FabSwingers.com forum: Good news for all JCB employees

By *ne Pass drilling OP Man
over a year ago

Northampton

Another success story for Lord Bamford and JCB. All employees including agency workers will receive a £2500 cash payment before Xmas plus a 10 % pay rise . In addition the company will create 500 new permanent jobs . Great news just before Xmas .

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

That is good news for all. Nice to see a company who is a making big profits recognise their staff and also give inflationary increases.

Although will pensionees be happy they are giving away profit

(Jk).

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *irldnCouple
over a year ago

Brighton

Good to see a company reward their workers. As it should be!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ohnnyTwoNotesMan
over a year ago

golden fields

"Another success story for Lord Bamford and JCB. All employees including agency workers will receive a £2500 cash payment before Xmas plus a 10 % pay rise . In addition the company will create 500 new permanent jobs . Great news just before Xmas .

Is this politics?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ne Pass drilling OP Man
over a year ago

Northampton

Is this politics?"
. It is about the economy so I would say yes. Another leave voter who made the right call.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ohnnyTwoNotesMan
over a year ago

golden fields

Is this politics?. It is about the economy so I would say yes. Another leave voter who made the right call. "

Lol

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Is this politics?. It is about the economy so I would say yes. Another leave voter who made the right call. "
be interesting to know how Brexit enabled this. I'm guessing JCBs to New Zealand have gone through the roof.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *eroy1000Man
over a year ago

milton keynes

Excellent news. Proof if it was needed that it really is Christmas. Great also that the workers are being rewarded

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *irldnCouple
over a year ago

Brighton

Is this politics?. It is about the economy so I would say yes. Another leave voter who made the right call. be interesting to know how Brexit enabled this. I'm guessing JCBs to New Zealand have gone through the roof. "

If the JCBs went through the roof they better have insurance

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *9alMan
over a year ago

Bridgend

I drive a JCB at work they are market leaders, it is right to share the profits with the people who make them .

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Nice to see a company with a good business strategy doing well and rewarding its employees.

JCB wanted Brexit by the way, just to throw that handgrenade into the thread. (Anyone would think they've made the most of changes to trade in their market sector).

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ne Pass drilling OP Man
over a year ago

Northampton

"Nice to see a company with a good business strategy doing well and rewarding its employees.

JCB wanted Brexit by the way, just to throw that handgrenade into the thread. (Anyone would think they've made the most of changes to trade in their market sector).

"
. They have also saved many stained necks and accidents. With telehandlers you are not constantly looking backwards or straining your neck for forward visibility.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *oldswarriorMan
over a year ago

Falkirk

JCB are making good headway in Africa.

We are seeing a diverse product line that is slowly eating into the CAT, Hitachi and Volvo dominated markets.

Thy don't offer a range of face shovels or haul trucks yet, but if they continue to support customers like they are doing now it won't take them long.

I worked for CAT, for decades and we were always behind in salary compared to JCB.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

Good that a company is showing its commitment to its employees.

Privately owned so not the short term financial thinking that infects listed companies, particularly in the US and UK. Far more like the German Mittlestand. Also private ownership means not invested in by any pension funds.

JCB has a number of factories outside the UK. China, India, USA and Brazil.

Most UK companies are not in this fortunate situation. They have to export to everywhere out of UK factories.

Their biggest recent investment was in Germany a few years ago. Would that have been necessary if Brexit had not happened?

Lord Bamford never made a positive economic argument for Brexit. Just " freedom", blah, blah, "trading nation, blah, blah. There has been nothing published since the referendum of any outcome from Brexit helping the companies performance. Something to bear in mind.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *otsMan
over a year ago

Higham

"Good that a company is showing its commitment to its employees.

JCB has a number of factories outside the UK. China, India, USA and Brazil.

Most UK companies are not in this fortunate situation. They have to export to everywhere out of UK factories.

Their biggest recent investment was in Germany a few years ago. Would that have been necessary if Brexit had not happened?

Forwards thinking and investment into hydrogen equipment

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *hropshireGentMan
over a year ago

midllands, traveling with work

It’s good to see some positive news posted in this section and it’s very good to hear that JCB are doing well and rewarding employees, without them it wouldn’t be possible

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

"Good that a company is showing its commitment to its employees.

JCB has a number of factories outside the UK. China, India, USA and Brazil.

Most UK companies are not in this fortunate situation. They have to export to everywhere out of UK factories.

Their biggest recent investment was in Germany a few years ago. Would that have been necessary if Brexit had not happened?

Forwards thinking and investment into hydrogen equipment "

...and zero to do with Brexit.

The EU Hydrogen strategy and investment into the industry is significantly greater by all measures than that of the UK.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Good that a company is showing its commitment to its employees.

JCB has a number of factories outside the UK. China, India, USA and Brazil.

Most UK companies are not in this fortunate situation. They have to export to everywhere out of UK factories.

Their biggest recent investment was in Germany a few years ago. Would that have been necessary if Brexit had not happened?

Forwards thinking and investment into hydrogen equipment

...and zero to do with Brexit.

The EU Hydrogen strategy and investment into the industry is significantly greater by all measures than that of the UK."

Great news for JCB and it’s employees, all 11,000 of them ,

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

Do these payments extend to the workers in the factories in other parts of the world?

How much of of this profit increase after the world opened up from COVID lockdown is from the non British manufacturing parts of the business?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago

Manchester

Yes all looks good

But, when you read the accounts in a little more detail you see the fundamental issues with our tax structure in the U.K. and how our government enables wealth to be kept by the richest.

The company JCB Services Ltd paid £84m in global tax of which around £14 m was adjustments from the previous year.

Then when you look at the total U.K. tax they paid it was just shy of £5m paid into the U.K. which shows where JCB growth is and it’s not in the U.K. Funnily enough the company also received £5m in government grants so in effect got that tax back.

Now let me clearly state I think it’s great they have shared £17m between staff and after tax most of them will receive at least at least £1100. It’s a nice little Christmas bonus for U.K. staff but not sure their Indian colleagues will receive the same.

When you look at the dividend paid by the company it’s over £1600 per share . There are 48,000 shares in JCB owned by the family. Total dividend payment to the family £77m.

I’m more than happy for dividends to be paid to a family business but now bear in mind the tax paid by the family will be a maximum of 39% . It’s unlikely it’s this high and certainly not 45% with no NI additions and that’s just for those shares registered in the U.K.

Then we add the fact the shares are mostly owned through trusts which in many cases are based offshore mainly Bermuda so, in effect they may not pay any U.K. tax at all on the dividends.

Remember Bamford is domicile here so all those dividends are paid through a U.K. controlled business but the parent company is actually Swiss based.

Now let’s look at the close to £100m paid out last year by JCB to various small companies around the world who provide “advice and consultancy” services to JCB. Interestingly those advisor companies are solely owned by the individual Bamford family members.

So it’s possible that a U.K. company has paid no U.K. tax whilst the family who own it have pocketed £170m all legally.

It is alleged Lord Bamford paid himself £577m between 2001 -2013 through an obscure company based in the Netherlands. The company as a single share holding did not have to report accounts so it is alleged all of the money was transferred into a private account of Bamford’s tax free.

Great company run very well by a shrewd business family clan and it shows what the U.K. is capable of manufacturing and global growth wise but it also exposes everything that’s wrong with our tax system. The EU wants to close the legal tax avoidance.

I don’t blame Bamford at all. I blame the fools in our parliament who enable him and his extended family to avoid any personal tax bills and be free to ever increase their wealth unhindered unlike an average hard working person.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Yes all looks good

But, when you read the accounts in a little more detail you see the fundamental issues with our tax structure in the U.K. and how our government enables wealth to be kept by the richest.

The company JCB Services Ltd paid £84m in global tax of which around £14 m was adjustments from the previous year.

When you look at the dividend paid by the company it’s over £1600 per share . There are 48,000 shares in JCB owned by the family. Total dividend payment to the family £77m.

Then we add the fact the shares are mostly owned through trusts which in many cases are based offshore mainly Bermuda so, in effect they may not pay any U.K. tax at all on the dividends.

Remember Bamford is domicile here so all those dividends are paid through a U.K. controlled business but the parent company is actually Swiss based.

So it’s possible that a U.K. company has paid no U.K. tax whilst the family who own it have pocketed £170m all legally.

You do like to poop on a Brexiteers party

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Still don't get how OP thinks its great news for everyone though.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago

Manchester

"Yes all looks good

But, when you read the accounts in a little more detail you see the fundamental issues with our tax structure in the U.K. and how our government enables wealth to be kept by the richest.

The company JCB Services Ltd paid £84m in global tax of which around £14 m was adjustments from the previous year.

When you look at the dividend paid by the company it’s over £1600 per share . There are 48,000 shares in JCB owned by the family. Total dividend payment to the family £77m.

Then we add the fact the shares are mostly owned through trusts which in many cases are based offshore mainly Bermuda so, in effect they may not pay any U.K. tax at all on the dividends.

Remember Bamford is domicile here so all those dividends are paid through a U.K. controlled business but the parent company is actually Swiss based.

So it’s possible that a U.K. company has paid no U.K. tax whilst the family who own it have pocketed £170m all legally.

You do like to poop on a Brexiteers party

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ne Pass drilling OP Man
over a year ago

Northampton

"Yes all looks good

But, when you read the accounts in a little more detail you see the fundamental issues with our tax structure in the U.K. and how our government enables wealth to be kept by the richest.

The company JCB Services Ltd paid £84m in global tax of which around £14 m was adjustments from the previous year.

When you look at the dividend paid by the company it’s over £1600 per share . There are 48,000 shares in JCB owned by the family. Total dividend payment to the family £77m.

Then we add the fact the shares are mostly owned through trusts which in many cases are based offshore mainly Bermuda so, in effect they may not pay any U.K. tax at all on the dividends.

Remember Bamford is domicile here so all those dividends are paid through a U.K. controlled business but the parent company is actually Swiss based.

So it’s possible that a U.K. company has paid no U.K. tax whilst the family who own it have pocketed £170m all legally.

"
. Maybe thw government are not fools and recognise that all tax legislation has to be complied with . Change the legislation and you could potentially end up collecting even less in tax.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ne Pass drilling OP Man
over a year ago

Northampton

"Yes all looks good

But, when you read the accounts in a little more detail you see the fundamental issues with our tax structure in the U.K. and how our government enables wealth to be kept by the richest.

The company JCB Services Ltd paid £84m in global tax of which around £14 m was adjustments from the previous year.

When you look at the dividend paid by the company it’s over £1600 per share . There are 48,000 shares in JCB owned by the family. Total dividend payment to the family £77m.

Then we add the fact the shares are mostly owned through trusts which in many cases are based offshore mainly Bermuda so, in effect they may not pay any U.K. tax at all on the dividends.

Remember Bamford is domicile here so all those dividends are paid through a U.K. controlled business but the parent company is actually Swiss based.

So it’s possible that a U.K. company has paid no U.K. tax whilst the family who own it have pocketed £170m all legally.

You do like to poop on a Brexiteers party

Yes I’m anti Brexit that’s true but in this case I’m very anti legal tax avoidance . The rich should pay the same as the highest paid at 45%. Why not? If it’s fair for a worker it should be fair for a company owner . "
. However Lord Bamford has to pay exactly the same tax as any other individual in the UK .His company is an entirely different entity to him personally and his personal tax return

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago

Manchester

"Yes all looks good

But, when you read the accounts in a little more detail you see the fundamental issues with our tax structure in the U.K. and how our government enables wealth to be kept by the richest.

The company JCB Services Ltd paid £84m in global tax of which around £14 m was adjustments from the previous year.

When you look at the dividend paid by the company it’s over £1600 per share . There are 48,000 shares in JCB owned by the family. Total dividend payment to the family £77m.

Then we add the fact the shares are mostly owned through trusts which in many cases are based offshore mainly Bermuda so, in effect they may not pay any U.K. tax at all on the dividends.

Remember Bamford is domicile here so all those dividends are paid through a U.K. controlled business but the parent company is actually Swiss based.

So it’s possible that a U.K. company has paid no U.K. tax whilst the family who own it have pocketed £170m all legally.

. Maybe thw government are not fools and recognise that all tax legislation has to be complied with . Change the legislation and you could potentially end up collecting even less in tax. "

Maybe the government are not fools ???? Ha ha ha ha Of course they are not. They are complicit!

The economy has doubled in size over the last thirty years . Given that around 60% of general GDP ends up being handed over in various taxes Where’s the money??

Also interesting point is how we don’t have a wealth fund with all that growth .

We had North Sea oil just like Norway. They put aside $1.4trillion . Given that in addition to oil revenues we also had a far bigger and better developed industrial economy, so again I ask, where’s the money?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ohnnyTwoNotesMan
over a year ago

golden fields

"Yes all looks good

But, when you read the accounts in a little more detail you see the fundamental issues with our tax structure in the U.K. and how our government enables wealth to be kept by the richest.

The company JCB Services Ltd paid £84m in global tax of which around £14 m was adjustments from the previous year.

When you look at the dividend paid by the company it’s over £1600 per share . There are 48,000 shares in JCB owned by the family. Total dividend payment to the family £77m.

Then we add the fact the shares are mostly owned through trusts which in many cases are based offshore mainly Bermuda so, in effect they may not pay any U.K. tax at all on the dividends.

Remember Bamford is domicile here so all those dividends are paid through a U.K. controlled business but the parent company is actually Swiss based.

So it’s possible that a U.K. company has paid no U.K. tax whilst the family who own it have pocketed £170m all legally.

You do like to poop on a Brexiteers party

Yes I’m anti Brexit that’s true but in this case I’m very anti legal tax avoidance . The rich should pay the same as the highest paid at 45%. Why not? If it’s fair for a worker it should be fair for a company owner . . However Lord Bamford has to pay exactly the same tax as any other individual in the UK .His company is an entirely different entity to him personally and his personal tax return "

He's responsible for it.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

"Yes all looks good

But, when you read the accounts in a little more detail you see the fundamental issues with our tax structure in the U.K. and how our government enables wealth to be kept by the richest.

The company JCB Services Ltd paid £84m in global tax of which around £14 m was adjustments from the previous year.

When you look at the dividend paid by the company it’s over £1600 per share . There are 48,000 shares in JCB owned by the family. Total dividend payment to the family £77m.

Then we add the fact the shares are mostly owned through trusts which in many cases are based offshore mainly Bermuda so, in effect they may not pay any U.K. tax at all on the dividends.

Remember Bamford is domicile here so all those dividends are paid through a U.K. controlled business but the parent company is actually Swiss based.

So it’s possible that a U.K. company has paid no U.K. tax whilst the family who own it have pocketed £170m all legally.

. Maybe thw government are not fools and recognise that all tax legislation has to be complied with . Change the legislation and you could potentially end up collecting even less in tax. "

"Could potentially"

You "could potentially" also collect significantly more, right?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

"Yes all looks good

But, when you read the accounts in a little more detail you see the fundamental issues with our tax structure in the U.K. and how our government enables wealth to be kept by the richest.

The company JCB Services Ltd paid £84m in global tax of which around £14 m was adjustments from the previous year.

When you look at the dividend paid by the company it’s over £1600 per share . There are 48,000 shares in JCB owned by the family. Total dividend payment to the family £77m.

Then we add the fact the shares are mostly owned through trusts which in many cases are based offshore mainly Bermuda so, in effect they may not pay any U.K. tax at all on the dividends.

Remember Bamford is domicile here so all those dividends are paid through a U.K. controlled business but the parent company is actually Swiss based.

So it’s possible that a U.K. company has paid no U.K. tax whilst the family who own it have pocketed £170m all legally.

You do like to poop on a Brexiteers party

Yes I’m anti Brexit that’s true but in this case I’m very anti legal tax avoidance . The rich should pay the same as the highest paid at 45%. Why not? If it’s fair for a worker it should be fair for a company owner . . However Lord Bamford has to pay exactly the same tax as any other individual in the UK .His company is an entirely different entity to him personally and his personal tax return "

Really? So why would anybody want to build a hugely profitable company if no e of it accrues to you personally so that you and your family can benefit from it?

It's very, very confusing.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ohn8210tCouple
over a year ago

Warwick

Profits up and build quality down . Our £100,000.00 Jcb just 2 years old has had a transmission failure not under guarantee.

Looking at a £20,000 repair bill and no replacement to earn a living with whilst it’s fixed.

We’re pleased the company is looking after its staff though.

Personally I’d of paid another few thousand for a stronger drive train . Hopefully at least 10% stronger?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ove2pleaseseukMan
over a year ago

Hastings

"Yes all looks good

But, when you read the accounts in a little more detail you see the fundamental issues with our tax structure in the U.K. and how our government enables wealth to be kept by the richest.

The company JCB Services Ltd paid £84m in global tax of which around £14 m was adjustments from the previous year.

When you look at the dividend paid by the company it’s over £1600 per share . There are 48,000 shares in JCB owned by the family. Total dividend payment to the family £77m.

Then we add the fact the shares are mostly owned through trusts which in many cases are based offshore mainly Bermuda so, in effect they may not pay any U.K. tax at all on the dividends.

Remember Bamford is domicile here so all those dividends are paid through a U.K. controlled business but the parent company is actually Swiss based.

So it’s possible that a U.K. company has paid no U.K. tax whilst the family who own it have pocketed £170m all legally.

If you have looked that deep in to the company you could of added how much was pId in cooperation tax as dividends can only be payed out on profits after taxes..

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago

Manchester

"Yes all looks good

But, when you read the accounts in a little more detail you see the fundamental issues with our tax structure in the U.K. and how our government enables wealth to be kept by the richest.

The company JCB Services Ltd paid £84m in global tax of which around £14 m was adjustments from the previous year.

When you look at the dividend paid by the company it’s over £1600 per share . There are 48,000 shares in JCB owned by the family. Total dividend payment to the family £77m.

Then we add the fact the shares are mostly owned through trusts which in many cases are based offshore mainly Bermuda so, in effect they may not pay any U.K. tax at all on the dividends.

Remember Bamford is domicile here so all those dividends are paid through a U.K. controlled business but the parent company is actually Swiss based.

So it’s possible that a U.K. company has paid no U.K. tax whilst the family who own it have pocketed £170m all legally.

You do like to poop on a Brexiteers party

Yes I’m anti Brexit that’s true but in this case I’m very anti legal tax avoidance . The rich should pay the same as the highest paid at 45%. Why not? If it’s fair for a worker it should be fair for a company owner . . However Lord Bamford has to pay exactly the same tax as any other individual in the UK .His company is an entirely different entity to him personally and his personal tax return "

No he doesn’t as he has access to legal tax avoidance which workers solely on PAYE do not.

His company is a legal entity. How it operates on his decision as it’s a family business. Nothing he’s doing is illegal. It is however adding to the drain of wealth from the U.K.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago

Manchester

"Yes all looks good

But, when you read the accounts in a little more detail you see the fundamental issues with our tax structure in the U.K. and how our government enables wealth to be kept by the richest.

The company JCB Services Ltd paid £84m in global tax of which around £14 m was adjustments from the previous year.

When you look at the dividend paid by the company it’s over £1600 per share . There are 48,000 shares in JCB owned by the family. Total dividend payment to the family £77m.

Then we add the fact the shares are mostly owned through trusts which in many cases are based offshore mainly Bermuda so, in effect they may not pay any U.K. tax at all on the dividends.

Remember Bamford is domicile here so all those dividends are paid through a U.K. controlled business but the parent company is actually Swiss based.

So it’s possible that a U.K. company has paid no U.K. tax whilst the family who own it have pocketed £170m all legally.

You do like to poop on a Brexiteers party

Yes I’m anti Brexit that’s true but in this case I’m very anti legal tax avoidance . The rich should pay the same as the highest paid at 45%. Why not? If it’s fair for a worker it should be fair for a company owner . . However Lord Bamford has to pay exactly the same tax as any other individual in the UK .His company is an entirely different entity to him personally and his personal tax return

Really? So why would anybody want to build a hugely profitable company if no e of it accrues to you personally so that you and your family can benefit from it?

It's very, very confusing."

They still would accrue that wealth it was a fair and equal system

If your salary is set by your boss at £200k you pay 45% tax plus NI

If you own the company and decide to pay yourself £2m in dividends you would pay 45% tax plus NI

Who takes more money home?

It’s always the guy who earns more. So if you’re successful you are still going to be richer than your workers which is fine by me.

Lord Bamford tells his staff what is their maximum salary but he can chose his own salary assuming the company he owns makes a profit. So if he makes more money he can take more money home . I don’t care if he pays himself £200m as long as he pays the same rate of tax as the guy on £200k Bamford still keeps over half his pay just like the guy being paid a lot less.

The big earners should not pay a higher rate just the top rate like their employees. Otherwise we are all subsidising that extra avoidance benefit.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

"Yes all looks good

But, when you read the accounts in a little more detail you see the fundamental issues with our tax structure in the U.K. and how our government enables wealth to be kept by the richest.

The company JCB Services Ltd paid £84m in global tax of which around £14 m was adjustments from the previous year.

When you look at the dividend paid by the company it’s over £1600 per share . There are 48,000 shares in JCB owned by the family. Total dividend payment to the family £77m.

Then we add the fact the shares are mostly owned through trusts which in many cases are based offshore mainly Bermuda so, in effect they may not pay any U.K. tax at all on the dividends.

Remember Bamford is domicile here so all those dividends are paid through a U.K. controlled business but the parent company is actually Swiss based.

So it’s possible that a U.K. company has paid no U.K. tax whilst the family who own it have pocketed £170m all legally.

You do like to poop on a Brexiteers party

Yes I’m anti Brexit that’s true but in this case I’m very anti legal tax avoidance . The rich should pay the same as the highest paid at 45%. Why not? If it’s fair for a worker it should be fair for a company owner . . However Lord Bamford has to pay exactly the same tax as any other individual in the UK .His company is an entirely different entity to him personally and his personal tax return

Really? So why would anybody want to build a hugely profitable company if no e of it accrues to you personally so that you and your family can benefit from it?

It's very, very confusing.

They still would accrue that wealth it was a fair and equal system

If your salary is set by your boss at £200k you pay 45% tax plus NI

If you own the company and decide to pay yourself £2m in dividends you would pay 45% tax plus NI

Who takes more money home?

It’s always the guy who earns more. So if you’re successful you are still going to be richer than your workers which is fine by me.

The big earners should not pay a higher rate just the top rate like their employees. Otherwise we are all subsidising that extra avoidance benefit. "

Actually, the highest rate of dividend tax is less than 40% and no NI payment is due on that from you or the company.

It is inherently more profitable to passively hold shares than to be paid to actively work through physical or mental effort.

The point I was actually making is that if the company is a separate entity and you gain no income from it (that would therefore be taxable) then what's the point?

The reality is that you do earn an income that should be taxed in the same way as anyone else, but you are allowed not to.

Of course there is also a risk premium that should be acknowledged in the tax code, but that should be some fixed multiple of investment.

The current system allows far, far more than this.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ove2pleaseseukMan
over a year ago

Hastings

So if I want to in vest in shares and make a profit I get taxed if I make a loss will I get the tax back NO will the government refund my loss NO it's the same for everyone in the UK what is the problem.

So would you tax someone some how if they own gold and the price goes up

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

"So if I want to in vest in shares and make a profit I get taxed if I make a loss will I get the tax back NO will the government refund my loss NO it's the same for everyone in the UK what is the problem.

So would you tax someone some how if they own gold and the price goes up "

What point are you making about the profits of JCB and how the Bamfords are taxed?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago

Manchester

"Yes all looks good

But, when you read the accounts in a little more detail you see the fundamental issues with our tax structure in the U.K. and how our government enables wealth to be kept by the richest.

The company JCB Services Ltd paid £84m in global tax of which around £14 m was adjustments from the previous year.

When you look at the dividend paid by the company it’s over £1600 per share . There are 48,000 shares in JCB owned by the family. Total dividend payment to the family £77m.

Then we add the fact the shares are mostly owned through trusts which in many cases are based offshore mainly Bermuda so, in effect they may not pay any U.K. tax at all on the dividends.

Remember Bamford is domicile here so all those dividends are paid through a U.K. controlled business but the parent company is actually Swiss based.

So it’s possible that a U.K. company has paid no U.K. tax whilst the family who own it have pocketed £170m all legally.

You do like to poop on a Brexiteers party

Yes I’m anti Brexit that’s true but in this case I’m very anti legal tax avoidance . The rich should pay the same as the highest paid at 45%. Why not? If it’s fair for a worker it should be fair for a company owner . . However Lord Bamford has to pay exactly the same tax as any other individual in the UK .His company is an entirely different entity to him personally and his personal tax return

Really? So why would anybody want to build a hugely profitable company if no e of it accrues to you personally so that you and your family can benefit from it?

It's very, very confusing.

They still would accrue that wealth it was a fair and equal system

If your salary is set by your boss at £200k you pay 45% tax plus NI

If you own the company and decide to pay yourself £2m in dividends you would pay 45% tax plus NI

Who takes more money home?

It’s always the guy who earns more. So if you’re successful you are still going to be richer than your workers which is fine by me.

The big earners should not pay a higher rate just the top rate like their employees. Otherwise we are all subsidising that extra avoidance benefit.

Actually, the highest rate of dividend tax is less than 40% and no NI payment is due on that from you or the company.

It is inherently more profitable to passively hold shares than to be paid to actively work through physical or mental effort.

The point I was actually making is that if the company is a separate entity and you gain no income from it (that would therefore be taxable) then what's the point?

The reality is that you do earn an income that should be taxed in the same way as anyone else, but you are allowed not to.

Of course there is also a risk premium that should be acknowledged in the tax code, but that should be some fixed multiple of investment.

The current system allows far, far more than this."

I know the dividend is 39% on certain earnings . My point was “if” they were the same .

I agree with your points .

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago

Manchester

So would you tax someone some how if they own gold and the price goes up "

You chose to invest in shares so the risk is yours alone. Just like gamblers pay tax on their bets. . I don’t see them claiming their losses back!!

As for gold you get taxed when you sell it as with capitol gains tax.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ove2pleaseseukMan
over a year ago

Hastings

So would you tax someone some how if they own gold and the price goes up

What point are you making about the profits of JCB and how the Bamfords are taxed?"

Every one can do what thay have done if you work hard and take a bit of risk. You seem to not like the fact that this family is doing well.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ove2pleaseseukMan
over a year ago

Hastings

"Yes all looks good

But, when you read the accounts in a little more detail you see the fundamental issues with our tax structure in the U.K. and how our government enables wealth to be kept by the richest.

The company JCB Services Ltd paid £84m in global tax of which around £14 m was adjustments from the previous year.

When you look at the dividend paid by the company it’s over £1600 per share . There are 48,000 shares in JCB owned by the family. Total dividend payment to the family £77m.

Then we add the fact the shares are mostly owned through trusts which in many cases are based offshore mainly Bermuda so, in effect they may not pay any U.K. tax at all on the dividends.

Remember Bamford is domicile here so all those dividends are paid through a U.K. controlled business but the parent company is actually Swiss based.

So it’s possible that a U.K. company has paid no U.K. tax whilst the family who own it have pocketed £170m all legally.

You do like to poop on a Brexiteers party

Yes I’m anti Brexit that’s true but in this case I’m very anti legal tax avoidance . The rich should pay the same as the highest paid at 45%. Why not? If it’s fair for a worker it should be fair for a company owner . . However Lord Bamford has to pay exactly the same tax as any other individual in the UK .His company is an entirely different entity to him personally and his personal tax return

Really? So why would anybody want to build a hugely profitable company if no e of it accrues to you personally so that you and your family can benefit from it?

It's very, very confusing.

They still would accrue that wealth it was a fair and equal system

If your salary is set by your boss at £200k you pay 45% tax plus NI

If you own the company and decide to pay yourself £2m in dividends you would pay 45% tax plus NI

Who takes more money home?

It’s always the guy who earns more. So if you’re successful you are still going to be richer than your workers which is fine by me.

The big earners should not pay a higher rate just the top rate like their employees. Otherwise we are all subsidising that extra avoidance benefit.

Actually, the highest rate of dividend tax is less than 40% and no NI payment is due on that from you or the company.

It is inherently more profitable to passively hold shares than to be paid to actively work through physical or mental effort.

The point I was actually making is that if the company is a separate entity and you gain no income from it (that would therefore be taxable) then what's the point?

The reality is that you do earn an income that should be taxed in the same way as anyone else, but you are allowed not to.

Of course there is also a risk premium that should be acknowledged in the tax code, but that should be some fixed multiple of investment.

The current system allows far, far more than this.

I know the dividend is 39% on certain earnings . My point was “if” they were the same .

I agree with your points . "

But then it becomes a tax game any way.

Oh do I pay myself a salary to reduce profit there for cooperation tax or do I pay 20% on the profit and dividend tax.

My self I take a salary of £1047 a month then dividends as that works best At the moment you also need to think back when dividend tax was 0 up to the lower threshold as it was deemed the tax had allready been paid ?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ove2pleaseseukMan
over a year ago

Hastings

"Yes all looks good

But, when you read the accounts in a little more detail you see the fundamental issues with our tax structure in the U.K. and how our government enables wealth to be kept by the richest.

The company JCB Services Ltd paid £84m in global tax of which around £14 m was adjustments from the previous year.

When you look at the dividend paid by the company it’s over £1600 per share . There are 48,000 shares in JCB owned by the family. Total dividend payment to the family £77m.

Then we add the fact the shares are mostly owned through trusts which in many cases are based offshore mainly Bermuda so, in effect they may not pay any U.K. tax at all on the dividends.

Remember Bamford is domicile here so all those dividends are paid through a U.K. controlled business but the parent company is actually Swiss based.

So it’s possible that a U.K. company has paid no U.K. tax whilst the family who own it have pocketed £170m all legally.

You do like to poop on a Brexiteers party

Yes I’m anti Brexit that’s true but in this case I’m very anti legal tax avoidance . The rich should pay the same as the highest paid at 45%. Why not? If it’s fair for a worker it should be fair for a company owner . . However Lord Bamford has to pay exactly the same tax as any other individual in the UK .His company is an entirely different entity to him personally and his personal tax return

Really? So why would anybody want to build a hugely profitable company if no e of it accrues to you personally so that you and your family can benefit from it?

It's very, very confusing.

They still would accrue that wealth it was a fair and equal system

If your salary is set by your boss at £200k you pay 45% tax plus NI

If you own the company and decide to pay yourself £2m in dividends you would pay 45% tax plus NI

Who takes more money home?

It’s always the guy who earns more. So if you’re successful you are still going to be richer than your workers which is fine by me.

The big earners should not pay a higher rate just the top rate like their employees. Otherwise we are all subsidising that extra avoidance benefit.

Actually, the highest rate of dividend tax is less than 40% and no NI payment is due on that from you or the company.

It is inherently more profitable to passively hold shares than to be paid to actively work through physical or mental effort.

The point I was actually making is that if the company is a separate entity and you gain no income from it (that would therefore be taxable) then what's the point?

The reality is that you do earn an income that should be taxed in the same way as anyone else, but you are allowed not to.

Of course there is also a risk premium that should be acknowledged in the tax code, but that should be some fixed multiple of investment.

The current system allows far, far more than this.

I know the dividend is 39% on certain earnings . My point was “if” they were the same .

I agree with your points . "

39% is above the 50k 7.5% up to 50K

£2000 is still tax free for each director but as sid can only be taken out of profit after corporation tax

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ne Pass drilling OP Man
over a year ago

Northampton

"Profits up and build quality down . Our £100,000.00 Jcb just 2 years old has had a transmission failure not under guarantee.

Looking at a £20,000 repair bill and no replacement to earn a living with whilst it’s fixed.

We’re pleased the company is looking after its staff though.

Personally I’d of paid another few thousand for a stronger drive train . Hopefully at least 10% stronger?

"
. Sadly this is one of the problems with modern vehicles and machinery. They are a lot more reliable than a few decades ago but repair costs are horrendous when they go wrong . The cost of either gearboxes or engines for Scania lorries is eye watering .

I feel your pain. I had to fit a new engine about ten years ago. However I took a risk and arranged to fit a secondhand one . With a transmission failure you probably have no choice but to fit a new box. A very painfull experience.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ove2pleaseseukMan
over a year ago

Hastings

"Profits up and build quality down . Our £100,000.00 Jcb just 2 years old has had a transmission failure not under guarantee.

Looking at a £20,000 repair bill and no replacement to earn a living with whilst it’s fixed.

We’re pleased the company is looking after its staff though.

Personally I’d of paid another few thousand for a stronger drive train . Hopefully at least 10% stronger?

. Sadly this is one of the problems with modern vehicles and machinery. They are a lot more reliable than a few decades ago but repair costs are horrendous when they go wrong . The cost of either gearboxes or engines for Scania lorries is eye watering .

No it probably more expensive as it still under warranty so if its not done by main dealer then good buy to that. Have you looked at the cost of getting the box rebuild buy a third party and forgetting the warranty.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *rDiscretionXXXMan
over a year ago

Gilfach

"So if I want to in vest in shares and make a profit I get taxed if I make a loss will I get the tax back NO ..."

If you invest in shares, and you make a profit, you get taxed on that profit. If you invest in shares and you make a loss, that loss reduces the amount of tax that you have to pay.

So yes, you "get the tax back".

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ove2pleaseseukMan
over a year ago

Hastings

"So if I want to in vest in shares and make a profit I get taxed if I make a loss will I get the tax back NO ...

If you invest in shares, and you make a profit, you get taxed on that profit. If you invest in shares and you make a loss, that loss reduces the amount of tax that you have to pay.

So yes, you "get the tax back"."

So if I eventually 2k and make a 3k loss I get my 2k back NO it dose not work like that.

It's a risk OK I agree once you have a big enough portfolio your right but how starts with a big portfolio?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *rDiscretionXXXMan
over a year ago

Gilfach

"So if I want to in vest in shares and make a profit I get taxed if I make a loss will I get the tax back NO ..."

"If you invest in shares, and you make a profit, you get taxed on that profit. If you invest in shares and you make a loss, that loss reduces the amount of tax that you have to pay.

So yes, you "get the tax back"."

"So if I eventually 2k and make a 3k loss I get my 2k back NO it dose not work like that."

In your original post you made a distinction between getting "the tax back", and getting your investment back. If you're now going to start confusing those 2 things, I'll leave you to it.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ove2pleaseseukMan
over a year ago

Hastings

"So if I want to in vest in shares and make a profit I get taxed if I make a loss will I get the tax back NO ...

If you invest in shares, and you make a profit, you get taxed on that profit. If you invest in shares and you make a loss, that loss reduces the amount of tax that you have to pay.

So yes, you "get the tax back"."

And you said you "get the tax back"

But no you don't you just pay less if year one you make a profit and pay tax and year 2 make a loss you don't get back what you have paid.so know you don't get it back.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

So would you tax someone some how if they own gold and the price goes up

What point are you making about the profits of JCB and how the Bamfords are taxed?

Every one can do what thay have done if you work hard and take a bit of risk. You seem to not like the fact that this family is doing well. "

No. I have no problem with them doing well.

They should just contribute in the same proportion as everyone else.

Perhaps you disagree. Should the wealthy contribute a smaller proportion of their earnings than the poor?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ove2pleaseseukMan
over a year ago

Hastings

So would you tax someone some how if they own gold and the price goes up

What point are you making about the profits of JCB and how the Bamfords are taxed?

Every one can do what thay have done if you work hard and take a bit of risk. You seem to not like the fact that this family is doing well.

No. I have no problem with them doing well.

They should just contribute in the same proportion as everyone else.

Perhaps you disagree. Should the wealthy contribute a smaller proportion of their earnings than the poor?"

I don't see you as poor

And they must give lots more then most in corporation tax let alone any other sort of tax.

Maybe there bonus to staff is just to reduce that bill.

No where do you give any idea of your saters in life so I'll put you in the top 20%

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

So would you tax someone some how if they own gold and the price goes up

What point are you making about the profits of JCB and how the Bamfords are taxed?

Every one can do what thay have done if you work hard and take a bit of risk. You seem to not like the fact that this family is doing well.

No. I have no problem with them doing well.

They should just contribute in the same proportion as everyone else.

Perhaps you disagree. Should the wealthy contribute a smaller proportion of their earnings than the poor?

I don't see you as poor

And they must give lots more then most in corporation tax let alone any other sort of tax.

Maybe there bonus to staff is just to reduce that bill.

No where do you give any idea of your saters in life so I'll put you in the top 20%"

Why do I have to be poor to have empathy for those who aren't? Is "the game" just to look after myself? I still do not follow what point you are making here.

The company pays corporation tax at 19% on profits. That is a cost (and an investment in the country) of doing business.

After that they, the Bamfords, should pay the same proportion of their income in taxes as their own contribution to the conditions that have allowed them to create such success as their employees do. They don't though. Why is that OK?

Is there mutual benefit in wider society being better of or is it a zero sum game?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *astcoast2000Man
over a year ago

Newcastle County Down

JCBs turnover has risen to £4.4 billion in 2021, up from £3.1 billion in 2020. Profit before tax increased from £130.1 million to £502.6 million and machine sales from 74590 to 95650. Great news for everyone. . "
They took over a bankrupt bus manufacturer over in Northern Ireland. Completely turned it around now employing former staff that were paid off and back to some staff level as previously great company

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ustintime69Man
over a year ago

Bristol

Bamford is a good businessman as is Dyson but they both bankrolled Brexit without giving any honest explanation of why they really did which is because the EU were bringing in rules that would have made the tax avoidance they routinely practice much more difficult to achieve. It was simply personal to them in much the same way as it was for Farage as he had been unable to claim millions due to EU rulings on his trading. Don’t ever believe that any of these people are doing any of this stuff for patriotic reasons or any of that guff….it’s all about the money!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

"Bamford is a good businessman as is Dyson but they both bankrolled Brexit without giving any honest explanation of why they really did which is because the EU were bringing in rules that would have made the tax avoidance they routinely practice much more difficult to achieve. It was simply personal to them in much the same way as it was for Farage as he had been unable to claim millions due to EU rulings on his trading. Don’t ever believe that any of these people are doing any of this stuff for patriotic reasons or any of that guff….it’s all about the money!"

You can add the other foreign domiciled James Radcliffe to that list.

I believe the Bamford family do still live here and have their company headquartered here.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ne Pass drilling OP Man
over a year ago

Northampton

You can add the other foreign domiciled James Radcliffe to that list.

I believe the Bamford family do still live here and have their company headquartered here."
. If you were to analyse the personal tax returns of these people I think you will find that they have made a more than adequate contribution to society .

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ohnnyTwoNotesMan
over a year ago

golden fields

You can add the other foreign domiciled James Radcliffe to that list.

I believe the Bamford family do still live here and have their company headquartered here.. If you were to analyse the personal tax returns of these people I think you will find that they have made a more than adequate contribution to society . "

Brutal diss to the Tories.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

Post new Message to Thread