[la gran siete]

Originally Posted by karkus30

It seems many cannot grasp the idea that loopholes are not illegal. That they are purposefully created is another story entirely. Poor old Jimmy Carr wasn't able to communicate that fact and acted like a wet flannel.

more likely he didn't want to lose popularity.No one likes being vilified, especially not in public.If people start equating dodgy tax avoidance scams with benefit scrounging or worse, then i cam well imagine a lot of finger pointing and open abuse from people who pay their full whack of tax

[karkus30]

Originally Posted by la gran siete

more likely he didn't want to lose popularity.No one likes being vilified, especially not in public.If people start equating dodgy tax avoidance scams with benefit scrounging or worse, then i cam well imagine a lot of finger pointing and open abuse from people who pay their full whack of tax

I know, but he likes to attempt political satire and so should have been a good candidate for standing up and pointing at everyone else that are using these loopholes and told them to close the loopholes. He was within his rights to do so. I lost all respect for him, he isn't really another Bill Hicks. Now he has had it with political comedy as half will just look at him as a tax scroungers and the rest will se him as a rather pathetic figure with the back bone of a jellyfish.

[dejongj]

I found it a very strange thing to say. Last time I checked cash is a perfectly legal tender. And getting a "discount" for paying cash may have an implied reason behind it, but it isn't your problem.

I actually asked a vat inspector this once as a gardener was quoting me a 17.5% discount if I paid cash. He said I should take it, as it is the business's responsibility to pay their tax. He did ask me for the name of the company though so he could pass it on to the compliance team to go over their business with a fine tooth comb.

Not much different from say a Citroen who regularly advertised vat free deals. The deal was never vat free, you just got a 17.5% reduction on the final vat inclusive price

To make this "immoral" act more, take the discount and tip off HMRC. Start with your local gardener today

[karkus30]

The VAT discount is hardly worth it for cash. It's unlikely a self employed Gardner would be registered. If you are a tradesman then at least half of your cost are material cost anyway. All you can save is he 10% on labour, but why would you then give a discount ? The only time that's possible is if you are using goods already paid for as part of another job and then you are really charging the customer for tax you won't actually pay. The customer isn't aware of that aspect because he gets a bill with the total plus VAT anyway. If the customer pays cash without a receipt then for a VAT registered business he just has to accept that he is being told he is getting a discount when actually he is not and the tradesman pockets the VAT.

When small business people used to come and see us we always advised them to pay the tax. The reality is that most small businesses won't pay very much at all if their turnover is low, but they risk prosecution and the oppression of the tax inspectors for eternity.

In reality, cash payments are probably tax neutral in most cases.

Then there are the shops and businesses who are taking cheques, giving receipts and fiddling the books. They eventually get caught.

You also have moonlighters who probably would get marginal taxation increases, but the cost of reclaiming and submitting would be ridiculous in both time and cost. You would have to Dob your kids in if you paid them to wash the car. You might even get done under the child labour laws ! Car boot sales would be taxable. Swaps of goods would be taxable ( try and figure out that one ).

Where it does get sticky is companies employing the generally unemployable that are also claiming benefit. However, you have to factor in that it's often a supplement for the unemployed and without it, some would be having a miserable time as they are unable to get a job anyway. Why deprive them?

Lastly we have the criminals dealing in stolen goods, drugs and prostitution. Well, it's the job of the Police to catch those people. Tax isn't an issue unless it's legalised.

[rampant]

i wonder how many of these `car washes` are legally submitting their income - as they are all 100% cash!!!!!!

[dejongj]

Originally Posted by rampant

i wonder how many of these `car washes` are legally submitting their income - as they are all 100% cash!!!!!!

Lots of businesses are cash businesses, doesn't make them all crooks.

HMRC has got lots of data on what a typical turnover should be for the type of business that is being run. and what a typical expected tax bill should be. Or what type of business (vat registered) is a typical repayment business and what a typical repayment should be etc.

Deviate from the norm and you will show up on the radar. Very difficult to get off it again there after.

[poolside]

Originally Posted by dejongj

HMRC has got lots of data on what a typical turnover should be for the type of business that is being run. and what a typical expected tax bill should be. Or what type of business (vat registered) is a typical repayment business and what a typical repayment should be etc.

Deviate from the norm and you will show up on the radar. Very difficult to get off it again there after.

That's OK then, I was starting to get worried ......... but hang on , what about Boots and then there's Top Shop, oh and Vodaphone, etc, etc, etc. Sorry, forgot, they don't count because they are not always paid in cash and no doubt they have 'friends' in high places .

Anyway, they are not 'tradesmen' and, after all, one cannot have the middle classes expecting the same 'flexibility' as those who hold positions of power. We are all animals but must not forget that some animals are more equal than others.

[dejongj]

Originally Posted by poolside

That's OK then, I was starting to get worried ......... but hang on , what about Boots and then there's Top Shop, oh and Vodaphone, etc, etc, etc. Sorry, forgot, they don't count because they are not always paid in cash and no doubt they have 'friends' in high places .

Are they not playing it by the rules then?

[poolside]

No.

[poolside]

No. Not the 'moral' rule.

[dejongj]

Originally Posted by poolside

That's OK then, I was starting to get worried ......... but hang on , what about Boots and then there's Top Shop, oh and Vodaphone, etc, etc, etc. Sorry, forgot, they don't count because they are not always paid in cash and no doubt they have 'friends' in high places .

Anyway, they are not 'tradesmen' and, after all, one cannot expect the middle classes to expect the same privileges and 'flexibility' that is enjoyed by those in powerful positions. We must not forget that we are all animals, its just that some animals are more equal than others.

Does that rant make you feel better or have you got anything constructive to say?

[dejongj]

Originally Posted by dejongj

Are they not playing it by the rules then?

Originally Posted by poolside

No.

Really? Please do elaborate or is it just an opinion or rant even...You do realise they get a lot more compliant visits than many small business. I appreciate you may not like the rules, and one could argue what they do is morally wrong in certain cases, but I think you'll find that they do play it by the rules...

[poolside]

Originally Posted by dejongj

Does that rant make you feel better or have you got anything constructive to say?

Cant say it's made me feel any better as such but I think that it made a fair and reasonable point; that those in power/authority should not attempt to preach 'morality' with regard to one sector of the population whilst ignoring the 'imorality' of others, despite its legality.

[dejongj]

Originally Posted by poolside

Cant say it's made me feel any better as such but I think that it made a fair and reasonable point; that those in power/authority should not attempt to preach 'morality' with regard to one sector of the population whilst ignoring the 'imorality' of others, despite its legality.

Well it took you quite a few edits and attempts to bring that point across :roll eyes: I don't think they are ignoring the morality of other groups at all. Legally they can't do anything about it though...Just like they can't do anything about people being paid in cash, it was a stupid remark to have been made in the first place by David Gauke in my opinion...

[namuk]

stick Gauke on real world wages for a year or two then lets see if comes out with that statement his expenses ect are more then the average or even less people earn a year.

[dejongj]

Originally Posted by namuk

stick Gauke on real world wages for a year or two then lets see if comes out with that statement his expenses ect are more then the average or even less people earn a year.

And how is that relevant to people paying cash for services and the implied immorality of contributing to tax evasion?

[Squiffy]

Originally Posted by dejongj

And how is that relevant to people paying cash for services and the implied immorality of contributing to tax evasion?

Tory MPs are evil.

So even if they say something which no right thinking person could object to, it's wrong by default.

[poolside]

Originally Posted by dejongj

Well it took you quite a few edits and attempts to bring that point across :roll eyes:

Then again, some people have problems interpreting the written word .

Originally Posted by dejongj

Legally they can't do anything about it though...

Who do you mean when you say "they". Taken in context, you are suggesting that the Government is not capable of introducing new laws to prevent large corporations from immorally avoiding the payment of UK tax on UK income? That's not the case.

[dejongj]

Personally I think this Tory MP was very wrong, still don't get how putting him on real world wages and no expense account is contributing to the conversation, other than just having a rant...

[dejongj]

Originally Posted by poolside

Then again, some people have problems interpreting the written word .


Who do you mean when you say "they". Taken in context, you are suggesting that the Government is not capable of introducing new laws to prevent large corporations from immorally avoiding the payment of UK tax on UK income? That's not the case.

True that is not the case, but leaving Europe and how the unified tax system works has got lots of other consequences. There is always a possibility and choice, it is just not a reasonable one that will achieve much.

[poolside]

Originally Posted by dejongj

Personally I think this Tory MP was very wrong, still don't get how putting him on real world wages and no expense account is contributing to the conversation, other than just having a rant...

Well, it may help him to understand how difficult life can be on a lower wage than he and his wife enjoy and, thereby, help him to also understand why people may be tempted from time to time to look for cash in hand work. In turn, this may also help him to understand why most of the population, whilst agreeing with his sentiment, disagree with his claim of 'moraility'.

[namuk]

Originally Posted by dejongj

And how is that relevant to people paying cash for services and the implied immorality of contributing to tax evasion?

Quiet allot when when your on allot less a year as every bit counts,Gauke will not have that issue.

[dejongj]

Originally Posted by poolside

Well, it may help him to understand how difficult life can be on a lower wage than he and his wife enjoy and, thereby, help him to also understand why people may be tempted from time to time to look for cash in hand work. In turn, this may also help him to understand why most of the population, whilst agreeing with his sentiment, disagree with his claim of 'moraility'.

Originally Posted by namuk

Quiet allot when when your on allot less a year as every bit counts,Gauke will not have that issue.

Ahem gents, the point is about people who PAY tradesmen cash in hand, not those that receive it....Get with it

[Squiffy]

Originally Posted by dejongj

Ahem gents, the point is about people who PAY tradesmen cash in hand, not those that receive it....Get with it

No, the point is about paying cash in hand in return for a discount, shared from the evaded tax.

[namuk]

Originally Posted by dejongj

Ahem gents, the point is about people who PAY tradesmen cash in hand, not those that receive it....Get with it

i take it your next in line tobe in Goverment

[poolside]

Originally Posted by dejongj

Ahem gents, the point is about people who PAY tradesmen cash in hand, not those that receive it....Get with it

But according to the Telegraph, the original link, he is reported to have said; People who pay cash in hand to tradesmen are morally wrong, damaging the economy and helping tax evaders. I think this is a clear reference to both the people(s) who make or receive a cash payment, not just those making the payment.

[dejongj]

Originally Posted by Squiffy

No, the point is about paying cash in hand in return for a discount, shared from the evaded tax.

As a consumer you are not concerned whether the tax is evaded or not, the price is the price. Not every business that is a cash business is evading tax, if they want to give you a discount you should take it, they still have to pay their dues...Nothing morally wrong with that..

Originally Posted by poolside

But according to the Telegraph, the original link, he is reported to have said; People who pay cash in hand to tradesmen are morally wrong, damaging the economy and helping tax evaders. I think this is a clear reference to both the people(s) who make or receive a cash payment, not just those making the payment.

I already said it is a silly statement, the rules are quite clear. It is the responsibility of the provider of the services/business to ensure the appropriate tax/duties is being paid, not the consumer.

Besides the argument wouldn't work because when are on a lot less you don't have to pay the tax anyway, and are also a beneficiary of a variety of benefits and credits...

[dejongj]

Originally Posted by namuk

i take it your next in line tobe in Goverment

No thank you, doesn't pay well enough for my liking...And I don't need a knighthood and aren't interested in the speakers tours...Been there done that...

[Squiffy]

Originally Posted by dejongj

I already said it is a silly statement, the rules are quite clear. It is the responsibility of the provider of the services/business to ensure the appropriate tax/duties is being paid, not the consumer.

Sheesh. Why is everybody determined to criticise this guy, while ignoring what he actually said? Read the quote IN FULL, and remember it was an interview and he was being asked about tax avoidance and tax evasion.

Mr Gauke, the Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury, said: “Getting a discount with your plumber by paying cash in hand is something that is a big cost to the Revenue and means others have to pay more in tax.

“I think it is morally wrong. It is illegal for the plumber but it is pretty implicit in those circumstances that there is a reason why there is a discount for cash. That is a large part of the hidden economy.”

So this is specifically about getting a cash discount due to the evaded tax. The article goes on to say.

According to a report by the Public Accounts Committee, more than two million people make cash-in-hand payments costing the Treasury an estimated £2  billion.

Why is he wrong to talk about this when he is specifically asked in an interview?

[dejongj]

Originally Posted by Squiffy

Sheesh. Why is everybody determined to criticise this guy, while ignoring what he actually said? Read the quote IN FULL, and remember it was an interview and he was being asked about tax avoidance and tax evasion.

Mr Gauke, the Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury, said: “Getting a discount with your plumber by paying cash in hand is something that is a big cost to the Revenue and means others have to pay more in tax.

“I think it is morally wrong. It is illegal for the plumber but it is pretty implicit in those circumstances that there is a reason why there is a discount for cash. That is a large part of the hidden economy.”

So this is specifically about getting a cash discount due to the evaded tax. The article goes on to say.

According to a report by the Public Accounts Committee, more than two million people make cash-in-hand payments costing the Treasury an estimated £2  billion.

Why is he wrong to talk about this when he is specifically asked in an interview?

Because the person paying for the services, according to the law and the tax inspectors don't do anything wrong. Cash is a legal tender and if someone wants to provide a discount for receiving cash then that is their choice.

I do not believe the general public should become tax inspectors, then again HMRC seems to be starting them young this year as they want children to snitch...

People are smart enough, well I hope, to make a reasonable assessment of a situation. Like I said earlier, I take the discount and advice HMRC what that company just offered me. How is that morally wrong?