrong. His problem is the perception of the his actions and those of his "class".
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,448
Location
St Albans
Dave also hasn't helped the perception problem by seemingly having to have every statement on the facts dragged out of him. I get he wanted to preserve his own privacy and that of his family but he has badly misjudged the public mood. He should have come clean on day one, released all the facts and closed down the story.

For the record I don't think he has done anything legally wrong. His problem is the perception of the his actions and those of his "class".

Probably much to the horror of his peers, he has started an avalanche of declaring finances that those who refuse to play will get a kicking for.
I think i heard this morning that Farrage was being a bit churlish about his offshore dealings, - should be entertaining.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top