Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sunak’s war on the poor and disabled continues Closure of Work and Health Programme comes hard on heels of Rishi Sunak’s bid to end the UK’s supposed ‘sicknote’ culture Who’s getting it next ? " By ending the "sicknote" culture there will be more money to help those truly in need rather than some of the skivers. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sunak’s war on the poor and disabled continues Closure of Work and Health Programme comes hard on heels of Rishi Sunak’s bid to end the UK’s supposed ‘sicknote’ culture Who’s getting it next ? By ending the "sicknote" culture there will be more money to help those truly in need rather than some of the skivers. " Could you tell me how he is going to end the “sicknote” culture? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sunak’s war on the poor and disabled continues Closure of Work and Health Programme comes hard on heels of Rishi Sunak’s bid to end the UK’s supposed ‘sicknote’ culture Who’s getting it next ? " In fairness to Sunak, these kind of austerity measures on the most vulnerable people in society seem to galvanise the Tory supporter base. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sunak’s war on the poor and disabled continues Closure of Work and Health Programme comes hard on heels of Rishi Sunak’s bid to end the UK’s supposed ‘sicknote’ culture Who’s getting it next ? " I would say clamping down on benefit fraud is a good thing but it needs to be done carefully to not adversely affect the genuine people | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Notably no clampdown on 68,700 non doms or complicated trusts that enabled the Duke of Westminster to inherit a £9,000,000,000 property portfolio free of any inheritance tax." You mean, no clampdown on people going about their business in accordance with the law? I should hope not. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Notably no clampdown on 68,700 non doms or complicated trusts that enabled the Duke of Westminster to inherit a £9,000,000,000 property portfolio free of any inheritance tax. " For some bizzare reason I thought this thread was about people on sick benefit. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Notably no clampdown on 68,700 non doms or complicated trusts that enabled the Duke of Westminster to inherit a £9,000,000,000 property portfolio free of any inheritance tax. For some bizzare reason I thought this thread was about people on sick benefit. " Making the point that it’s the least well off again that have been targeted. £3.2bn a year supporting non doms and £4bn tax avoided by the duke, but let’s demonise the less well off. Add all the spv and offshore trusts ‘legally’ avoiding tax. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Notably no clampdown on 68,700 non doms or complicated trusts that enabled the Duke of Westminster to inherit a £9,000,000,000 property portfolio free of any inheritance tax. For some bizzare reason I thought this thread was about people on sick benefit. Making the point that it’s the least well off again that have been targeted. £3.2bn a year supporting non doms and £4bn tax avoided by the duke, but let’s demonise the less well off. Add all the spv and offshore trusts ‘legally’ avoiding tax. " It’s all just meat for the people who lick the boots of the wealthy because they see them as their betters. These sort of people will always find a way to defend rich people but they still need someone to blame, so they take the easy way out and punch downwards. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It doesn't matter who you "defend" or whose boots you lock, the sick notes are a huge drain on society because they can't be bothered getting out of bed and going to work. I'd say you'd be hard pressed to find someone that doesn't know someone on "long term sick" because the jobs just took much and they'd rather not look for something that suits them." OK but could you tell me how he is going to end the “sicknote” culture? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If I knew that I'd probably be earning a 7 figure salary. A start would be to have an automatic timescale for various recognised illnesses. Eg if you have flu then max time off is two weeks If your off with stress then three months and you resign or return. More than two periods in five years means you can't do the job and move over let someone else have a go. Would you just continue to pay sickness benefits forever ?" To the people who require sickness benefits, yes. You seem to be mistaking long term sickness for all sickness, two weeks off with the flu is not long term, three months off with stress is not long term. Stress is a catch all term that can encompass a lot of different things, it could be that one person is perfectly fine to return to work after three months but someone else isn’t. This is why we have doctors, because if medicine was simply a one size fits all thing then you could get anyone with a basic grasp of excel to make such decisions. How long would you give for cancer? What if the cancer reoccurs, would that person be forced to resign because they can no longer do the job? Would you be happy to be the one who brings them into the office and tells them? One of the unfortunate trends of late is that everyone thinks their opinion is as valid as an expert’s, this is especially dangerous when it comes to health. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It doesn't matter who you "defend" or whose boots you lock, the sick notes are a huge drain on society because they can't be bothered getting out of bed and going to work. I'd say you'd be hard pressed to find someone that doesn't know someone on "long term sick" because the jobs just took much and they'd rather not look for something that suits them. OK but could you tell me how he is going to end the “sicknote” culture?" It seems to me there are two approaches: 1. Disprove eligibility for a 'sicknote' (very hard to do). 2. Require some 'sicknote' cases to train and WFH (but that seemed v.unpopular on another thread). Alternatively, we just accept that some people are workshy and hide behind sicknotes. But that's grossly unfair on the genuinely sick and taxpayers. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It doesn't matter who you "defend" or whose boots you lock, the sick notes are a huge drain on society because they can't be bothered getting out of bed and going to work. I'd say you'd be hard pressed to find someone that doesn't know someone on "long term sick" because the jobs just took much and they'd rather not look for something that suits them. OK but could you tell me how he is going to end the “sicknote” culture? It seems to me there are two approaches: 1. Disprove eligibility for a 'sicknote' (very hard to do). 2. Require some 'sicknote' cases to train and WFH (but that seemed v.unpopular on another thread). Alternatively, we just accept that some people are workshy and hide behind sicknotes. But that's grossly unfair on the genuinely sick and taxpayers." Or we could accept that people are genuinely sick and help them, rather than punish them. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It doesn't matter who you "defend" or whose boots you lock, the sick notes are a huge drain on society because they can't be bothered getting out of bed and going to work. I'd say you'd be hard pressed to find someone that doesn't know someone on "long term sick" because the jobs just took much and they'd rather not look for something that suits them. OK but could you tell me how he is going to end the “sicknote” culture? It seems to me there are two approaches: 1. Disprove eligibility for a 'sicknote' (very hard to do). 2. Require some 'sicknote' cases to train and WFH (but that seemed v.unpopular on another thread). Alternatively, we just accept that some people are workshy and hide behind sicknotes. But that's grossly unfair on the genuinely sick and taxpayers. Or we could accept that people are genuinely sick and help them, rather than punish them." Yes of course, but I don't think anybody is suggesting otherwise are they? Where do you get that idea from? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It doesn't matter who you "defend" or whose boots you lock, the sick notes are a huge drain on society because they can't be bothered getting out of bed and going to work. I'd say you'd be hard pressed to find someone that doesn't know someone on "long term sick" because the jobs just took much and they'd rather not look for something that suits them. OK but could you tell me how he is going to end the “sicknote” culture? It seems to me there are two approaches: 1. Disprove eligibility for a 'sicknote' (very hard to do). 2. Require some 'sicknote' cases to train and WFH (but that seemed v.unpopular on another thread). Alternatively, we just accept that some people are workshy and hide behind sicknotes. But that's grossly unfair on the genuinely sick and taxpayers. Or we could accept that people are genuinely sick and help them, rather than punish them." So everyone claiming to be sick is genuine? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It doesn't matter who you "defend" or whose boots you lock, the sick notes are a huge drain on society because they can't be bothered getting out of bed and going to work. I'd say you'd be hard pressed to find someone that doesn't know someone on "long term sick" because the jobs just took much and they'd rather not look for something that suits them. OK but could you tell me how he is going to end the “sicknote” culture? It seems to me there are two approaches: 1. Disprove eligibility for a 'sicknote' (very hard to do). 2. Require some 'sicknote' cases to train and WFH (but that seemed v.unpopular on another thread). Alternatively, we just accept that some people are workshy and hide behind sicknotes. But that's grossly unfair on the genuinely sick and taxpayers. Or we could accept that people are genuinely sick and help them, rather than punish them. Yes of course, but I don't think anybody is suggesting otherwise are they? Where do you get that idea from?" I think a lot of people are saying that some people on long term sickness benefits aren’t genuinely sick. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It doesn't matter who you "defend" or whose boots you lock, the sick notes are a huge drain on society because they can't be bothered getting out of bed and going to work. I'd say you'd be hard pressed to find someone that doesn't know someone on "long term sick" because the jobs just took much and they'd rather not look for something that suits them. OK but could you tell me how he is going to end the “sicknote” culture? It seems to me there are two approaches: 1. Disprove eligibility for a 'sicknote' (very hard to do). 2. Require some 'sicknote' cases to train and WFH (but that seemed v.unpopular on another thread). Alternatively, we just accept that some people are workshy and hide behind sicknotes. But that's grossly unfair on the genuinely sick and taxpayers. Or we could accept that people are genuinely sick and help them, rather than punish them. So everyone claiming to be sick is genuine?" Until a doctor says otherwise, yes. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It doesn't matter who you "defend" or whose boots you lock, the sick notes are a huge drain on society because they can't be bothered getting out of bed and going to work. I'd say you'd be hard pressed to find someone that doesn't know someone on "long term sick" because the jobs just took much and they'd rather not look for something that suits them. OK but could you tell me how he is going to end the “sicknote” culture? It seems to me there are two approaches: 1. Disprove eligibility for a 'sicknote' (very hard to do). 2. Require some 'sicknote' cases to train and WFH (but that seemed v.unpopular on another thread). Alternatively, we just accept that some people are workshy and hide behind sicknotes. But that's grossly unfair on the genuinely sick and taxpayers. Or we could accept that people are genuinely sick and help them, rather than punish them. Yes of course, but I don't think anybody is suggesting otherwise are they? Where do you get that idea from? I think a lot of people are saying that some people on long term sickness benefits aren’t genuinely sick." Ah, but that's a different matter. Have you considered the possibility that they may well be right? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It doesn't matter who you "defend" or whose boots you lock, the sick notes are a huge drain on society because they can't be bothered getting out of bed and going to work. I'd say you'd be hard pressed to find someone that doesn't know someone on "long term sick" because the jobs just took much and they'd rather not look for something that suits them. OK but could you tell me how he is going to end the “sicknote” culture? It seems to me there are two approaches: 1. Disprove eligibility for a 'sicknote' (very hard to do). 2. Require some 'sicknote' cases to train and WFH (but that seemed v.unpopular on another thread). Alternatively, we just accept that some people are workshy and hide behind sicknotes. But that's grossly unfair on the genuinely sick and taxpayers. Or we could accept that people are genuinely sick and help them, rather than punish them. Yes of course, but I don't think anybody is suggesting otherwise are they? Where do you get that idea from? I think a lot of people are saying that some people on long term sickness benefits aren’t genuinely sick. Ah, but that's a different matter. Have you considered the possibility that they may well be right?" Until such time as a doctor decides otherwise it doesn’t really matter what I think because I’m in no way qualified to say. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Doctors don't question nowadays, they just sign hence the problem. They even send out sick notes if you phone them lol I had a sore back a few years ago and tried to make an appointment. First words were ill send you a sick line.fkr a month. I refused " Then you have a terrible doctor, I’ve never yet had a GP offer me a sick note without a consultation. Neither of our experiences are anything more than anecdotal though. Now can we get back to how long you’d give someone with cancer of work before they have to return or resign? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Doctors don't question nowadays, they just sign hence the problem. They even send out sick notes if you phone them lol I had a sore back a few years ago and tried to make an appointment. First words were ill send you a sick line.fkr a month. I refused Then you have a terrible doctor, I’ve never yet had a GP offer me a sick note without a consultation. Neither of our experiences are anything more than anecdotal though. Now can we get back to how long you’d give someone with cancer of work before they have to return or resign?" NHS NI had a policy regarding cancer (well long term) sick leave I'm not going to quote it as a fact in case it's changed but I believe it was 12 months I'm sure Google will tell you Maybe not nice but that's life | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Doctors don't question nowadays, they just sign hence the problem. They even send out sick notes if you phone them lol I had a sore back a few years ago and tried to make an appointment. First words were ill send you a sick line.fkr a month. I refused Then you have a terrible doctor, I’ve never yet had a GP offer me a sick note without a consultation. Neither of our experiences are anything more than anecdotal though. Now can we get back to how long you’d give someone with cancer of work before they have to return or resign? NHS NI had a policy regarding cancer (well long term) sick leave I'm not going to quote it as a fact in case it's changed but I believe it was 12 months I'm sure Google will tell you Maybe not nice but that's life" Ok so what would you make it? 12 months? That’s how long the NHS pays sick pay, but what about if they lose their job and need sickness benefits, how long would you give them? What about if it recurs within 5 years? Would you be happy to sit in a room and tell them that you’re stopping their benefits? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If I knew that I'd probably be earning a 7 figure salary. A start would be to have an automatic timescale for various recognised illnesses. Eg if you have flu then max time off is two weeks If your off with stress then three months and you resign or return. More than two periods in five years means you can't do the job and move over let someone else have a go. Would you just continue to pay sickness benefits forever ?" And people with long term conditions? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Notably no clampdown on 68,700 non doms or complicated trusts that enabled the Duke of Westminster to inherit a £9,000,000,000 property portfolio free of any inheritance tax. For some bizzare reason I thought this thread was about people on sick benefit. Making the point that it’s the least well off again that have been targeted. £3.2bn a year supporting non doms and £4bn tax avoided by the duke, but let’s demonise the less well off. Add all the spv and offshore trusts ‘legally’ avoiding tax. " Shouldn't all gaming the system be targeted. I feel if your claiming something your not entitled to, whether that's some rich non Dom or anyone else then it should be stopped. Saying we can't clamp down on one area until we have clamped down on something else seems crazy to me. Stop it wherever it's found I would think. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Notably no clampdown on 68,700 non doms or complicated trusts that enabled the Duke of Westminster to inherit a £9,000,000,000 property portfolio free of any inheritance tax. For some bizzare reason I thought this thread was about people on sick benefit. Making the point that it’s the least well off again that have been targeted. £3.2bn a year supporting non doms and £4bn tax avoided by the duke, but let’s demonise the less well off. Add all the spv and offshore trusts ‘legally’ avoiding tax. Shouldn't all gaming the system be targeted. I feel if your claiming something your not entitled to, whether that's some rich non Dom or anyone else then it should be stopped. Saying we can't clamp down on one area until we have clamped down on something else seems crazy to me. Stop it wherever it's found I would think." Sounds too sensible .  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Notably no clampdown on 68,700 non doms or complicated trusts that enabled the Duke of Westminster to inherit a £9,000,000,000 property portfolio free of any inheritance tax. For some bizzare reason I thought this thread was about people on sick benefit. Making the point that it’s the least well off again that have been targeted. £3.2bn a year supporting non doms and £4bn tax avoided by the duke, but let’s demonise the less well off. Add all the spv and offshore trusts ‘legally’ avoiding tax. Shouldn't all gaming the system be targeted. I feel if your claiming something your not entitled to, whether that's some rich non Dom or anyone else then it should be stopped. Saying we can't clamp down on one area until we have clamped down on something else seems crazy to me. Stop it wherever it's found I would think." The thing is, it always seems to be the people on benefits they target, never the rich people. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Notably no clampdown on 68,700 non doms or complicated trusts that enabled the Duke of Westminster to inherit a £9,000,000,000 property portfolio free of any inheritance tax. For some bizzare reason I thought this thread was about people on sick benefit. Making the point that it’s the least well off again that have been targeted. £3.2bn a year supporting non doms and £4bn tax avoided by the duke, but let’s demonise the less well off. Add all the spv and offshore trusts ‘legally’ avoiding tax. Shouldn't all gaming the system be targeted. I feel if your claiming something your not entitled to, whether that's some rich non Dom or anyone else then it should be stopped. Saying we can't clamp down on one area until we have clamped down on something else seems crazy to me. Stop it wherever it's found I would think. The thing is, it always seems to be the people on benefits they target, never the rich people." Target the rich for what? Wrongdoing or just for being rich? No doubt some rich people cheat just as some benefits claimants do. The ladder of the law has no top and no bottom. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sunak’s war on the poor and disabled continues Closure of Work and Health Programme comes hard on heels of Rishi Sunak’s bid to end the UK’s supposed ‘sicknote’ culture Who’s getting it next ? " . It is nothing to do with a war on the sick and disabled. Most law abiding citizens only want benefits paid to those who are entitled. Benefits paid to those who are not entitled need to be investigated and stopped . Every single benefit claimant is being paid by hard working taxpayers. The number claiming various disability benefits has doubled in the last ten years . It is obvious that people are milking the system and their benefits need to be stopped . Ant genuine claimant welcomes this crackdown and recognises that fraudulent claims should to stopped | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sunak’s war on the poor and disabled continues Closure of Work and Health Programme comes hard on heels of Rishi Sunak’s bid to end the UK’s supposed ‘sicknote’ culture Who’s getting it next ? . It is nothing to do with a war on the sick and disabled. Most law abiding citizens only want benefits paid to those who are entitled. Benefits paid to those who are not entitled need to be investigated and stopped . Every single benefit claimant is being paid by hard working taxpayers. The number claiming various disability benefits has doubled in the last ten years . It is obvious that people are milking the system and their benefits need to be stopped . Ant genuine claimant welcomes this crackdown and recognises that fraudulent claims should to stopped " Thank goodness for a bit of common sense | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sunak’s war on the poor and disabled continues Closure of Work and Health Programme comes hard on heels of Rishi Sunak’s bid to end the UK’s supposed ‘sicknote’ culture Who’s getting it next ? . It is nothing to do with a war on the sick and disabled. Most law abiding citizens only want benefits paid to those who are entitled. Benefits paid to those who are not entitled need to be investigated and stopped . Every single benefit claimant is being paid by hard working taxpayers. The number claiming various disability benefits has doubled in the last ten years . It is obvious that people are milking the system and their benefits need to be stopped . Ant genuine claimant welcomes this crackdown and recognises that fraudulent claims should to stopped " How will they decide which claimants are genuine or not? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Notably no clampdown on 68,700 non doms or complicated trusts that enabled the Duke of Westminster to inherit a £9,000,000,000 property portfolio free of any inheritance tax. For some bizzare reason I thought this thread was about people on sick benefit. Making the point that it’s the least well off again that have been targeted. £3.2bn a year supporting non doms and £4bn tax avoided by the duke, but let’s demonise the less well off. Add all the spv and offshore trusts ‘legally’ avoiding tax. Shouldn't all gaming the system be targeted. I feel if your claiming something your not entitled to, whether that's some rich non Dom or anyone else then it should be stopped. Saying we can't clamp down on one area until we have clamped down on something else seems crazy to me. Stop it wherever it's found I would think. The thing is, it always seems to be the people on benefits they target, never the rich people." . How do you know that the rich are not reviewed? If you are rich you are hardly going to take the risk of having an investigation by not paying the correct taxes. You will usually use a professional firm to submit a return. A professiona firm are hardly going to risk prosecution by submitting a false return on behalf of their clients . HMRC have means to undertake extensive data mining. Only a fool is going to attempt to under declare their tax. . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sunak’s war on the poor and disabled continues Closure of Work and Health Programme comes hard on heels of Rishi Sunak’s bid to end the UK’s supposed ‘sicknote’ culture Who’s getting it next ? . It is nothing to do with a war on the sick and disabled. Most law abiding citizens only want benefits paid to those who are entitled. Benefits paid to those who are not entitled need to be investigated and stopped . Every single benefit claimant is being paid by hard working taxpayers. The number claiming various disability benefits has doubled in the last ten years . It is obvious that people are milking the system and their benefits need to be stopped . Ant genuine claimant welcomes this crackdown and recognises that fraudulent claims should to stopped How will they decide which claimants are genuine or not?" . Maybe checking social media accounts would be a good start. A review of bank statements to seem to whom payments were made. Analysis of tracking devices on mobility vehicles. Any genuine claimant of these benefits want to see fraudulent claims stopped | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sunak’s war on the poor and disabled continues Closure of Work and Health Programme comes hard on heels of Rishi Sunak’s bid to end the UK’s supposed ‘sicknote’ culture Who’s getting it next ? . It is nothing to do with a war on the sick and disabled. Most law abiding citizens only want benefits paid to those who are entitled. Benefits paid to those who are not entitled need to be investigated and stopped . Every single benefit claimant is being paid by hard working taxpayers. The number claiming various disability benefits has doubled in the last ten years . It is obvious that people are milking the system and their benefits need to be stopped . Ant genuine claimant welcomes this crackdown and recognises that fraudulent claims should to stopped How will they decide which claimants are genuine or not?. Maybe checking social media accounts would be a good start. A review of bank statements to seem to whom payments were made. Analysis of tracking devices on mobility vehicles. Any genuine claimant of these benefits want to see fraudulent claims stopped " You think the government should have access to people’s bank accounts and the GPS of cars? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not sorry but actually I like the policy as there seems to be a lot of people pretending they cant work because they're too lazy to work. Im not paying taxes for someone else to have a comfortable life by not lifting a finger. Obviously help those in genuine need but on a rare occasion I actually agree with Sunak on this" This is exactly what I said further up. Sunak knows that focusing voter ire away from billionaire tax avoiders really emboldens a section of the electorate. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sunak’s war on the poor and disabled continues Closure of Work and Health Programme comes hard on heels of Rishi Sunak’s bid to end the UK’s supposed ‘sicknote’ culture Who’s getting it next ? . It is nothing to do with a war on the sick and disabled. Most law abiding citizens only want benefits paid to those who are entitled. Benefits paid to those who are not entitled need to be investigated and stopped . Every single benefit claimant is being paid by hard working taxpayers. The number claiming various disability benefits has doubled in the last ten years . It is obvious that people are milking the system and their benefits need to be stopped . Ant genuine claimant welcomes this crackdown and recognises that fraudulent claims should to stopped How will they decide which claimants are genuine or not?. Maybe checking social media accounts would be a good start. A review of bank statements to seem to whom payments were made. Analysis of tracking devices on mobility vehicles. Any genuine claimant of these benefits want to see fraudulent claims stopped You think the government should have access to people’s bank accounts and the GPS of cars?" . The government can already ask to see your bank account if you are claiming benefits. Trackers are already installed in some mobility vehicles . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not sorry but actually I like the policy as there seems to be a lot of people pretending they cant work because they're too lazy to work. Im not paying taxes for someone else to have a comfortable life by not lifting a finger. Obviously help those in genuine need but on a rare occasion I actually agree with Sunak on this This is exactly what I said further up. Sunak knows that focusing voter ire away from billionaire tax avoiders really emboldens a section of the electorate." . You appear to be confused . Tax planning and minimising your tax liability is completely legal. Claiming benefits to which you are not entitled is fraud. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not sorry but actually I like the policy as there seems to be a lot of people pretending they cant work because they're too lazy to work. Im not paying taxes for someone else to have a comfortable life by not lifting a finger. Obviously help those in genuine need but on a rare occasion I actually agree with Sunak on this This is exactly what I said further up. Sunak knows that focusing voter ire away from billionaire tax avoiders really emboldens a section of the electorate.. You appear to be confused . Tax planning and minimising your tax liability is completely legal. Claiming benefits to which you are not entitled is fraud. "
As I said. It's working. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sunak’s war on the poor and disabled continues Closure of Work and Health Programme comes hard on heels of Rishi Sunak’s bid to end the UK’s supposed ‘sicknote’ culture Who’s getting it next ? . It is nothing to do with a war on the sick and disabled. Most law abiding citizens only want benefits paid to those who are entitled. Benefits paid to those who are not entitled need to be investigated and stopped . Every single benefit claimant is being paid by hard working taxpayers. The number claiming various disability benefits has doubled in the last ten years . It is obvious that people are milking the system and their benefits need to be stopped . Ant genuine claimant welcomes this crackdown and recognises that fraudulent claims should to stopped How will they decide which claimants are genuine or not?. Maybe checking social media accounts would be a good start. A review of bank statements to seem to whom payments were made. Analysis of tracking devices on mobility vehicles. Any genuine claimant of these benefits want to see fraudulent claims stopped You think the government should have access to people’s bank accounts and the GPS of cars?. The government can already ask to see your bank account if you are claiming benefits. Trackers are already installed in some mobility vehicles . " Under current law, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) can request details of bank accounts and transactions on a case-by-case basis on suspicion of fraudulent activity. They have to show reasonable before being allowed to look at an account, not just because you are claiming benefits. As for mobility vehicles… ‘ To make sure that Scheme customers benefit directly from the Scheme car, location trackers can be fitted to vehicles if the risk of misuse is high; such as, where Scheme customers permanently reside in a care home and have several drivers who have access to the car, or if none of the customer’s named drivers live with them.’ Less than 5% of mobility vehicles have trackers fitted. So I’ll ask again, how do you think the government will distinguish between genuine and fraudulent claimants, apart from checking Facebook that is? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sunak’s war on the poor and disabled continues Closure of Work and Health Programme comes hard on heels of Rishi Sunak’s bid to end the UK’s supposed ‘sicknote’ culture Who’s getting it next ? . It is nothing to do with a war on the sick and disabled. Most law abiding citizens only want benefits paid to those who are entitled. Benefits paid to those who are not entitled need to be investigated and stopped . Every single benefit claimant is being paid by hard working taxpayers. The number claiming various disability benefits has doubled in the last ten years . It is obvious that people are milking the system and their benefits need to be stopped . Ant genuine claimant welcomes this crackdown and recognises that fraudulent claims should to stopped How will they decide which claimants are genuine or not?. Maybe checking social media accounts would be a good start. A review of bank statements to seem to whom payments were made. Analysis of tracking devices on mobility vehicles. Any genuine claimant of these benefits want to see fraudulent claims stopped You think the government should have access to people’s bank accounts and the GPS of cars?. The government can already ask to see your bank account if you are claiming benefits. Trackers are already installed in some mobility vehicles . Under current law, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) can request details of bank accounts and transactions on a case-by-case basis on suspicion of fraudulent activity. They have to show reasonable before being allowed to look at an account, not just because you are claiming benefits. As for mobility vehicles… ‘ To make sure that Scheme customers benefit directly from the Scheme car, location trackers can be fitted to vehicles if the risk of misuse is high; such as, where Scheme customers permanently reside in a care home and have several drivers who have access to the car, or if none of the customer’s named drivers live with them.’ Less than 5% of mobility vehicles have trackers fitted. So I’ll ask again, how do you think the government will distinguish between genuine and fraudulent claimants, apart from checking Facebook that is? " . It seems very simply to me and you have already answered the question. If claiming benefits the government should have automatic access to your bank account and make full use if trackers . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sunak’s war on the poor and disabled continues Closure of Work and Health Programme comes hard on heels of Rishi Sunak’s bid to end the UK’s supposed ‘sicknote’ culture Who’s getting it next ? . It is nothing to do with a war on the sick and disabled. Most law abiding citizens only want benefits paid to those who are entitled. Benefits paid to those who are not entitled need to be investigated and stopped . Every single benefit claimant is being paid by hard working taxpayers. The number claiming various disability benefits has doubled in the last ten years . It is obvious that people are milking the system and their benefits need to be stopped . Ant genuine claimant welcomes this crackdown and recognises that fraudulent claims should to stopped How will they decide which claimants are genuine or not?. Maybe checking social media accounts would be a good start. A review of bank statements to seem to whom payments were made. Analysis of tracking devices on mobility vehicles. Any genuine claimant of these benefits want to see fraudulent claims stopped You think the government should have access to people’s bank accounts and the GPS of cars?. The government can already ask to see your bank account if you are claiming benefits. Trackers are already installed in some mobility vehicles . Under current law, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) can request details of bank accounts and transactions on a case-by-case basis on suspicion of fraudulent activity. They have to show reasonable before being allowed to look at an account, not just because you are claiming benefits. As for mobility vehicles… ‘ To make sure that Scheme customers benefit directly from the Scheme car, location trackers can be fitted to vehicles if the risk of misuse is high; such as, where Scheme customers permanently reside in a care home and have several drivers who have access to the car, or if none of the customer’s named drivers live with them.’ Less than 5% of mobility vehicles have trackers fitted. So I’ll ask again, how do you think the government will distinguish between genuine and fraudulent claimants, apart from checking Facebook that is? " DWP can ask to see bank statements if you're claiming UC. They use 'claim review', they don't need to show 'reasonable suspicion of fraud'. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not sorry but actually I like the policy as there seems to be a lot of people pretending they cant work because they're too lazy to work. Im not paying taxes for someone else to have a comfortable life by not lifting a finger. Obviously help those in genuine need but on a rare occasion I actually agree with Sunak on this This is exactly what I said further up. Sunak knows that focusing voter ire away from billionaire tax avoiders really emboldens a section of the electorate." you can say what you want about billionaire's but at least they weren't lazy to reach where they are which is why I give them credit for that. Fair enough you might have a problem with billionaires not paying their fair share of taxes which is something to be looked at | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sunak’s war on the poor and disabled continues Closure of Work and Health Programme comes hard on heels of Rishi Sunak’s bid to end the UK’s supposed ‘sicknote’ culture Who’s getting it next ? . It is nothing to do with a war on the sick and disabled. Most law abiding citizens only want benefits paid to those who are entitled. Benefits paid to those who are not entitled need to be investigated and stopped . Every single benefit claimant is being paid by hard working taxpayers. The number claiming various disability benefits has doubled in the last ten years . It is obvious that people are milking the system and their benefits need to be stopped . Ant genuine claimant welcomes this crackdown and recognises that fraudulent claims should to stopped How will they decide which claimants are genuine or not?" By having lay people read medical reports and decide they know more than the experts. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Doctors don't question nowadays, they just sign hence the problem. They even send out sick notes if you phone them lol I had a sore back a few years ago and tried to make an appointment. First words were ill send you a sick line.fkr a month. I refused " Damn, I need to move where you are. It took me 4 months to get a sicknote because I had to have an appointment for it being my first one and I just couldn't get in to see anyone | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sunak’s war on the poor and disabled continues Closure of Work and Health Programme comes hard on heels of Rishi Sunak’s bid to end the UK’s supposed ‘sicknote’ culture Who’s getting it next ? . It is nothing to do with a war on the sick and disabled. Most law abiding citizens only want benefits paid to those who are entitled. Benefits paid to those who are not entitled need to be investigated and stopped . Every single benefit claimant is being paid by hard working taxpayers. The number claiming various disability benefits has doubled in the last ten years . It is obvious that people are milking the system and their benefits need to be stopped . Ant genuine claimant welcomes this crackdown and recognises that fraudulent claims should to stopped How will they decide which claimants are genuine or not?. Maybe checking social media accounts would be a good start. A review of bank statements to seem to whom payments were made. Analysis of tracking devices on mobility vehicles. Any genuine claimant of these benefits want to see fraudulent claims stopped You think the government should have access to people’s bank accounts and the GPS of cars?" The government has access to bank accounts. PIP is not means tested. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sunak’s war on the poor and disabled continues Closure of Work and Health Programme comes hard on heels of Rishi Sunak’s bid to end the UK’s supposed ‘sicknote’ culture Who’s getting it next ? . It is nothing to do with a war on the sick and disabled. Most law abiding citizens only want benefits paid to those who are entitled. Benefits paid to those who are not entitled need to be investigated and stopped . Every single benefit claimant is being paid by hard working taxpayers. The number claiming various disability benefits has doubled in the last ten years . It is obvious that people are milking the system and their benefits need to be stopped . Ant genuine claimant welcomes this crackdown and recognises that fraudulent claims should to stopped How will they decide which claimants are genuine or not?. Maybe checking social media accounts would be a good start. A review of bank statements to seem to whom payments were made. Analysis of tracking devices on mobility vehicles. Any genuine claimant of these benefits want to see fraudulent claims stopped You think the government should have access to people’s bank accounts and the GPS of cars?. The government can already ask to see your bank account if you are claiming benefits. Trackers are already installed in some mobility vehicles . Under current law, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) can request details of bank accounts and transactions on a case-by-case basis on suspicion of fraudulent activity. They have to show reasonable before being allowed to look at an account, not just because you are claiming benefits. As for mobility vehicles… ‘ To make sure that Scheme customers benefit directly from the Scheme car, location trackers can be fitted to vehicles if the risk of misuse is high; such as, where Scheme customers permanently reside in a care home and have several drivers who have access to the car, or if none of the customer’s named drivers live with them.’ Less than 5% of mobility vehicles have trackers fitted. So I’ll ask again, how do you think the government will distinguish between genuine and fraudulent claimants, apart from checking Facebook that is? " How would social media show hidden disabilities? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not sorry but actually I like the policy as there seems to be a lot of people pretending they cant work because they're too lazy to work. Im not paying taxes for someone else to have a comfortable life by not lifting a finger. Obviously help those in genuine need but on a rare occasion I actually agree with Sunak on this This is exactly what I said further up. Sunak knows that focusing voter ire away from billionaire tax avoiders really emboldens a section of the electorate. you can say what you want about billionaire's but at least they weren't lazy to reach where they are which is why I give them credit for that. Fair enough you might have a problem with billionaires not paying their fair share of taxes which is something to be looked at" Big assumption | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sunak’s war on the poor and disabled continues Closure of Work and Health Programme comes hard on heels of Rishi Sunak’s bid to end the UK’s supposed ‘sicknote’ culture Who’s getting it next ? . It is nothing to do with a war on the sick and disabled. Most law abiding citizens only want benefits paid to those who are entitled. Benefits paid to those who are not entitled need to be investigated and stopped . Every single benefit claimant is being paid by hard working taxpayers. The number claiming various disability benefits has doubled in the last ten years . It is obvious that people are milking the system and their benefits need to be stopped . Ant genuine claimant welcomes this crackdown and recognises that fraudulent claims should to stopped How will they decide which claimants are genuine or not?. Maybe checking social media accounts would be a good start. A review of bank statements to seem to whom payments were made. Analysis of tracking devices on mobility vehicles. Any genuine claimant of these benefits want to see fraudulent claims stopped You think the government should have access to people’s bank accounts and the GPS of cars?. The government can already ask to see your bank account if you are claiming benefits. Trackers are already installed in some mobility vehicles . Under current law, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) can request details of bank accounts and transactions on a case-by-case basis on suspicion of fraudulent activity. They have to show reasonable before being allowed to look at an account, not just because you are claiming benefits. As for mobility vehicles… ‘ To make sure that Scheme customers benefit directly from the Scheme car, location trackers can be fitted to vehicles if the risk of misuse is high; such as, where Scheme customers permanently reside in a care home and have several drivers who have access to the car, or if none of the customer’s named drivers live with them.’ Less than 5% of mobility vehicles have trackers fitted. So I’ll ask again, how do you think the government will distinguish between genuine and fraudulent claimants, apart from checking Facebook that is? How would social media show hidden disabilities?" We shall all have to start sharing what ever colour ribbon represents our hidden disability and relevant charity/foundation/organisation. That'll do the trick! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sunak’s war on the poor and disabled continues Closure of Work and Health Programme comes hard on heels of Rishi Sunak’s bid to end the UK’s supposed ‘sicknote’ culture Who’s getting it next ? . It is nothing to do with a war on the sick and disabled. Most law abiding citizens only want benefits paid to those who are entitled. Benefits paid to those who are not entitled need to be investigated and stopped . Every single benefit claimant is being paid by hard working taxpayers. The number claiming various disability benefits has doubled in the last ten years . It is obvious that people are milking the system and their benefits need to be stopped . Ant genuine claimant welcomes this crackdown and recognises that fraudulent claims should to stopped How will they decide which claimants are genuine or not?. Maybe checking social media accounts would be a good start. A review of bank statements to seem to whom payments were made. Analysis of tracking devices on mobility vehicles. Any genuine claimant of these benefits want to see fraudulent claims stopped You think the government should have access to people’s bank accounts and the GPS of cars?. The government can already ask to see your bank account if you are claiming benefits. Trackers are already installed in some mobility vehicles . Under current law, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) can request details of bank accounts and transactions on a case-by-case basis on suspicion of fraudulent activity. They have to show reasonable before being allowed to look at an account, not just because you are claiming benefits. As for mobility vehicles… ‘ To make sure that Scheme customers benefit directly from the Scheme car, location trackers can be fitted to vehicles if the risk of misuse is high; such as, where Scheme customers permanently reside in a care home and have several drivers who have access to the car, or if none of the customer’s named drivers live with them.’ Less than 5% of mobility vehicles have trackers fitted. So I’ll ask again, how do you think the government will distinguish between genuine and fraudulent claimants, apart from checking Facebook that is? How would social media show hidden disabilities? We shall all have to start sharing what ever colour ribbon represents our hidden disability and relevant charity/foundation/organisation. That'll do the trick! " I have a brain badge  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sunak’s war on the poor and disabled continues Closure of Work and Health Programme comes hard on heels of Rishi Sunak’s bid to end the UK’s supposed ‘sicknote’ culture Who’s getting it next ? . It is nothing to do with a war on the sick and disabled. Most law abiding citizens only want benefits paid to those who are entitled. Benefits paid to those who are not entitled need to be investigated and stopped . Every single benefit claimant is being paid by hard working taxpayers. The number claiming various disability benefits has doubled in the last ten years . It is obvious that people are milking the system and their benefits need to be stopped . Ant genuine claimant welcomes this crackdown and recognises that fraudulent claims should to stopped How will they decide which claimants are genuine or not?. Maybe checking social media accounts would be a good start. A review of bank statements to seem to whom payments were made. Analysis of tracking devices on mobility vehicles. Any genuine claimant of these benefits want to see fraudulent claims stopped You think the government should have access to people’s bank accounts and the GPS of cars?. The government can already ask to see your bank account if you are claiming benefits. Trackers are already installed in some mobility vehicles . Under current law, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) can request details of bank accounts and transactions on a case-by-case basis on suspicion of fraudulent activity. They have to show reasonable before being allowed to look at an account, not just because you are claiming benefits. As for mobility vehicles… ‘ To make sure that Scheme customers benefit directly from the Scheme car, location trackers can be fitted to vehicles if the risk of misuse is high; such as, where Scheme customers permanently reside in a care home and have several drivers who have access to the car, or if none of the customer’s named drivers live with them.’ Less than 5% of mobility vehicles have trackers fitted. So I’ll ask again, how do you think the government will distinguish between genuine and fraudulent claimants, apart from checking Facebook that is? How would social media show hidden disabilities? We shall all have to start sharing what ever colour ribbon represents our hidden disability and relevant charity/foundation/organisation. That'll do the trick! I have a brain badge "I have a salt pin, I'm not sure what my ribbon colour is, perhaps turquoise I think? But surely everyone knows what my hidden disability is if I just display salt. Obvious really huh!? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not sorry but actually I like the policy as there seems to be a lot of people pretending they cant work because they're too lazy to work. Im not paying taxes for someone else to have a comfortable life by not lifting a finger. Obviously help those in genuine need but on a rare occasion I actually agree with Sunak on this This is exactly what I said further up. Sunak knows that focusing voter ire away from billionaire tax avoiders really emboldens a section of the electorate. you can say what you want about billionaire's but at least they weren't lazy to reach where they are which is why I give them credit for that. " How do you know they're not lazy? Some of them inherited their wealth. " Fair enough you might have a problem with billionaires not paying their fair share of taxes which is something to be looked at" The point is, sketchy benefit collection, not paying taxes, is illegal for poor people. But perfectly legal for the ultra wealthy. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sunak’s war on the poor and disabled continues Closure of Work and Health Programme comes hard on heels of Rishi Sunak’s bid to end the UK’s supposed ‘sicknote’ culture Who’s getting it next ? . It is nothing to do with a war on the sick and disabled. Most law abiding citizens only want benefits paid to those who are entitled. Benefits paid to those who are not entitled need to be investigated and stopped . Every single benefit claimant is being paid by hard working taxpayers. The number claiming various disability benefits has doubled in the last ten years . It is obvious that people are milking the system and their benefits need to be stopped . Ant genuine claimant welcomes this crackdown and recognises that fraudulent claims should to stopped How will they decide which claimants are genuine or not?. Maybe checking social media accounts would be a good start. A review of bank statements to seem to whom payments were made. Analysis of tracking devices on mobility vehicles. Any genuine claimant of these benefits want to see fraudulent claims stopped You think the government should have access to people’s bank accounts and the GPS of cars?. The government can already ask to see your bank account if you are claiming benefits. Trackers are already installed in some mobility vehicles . Under current law, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) can request details of bank accounts and transactions on a case-by-case basis on suspicion of fraudulent activity. They have to show reasonable before being allowed to look at an account, not just because you are claiming benefits. As for mobility vehicles… ‘ To make sure that Scheme customers benefit directly from the Scheme car, location trackers can be fitted to vehicles if the risk of misuse is high; such as, where Scheme customers permanently reside in a care home and have several drivers who have access to the car, or if none of the customer’s named drivers live with them.’ Less than 5% of mobility vehicles have trackers fitted. So I’ll ask again, how do you think the government will distinguish between genuine and fraudulent claimants, apart from checking Facebook that is? How would social media show hidden disabilities? We shall all have to start sharing what ever colour ribbon represents our hidden disability and relevant charity/foundation/organisation. That'll do the trick! I have a brain badge
I have a salt pin, I'm not sure what my ribbon colour is, perhaps turquoise I think?
But surely everyone knows what my hidden disability is if I just display salt. Obvious really huh!? "I only know salt as the NHS acronym. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not sorry but actually I like the policy as there seems to be a lot of people pretending they cant work because they're too lazy to work. Im not paying taxes for someone else to have a comfortable life by not lifting a finger. Obviously help those in genuine need but on a rare occasion I actually agree with Sunak on this This is exactly what I said further up. Sunak knows that focusing voter ire away from billionaire tax avoiders really emboldens a section of the electorate. you can say what you want about billionaire's but at least they weren't lazy to reach where they are which is why I give them credit for that. How do you know they're not lazy? Some of them inherited their wealth. Fair enough you might have a problem with billionaires not paying their fair share of taxes which is something to be looked at The point is, sketchy benefit collection, not paying taxes, is illegal for poor people. But perfectly legal for the ultra wealthy. " Not true. Tax avoidance is legal for everybody and likewise tax evasion is illegal for everybody. You clearly dislike the rich, but the totalitarian alternatives are hardly compelling are they? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sunak’s war on the poor and disabled continues Closure of Work and Health Programme comes hard on heels of Rishi Sunak’s bid to end the UK’s supposed ‘sicknote’ culture Who’s getting it next ? . It is nothing to do with a war on the sick and disabled. Most law abiding citizens only want benefits paid to those who are entitled. Benefits paid to those who are not entitled need to be investigated and stopped . Every single benefit claimant is being paid by hard working taxpayers. The number claiming various disability benefits has doubled in the last ten years . It is obvious that people are milking the system and their benefits need to be stopped . Ant genuine claimant welcomes this crackdown and recognises that fraudulent claims should to stopped How will they decide which claimants are genuine or not?. Maybe checking social media accounts would be a good start. A review of bank statements to seem to whom payments were made. Analysis of tracking devices on mobility vehicles. Any genuine claimant of these benefits want to see fraudulent claims stopped You think the government should have access to people’s bank accounts and the GPS of cars?. The government can already ask to see your bank account if you are claiming benefits. Trackers are already installed in some mobility vehicles . Under current law, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) can request details of bank accounts and transactions on a case-by-case basis on suspicion of fraudulent activity. They have to show reasonable before being allowed to look at an account, not just because you are claiming benefits. As for mobility vehicles… ‘ To make sure that Scheme customers benefit directly from the Scheme car, location trackers can be fitted to vehicles if the risk of misuse is high; such as, where Scheme customers permanently reside in a care home and have several drivers who have access to the car, or if none of the customer’s named drivers live with them.’ Less than 5% of mobility vehicles have trackers fitted. So I’ll ask again, how do you think the government will distinguish between genuine and fraudulent claimants, apart from checking Facebook that is? . It seems very simply to me and you have already answered the question. If claiming benefits the government should have automatic access to your bank account and make full use if trackers . " OK so you want the government to have unfettered access to 40% of the bank accounts in the country, and to track the movements of disabled people. How will that help us get people off long term sickness benefits? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not sorry but actually I like the policy as there seems to be a lot of people pretending they cant work because they're too lazy to work. Im not paying taxes for someone else to have a comfortable life by not lifting a finger. Obviously help those in genuine need but on a rare occasion I actually agree with Sunak on this This is exactly what I said further up. Sunak knows that focusing voter ire away from billionaire tax avoiders really emboldens a section of the electorate. you can say what you want about billionaire's but at least they weren't lazy to reach where they are which is why I give them credit for that. How do you know they're not lazy? Some of them inherited their wealth. Fair enough you might have a problem with billionaires not paying their fair share of taxes which is something to be looked at The point is, sketchy benefit collection, not paying taxes, is illegal for poor people. But perfectly legal for the ultra wealthy. Not true. Tax avoidance is legal for everybody and likewise tax evasion is illegal for everybody. You clearly dislike the rich, but the totalitarian alternatives are hardly compelling are they?" Just going to add my 2 pence to this… Totally correct re avoidance vs evasion. A problem in this area has been exacerbated by HMRC themselves who have deliberately conflated these terms in their own messaging. This is deliberate as it is part of nudge theory to create a sense of confusion and concern amongst tax payers who will theoretically err on the side of caution. The Loan Charge is also a big warning to tax payers. Go back 10-15 years and being paid via a loan scheme was classed as avoidance not evasion. HMRC retrospectively changed laws to go back up to 20 years to recover money from individuals (but criminally not the companies who were operating the schemes and continued up until fairly recently*) So you might be legally/confidently avoiding tax today but there is precedent that HMRC may change the goalposts and come after you in future! I think one of the reasons why people get pissed off at tax avoidance (not evasion) by the rich is that due to the complexity of UK tax rules, and the requirement to have high value assets in the first place, the legal means to avoid is only really available to the very wealthy who can afford to pay tax experts to enable their avoidance. *bit of trivia - one of biggest operators of these loan schemes was AML. A company owned by The Knox Group. Which is owned by Doug Barrowman. Who is married to Baroness Mone. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not sorry but actually I like the policy as there seems to be a lot of people pretending they cant work because they're too lazy to work. Im not paying taxes for someone else to have a comfortable life by not lifting a finger. Obviously help those in genuine need but on a rare occasion I actually agree with Sunak on this This is exactly what I said further up. Sunak knows that focusing voter ire away from billionaire tax avoiders really emboldens a section of the electorate. you can say what you want about billionaire's but at least they weren't lazy to reach where they are which is why I give them credit for that. How do you know they're not lazy? Some of them inherited their wealth. Fair enough you might have a problem with billionaires not paying their fair share of taxes which is something to be looked at The point is, sketchy benefit collection, not paying taxes, is illegal for poor people. But perfectly legal for the ultra wealthy. Not true. Tax avoidance is legal for everybody and likewise tax evasion is illegal for everybody. You clearly dislike the rich, but the totalitarian alternatives are hardly compelling are they?" Is it so hard for people to understand that nobody supports illegal activities such as tax evasion, however using the laws of the land to reduce your tax burden is perfectly acceptable? It is also interesting that the feelings towards people who may have a reasonable amount of money are near to jealousy at best, but mostly underlying hatred fuelling imaginary scenarios of wrong doing and people of poor character | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Jay Z is a self made billionaire, built himself from nothing so his wealth was definitely not inherited but yes you do have a wealthy people who inherit it" Yeah some people work hard, some don't. Their level of wealth isn't the best way to judge how hard someone has worked. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not sorry but actually I like the policy as there seems to be a lot of people pretending they cant work because they're too lazy to work. Im not paying taxes for someone else to have a comfortable life by not lifting a finger. Obviously help those in genuine need but on a rare occasion I actually agree with Sunak on this This is exactly what I said further up. Sunak knows that focusing voter ire away from billionaire tax avoiders really emboldens a section of the electorate. you can say what you want about billionaire's but at least they weren't lazy to reach where they are which is why I give them credit for that. How do you know they're not lazy? Some of them inherited their wealth. Fair enough you might have a problem with billionaires not paying their fair share of taxes which is something to be looked at The point is, sketchy benefit collection, not paying taxes, is illegal for poor people. But perfectly legal for the ultra wealthy. Not true. Tax avoidance is legal for everybody and likewise tax evasion is illegal for everybody. You clearly dislike the rich, but the totalitarian alternatives are hardly compelling are they?" Try not to make up bollocks about other posters and try to stay on track please. Clearly there are tax avoidance schemes that allow rich people to hide their wealth off shore. Noone really thinks someone on benefits can open a Caymen Islands bank account to hide their income. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is it so hard for people to understand that nobody supports illegal activities such as tax evasion, however using the laws of the land to reduce your tax burden is perfectly acceptable? It is also interesting that the feelings towards people who may have a reasonable amount of money are near to jealousy at best, but mostly underlying hatred fuelling imaginary scenarios of wrong doing and people of poor character " I think without doubt there is jealousy for some. But as per my post above, there is also frustration over a system seemingly designed to enable the rich to legally avoid tax using methods that are not readily (or affordably) available to the leas well off or poor. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not sorry but actually I like the policy as there seems to be a lot of people pretending they cant work because they're too lazy to work. Im not paying taxes for someone else to have a comfortable life by not lifting a finger. Obviously help those in genuine need but on a rare occasion I actually agree with Sunak on this This is exactly what I said further up. Sunak knows that focusing voter ire away from billionaire tax avoiders really emboldens a section of the electorate. you can say what you want about billionaire's but at least they weren't lazy to reach where they are which is why I give them credit for that. How do you know they're not lazy? Some of them inherited their wealth. Fair enough you might have a problem with billionaires not paying their fair share of taxes which is something to be looked at The point is, sketchy benefit collection, not paying taxes, is illegal for poor people. But perfectly legal for the ultra wealthy. Not true. Tax avoidance is legal for everybody and likewise tax evasion is illegal for everybody. You clearly dislike the rich, but the totalitarian alternatives are hardly compelling are they? Try not to make up bollocks about other posters and try to stay on track please. Clearly there are tax avoidance schemes that allow rich people to hide their wealth off shore. Noone really thinks someone on benefits can open a Caymen Islands bank account to hide their income." OK I'll try not making up bollox but it's highly contagious  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not sorry but actually I like the policy as there seems to be a lot of people pretending they cant work because they're too lazy to work. Im not paying taxes for someone else to have a comfortable life by not lifting a finger. Obviously help those in genuine need but on a rare occasion I actually agree with Sunak on this This is exactly what I said further up. Sunak knows that focusing voter ire away from billionaire tax avoiders really emboldens a section of the electorate. you can say what you want about billionaire's but at least they weren't lazy to reach where they are which is why I give them credit for that. How do you know they're not lazy? Some of them inherited their wealth. Fair enough you might have a problem with billionaires not paying their fair share of taxes which is something to be looked at The point is, sketchy benefit collection, not paying taxes, is illegal for poor people. But perfectly legal for the ultra wealthy. Not true. Tax avoidance is legal for everybody and likewise tax evasion is illegal for everybody. You clearly dislike the rich, but the totalitarian alternatives are hardly compelling are they? Is it so hard for people to understand that nobody supports illegal activities such as tax evasion, however using the laws of the land to reduce your tax burden is perfectly acceptable? It is also interesting that the feelings towards people who may have a reasonable amount of money are near to jealousy at best, but mostly underlying hatred fuelling imaginary scenarios of wrong doing and people of poor character "Indeed. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sunak’s war on the poor and disabled continues Closure of Work and Health Programme comes hard on heels of Rishi Sunak’s bid to end the UK’s supposed ‘sicknote’ culture Who’s getting it next ? . It is nothing to do with a war on the sick and disabled. Most law abiding citizens only want benefits paid to those who are entitled. Benefits paid to those who are not entitled need to be investigated and stopped . Every single benefit claimant is being paid by hard working taxpayers. The number claiming various disability benefits has doubled in the last ten years . It is obvious that people are milking the system and their benefits need to be stopped . Ant genuine claimant welcomes this crackdown and recognises that fraudulent claims should to stopped How will they decide which claimants are genuine or not?. Maybe checking social media accounts would be a good start. A review of bank statements to seem to whom payments were made. Analysis of tracking devices on mobility vehicles. Any genuine claimant of these benefits want to see fraudulent claims stopped You think the government should have access to people’s bank accounts and the GPS of cars?. The government can already ask to see your bank account if you are claiming benefits. Trackers are already installed in some mobility vehicles . Under current law, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) can request details of bank accounts and transactions on a case-by-case basis on suspicion of fraudulent activity. They have to show reasonable before being allowed to look at an account, not just because you are claiming benefits. As for mobility vehicles… ‘ To make sure that Scheme customers benefit directly from the Scheme car, location trackers can be fitted to vehicles if the risk of misuse is high; such as, where Scheme customers permanently reside in a care home and have several drivers who have access to the car, or if none of the customer’s named drivers live with them.’ Less than 5% of mobility vehicles have trackers fitted. So I’ll ask again, how do you think the government will distinguish between genuine and fraudulent claimants, apart from checking Facebook that is? . It seems very simply to me and you have already answered the question. If claiming benefits the government should have automatic access to your bank account and make full use if trackers . OK so you want the government to have unfettered access to 40% of the bank accounts in the country, and to track the movements of disabled people. How will that help us get people off long term sickness benefits?" Some stupid arse criteria if you drive more than 3 miles a day you're not disabled (I said it was stupid  ). | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The thing is, it always seems to be the people on benefits they target, never the rich people." Of course they do, they steal from the rich | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not sorry but actually I like the policy as there seems to be a lot of people pretending they cant work because they're too lazy to work. Im not paying taxes for someone else to have a comfortable life by not lifting a finger. Obviously help those in genuine need but on a rare occasion I actually agree with Sunak on this This is exactly what I said further up. Sunak knows that focusing voter ire away from billionaire tax avoiders really emboldens a section of the electorate. you can say what you want about billionaire's but at least they weren't lazy to reach where they are which is why I give them credit for that. How do you know they're not lazy? Some of them inherited their wealth. Fair enough you might have a problem with billionaires not paying their fair share of taxes which is something to be looked at The point is, sketchy benefit collection, not paying taxes, is illegal for poor people. But perfectly legal for the ultra wealthy. Not true. Tax avoidance is legal for everybody and likewise tax evasion is illegal for everybody. You clearly dislike the rich, but the totalitarian alternatives are hardly compelling are they? Try not to make up bollocks about other posters and try to stay on track please. Clearly there are tax avoidance schemes that allow rich people to hide their wealth off shore. Noone really thinks someone on benefits can open a Caymen Islands bank account to hide their income. OK I'll try not making up bollox but it's highly contagious "That would be good ta In the meantime, do we agree that millionaires / billionaires have access to legal tax avoidance that ordinary people don't? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" In the meantime, do we agree that millionaires / billionaires have access to legal tax avoidance that ordinary people don't?" And we can agree they're doing absolutely nothing wrong unlike some of the sick note scroungers ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The thing is, it always seems to be the people on benefits they target, never the rich people. Of course they do, they steal from the rich" Any idea how long you’d let people with cancer be on sickness benefits for? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" In the meantime, do we agree that millionaires / billionaires have access to legal tax avoidance that ordinary people don't? And we can agree they're doing absolutely nothing wrong unlike some of the sick note scroungers ?" Are you demonstrating the effectiveness of shifting the focus away from the billions hidden using tax loopholes by blaming poor people? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" In the meantime, do we agree that millionaires / billionaires have access to legal tax avoidance that ordinary people don't? And we can agree they're doing absolutely nothing wrong unlike some of the sick note scroungers ? Are you demonstrating the effectiveness of shifting the focus away from the billions hidden using tax loopholes by blaming poor people?" No. You're demonstrating the effectiveness of shifting the focus of the thread which has fuck all to do with tax loopholes | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not sorry but actually I like the policy as there seems to be a lot of people pretending they cant work because they're too lazy to work. Im not paying taxes for someone else to have a comfortable life by not lifting a finger. Obviously help those in genuine need but on a rare occasion I actually agree with Sunak on this This is exactly what I said further up. Sunak knows that focusing voter ire away from billionaire tax avoiders really emboldens a section of the electorate. you can say what you want about billionaire's but at least they weren't lazy to reach where they are which is why I give them credit for that. How do you know they're not lazy? Some of them inherited their wealth. Fair enough you might have a problem with billionaires not paying their fair share of taxes which is something to be looked at The point is, sketchy benefit collection, not paying taxes, is illegal for poor people. But perfectly legal for the ultra wealthy. Not true. Tax avoidance is legal for everybody and likewise tax evasion is illegal for everybody. You clearly dislike the rich, but the totalitarian alternatives are hardly compelling are they? Try not to make up bollocks about other posters and try to stay on track please. Clearly there are tax avoidance schemes that allow rich people to hide their wealth off shore. Noone really thinks someone on benefits can open a Caymen Islands bank account to hide their income. OK I'll try not making up bollox but it's highly contagious
That would be good ta
In the meantime, do we agree that millionaires / billionaires have access to legal tax avoidance that ordinary people don't?"Yes they do and it's perfectly legal. Ordinary people enjoy tax benefits too - commensurate with their means e.g. ISAs So where's the problem? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not sorry but actually I like the policy as there seems to be a lot of people pretending they cant work because they're too lazy to work. Im not paying taxes for someone else to have a comfortable life by not lifting a finger. Obviously help those in genuine need but on a rare occasion I actually agree with Sunak on this This is exactly what I said further up. Sunak knows that focusing voter ire away from billionaire tax avoiders really emboldens a section of the electorate. you can say what you want about billionaire's but at least they weren't lazy to reach where they are which is why I give them credit for that. How do you know they're not lazy? Some of them inherited their wealth. Fair enough you might have a problem with billionaires not paying their fair share of taxes which is something to be looked at The point is, sketchy benefit collection, not paying taxes, is illegal for poor people. But perfectly legal for the ultra wealthy. Not true. Tax avoidance is legal for everybody and likewise tax evasion is illegal for everybody. You clearly dislike the rich, but the totalitarian alternatives are hardly compelling are they? Try not to make up bollocks about other posters and try to stay on track please. Clearly there are tax avoidance schemes that allow rich people to hide their wealth off shore. Noone really thinks someone on benefits can open a Caymen Islands bank account to hide their income. OK I'll try not making up bollox but it's highly contagious
That would be good ta
In the meantime, do we agree that millionaires / billionaires have access to legal tax avoidance that ordinary people don't?
Yes they do and it's perfectly legal. Ordinary people enjoy tax benefits too - commensurate with their means e.g. ISAs So where's the problem? "The problem arises where those who are making the rules, are benefitting personally, or those who donate money to their political party are benefitting. Meanwhile, look at those people on benefit fraud over there - | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not sorry but actually I like the policy as there seems to be a lot of people pretending they cant work because they're too lazy to work. Im not paying taxes for someone else to have a comfortable life by not lifting a finger. Obviously help those in genuine need but on a rare occasion I actually agree with Sunak on this This is exactly what I said further up. Sunak knows that focusing voter ire away from billionaire tax avoiders really emboldens a section of the electorate. you can say what you want about billionaire's but at least they weren't lazy to reach where they are which is why I give them credit for that. How do you know they're not lazy? Some of them inherited their wealth. Fair enough you might have a problem with billionaires not paying their fair share of taxes which is something to be looked at The point is, sketchy benefit collection, not paying taxes, is illegal for poor people. But perfectly legal for the ultra wealthy. Not true. Tax avoidance is legal for everybody and likewise tax evasion is illegal for everybody. You clearly dislike the rich, but the totalitarian alternatives are hardly compelling are they? Try not to make up bollocks about other posters and try to stay on track please. Clearly there are tax avoidance schemes that allow rich people to hide their wealth off shore. Noone really thinks someone on benefits can open a Caymen Islands bank account to hide their income. OK I'll try not making up bollox but it's highly contagious
That would be good ta
In the meantime, do we agree that millionaires / billionaires have access to legal tax avoidance that ordinary people don't?
Yes they do and it's perfectly legal. Ordinary people enjoy tax benefits too - commensurate with their means e.g. ISAs So where's the problem? "The system is weighted to disproportionately benefit the wealthy/super wealthy. Little talked about reality… HMRC has insufficient numbers of tax experts/accountants employed as Civil Servants. Weird isn’t it? But true. Because the CS does not pay enough for this skillset. So they all go and work for companies like KPMG etc (or in many cases start careers in HMRC then get poached on far higher salaries). HMRC then needs a lot of help to develop tax policy so guess what? They hire in consultants from companies like KPMG. They then develop over convoluted tax policy (the UK Tax Code is one of the largest and most complex in the World) that many of the Civil Servants do not actually fully understand (certainly not full implications and downstream impacts). Then the same consultants develop tax vehicles for their company (like KPMG) to sell to their clients to enable legal avoidance of the policies they have just developed for HMRC. Great work if you can get it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not sorry but actually I like the policy as there seems to be a lot of people pretending they cant work because they're too lazy to work. Im not paying taxes for someone else to have a comfortable life by not lifting a finger. Obviously help those in genuine need but on a rare occasion I actually agree with Sunak on this This is exactly what I said further up. Sunak knows that focusing voter ire away from billionaire tax avoiders really emboldens a section of the electorate. you can say what you want about billionaire's but at least they weren't lazy to reach where they are which is why I give them credit for that. How do you know they're not lazy? Some of them inherited their wealth. Fair enough you might have a problem with billionaires not paying their fair share of taxes which is something to be looked at The point is, sketchy benefit collection, not paying taxes, is illegal for poor people. But perfectly legal for the ultra wealthy. Not true. Tax avoidance is legal for everybody and likewise tax evasion is illegal for everybody. You clearly dislike the rich, but the totalitarian alternatives are hardly compelling are they? Try not to make up bollocks about other posters and try to stay on track please. Clearly there are tax avoidance schemes that allow rich people to hide their wealth off shore. Noone really thinks someone on benefits can open a Caymen Islands bank account to hide their income. OK I'll try not making up bollox but it's highly contagious
That would be good ta
In the meantime, do we agree that millionaires / billionaires have access to legal tax avoidance that ordinary people don't?
Yes they do and it's perfectly legal. Ordinary people enjoy tax benefits too - commensurate with their means e.g. ISAs So where's the problem?
The system is weighted to disproportionately benefit the wealthy/super wealthy.
Little talked about reality…
HMRC has insufficient numbers of tax experts/accountants employed as Civil Servants. Weird isn’t it? But true. Because the CS does not pay enough for this skillset. So they all go and work for companies like KPMG etc (or in many cases start careers in HMRC then get poached on far higher salaries).
HMRC then needs a lot of help to develop tax policy so guess what? They hire in consultants from companies like KPMG. They then develop over convoluted tax policy (the UK Tax Code is one of the largest and most complex in the World) that many of the Civil Servants do not actually fully understand (certainly not full implications and downstream impacts). Then the same consultants develop tax vehicles for their company (like KPMG) to sell to their clients to enable legal avoidance of the policies they have just developed for HMRC.
Great work if you can get it.". How would you know whether or not HMRC employed sufficient staff . ? Society has moved on and HMRC have extenive powers to data mine. A lot of people enjoy tax benefits. Pension contributions can be offset against tax , £20000 per annum can be invested in ISAs which is free of both income and capital gains tax . It is difficult to see how anyone can claim that the system favours the super wealthy. They pay a lot more tax than anyone else and are hardly going to risk prosecution for fraud . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not sorry but actually I like the policy as there seems to be a lot of people pretending they cant work because they're too lazy to work. Im not paying taxes for someone else to have a comfortable life by not lifting a finger. Obviously help those in genuine need but on a rare occasion I actually agree with Sunak on this This is exactly what I said further up. Sunak knows that focusing voter ire away from billionaire tax avoiders really emboldens a section of the electorate. you can say what you want about billionaire's but at least they weren't lazy to reach where they are which is why I give them credit for that. How do you know they're not lazy? Some of them inherited their wealth. Fair enough you might have a problem with billionaires not paying their fair share of taxes which is something to be looked at The point is, sketchy benefit collection, not paying taxes, is illegal for poor people. But perfectly legal for the ultra wealthy. Not true. Tax avoidance is legal for everybody and likewise tax evasion is illegal for everybody. You clearly dislike the rich, but the totalitarian alternatives are hardly compelling are they? Try not to make up bollocks about other posters and try to stay on track please. Clearly there are tax avoidance schemes that allow rich people to hide their wealth off shore. Noone really thinks someone on benefits can open a Caymen Islands bank account to hide their income. OK I'll try not making up bollox but it's highly contagious
That would be good ta
In the meantime, do we agree that millionaires / billionaires have access to legal tax avoidance that ordinary people don't?
Yes they do and it's perfectly legal. Ordinary people enjoy tax benefits too - commensurate with their means e.g. ISAs So where's the problem?
The system is weighted to disproportionately benefit the wealthy/super wealthy.
Little talked about reality…
HMRC has insufficient numbers of tax experts/accountants employed as Civil Servants. Weird isn’t it? But true. Because the CS does not pay enough for this skillset. So they all go and work for companies like KPMG etc (or in many cases start careers in HMRC then get poached on far higher salaries).
HMRC then needs a lot of help to develop tax policy so guess what? They hire in consultants from companies like KPMG. They then develop over convoluted tax policy (the UK Tax Code is one of the largest and most complex in the World) that many of the Civil Servants do not actually fully understand (certainly not full implications and downstream impacts). Then the same consultants develop tax vehicles for their company (like KPMG) to sell to their clients to enable legal avoidance of the policies they have just developed for HMRC.
Great work if you can get it.. How would you know whether or not HMRC employed sufficient staff . ? Society has moved on and HMRC have extenive powers to data mine.
A lot of people enjoy tax benefits. Pension contributions can be offset against tax , £20000 per annum can be invested in ISAs which is free of both income and capital gains tax . It is difficult to see how anyone can claim that the system favours the super wealthy. They pay a lot more tax than anyone else and are hardly going to risk prosecution for fraud . "A) I know from first hand experience. B) What has data mining and HMRC powers got to do with the point I was making? C) The super wealthy pay more in absolute terms of course but not proportionately as I specifically said. D) Only the super wealthy have the ability and means to exploit tax loopholes that enables them to reduce tax liabilities legally. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not sorry but actually I like the policy as there seems to be a lot of people pretending they cant work because they're too lazy to work. Im not paying taxes for someone else to have a comfortable life by not lifting a finger. Obviously help those in genuine need but on a rare occasion I actually agree with Sunak on this This is exactly what I said further up. Sunak knows that focusing voter ire away from billionaire tax avoiders really emboldens a section of the electorate. you can say what you want about billionaire's but at least they weren't lazy to reach where they are which is why I give them credit for that. How do you know they're not lazy? Some of them inherited their wealth. Fair enough you might have a problem with billionaires not paying their fair share of taxes which is something to be looked at The point is, sketchy benefit collection, not paying taxes, is illegal for poor people. But perfectly legal for the ultra wealthy. Not true. Tax avoidance is legal for everybody and likewise tax evasion is illegal for everybody. You clearly dislike the rich, but the totalitarian alternatives are hardly compelling are they? Just going to add my 2 pence to this… Totally correct re avoidance vs evasion. A problem in this area has been exacerbated by HMRC themselves who have deliberately conflated these terms in their own messaging. This is deliberate as it is part of nudge theory to create a sense of confusion and concern amongst tax payers who will theoretically err on the side of caution. The Loan Charge is also a big warning to tax payers. Go back 10-15 years and being paid via a loan scheme was classed as avoidance not evasion. HMRC retrospectively changed laws to go back up to 20 years to recover money from individuals (but criminally not the companies who were operating the schemes and continued up until fairly recently*) So you might be legally/confidently avoiding tax today but there is precedent that HMRC may change the goalposts and come after you in future! I think one of the reasons why people get pissed off at tax avoidance (not evasion) by the rich is that due to the complexity of UK tax rules, and the requirement to have high value assets in the first place, the legal means to avoid is only really available to the very wealthy who can afford to pay tax experts to enable their avoidance. *bit of trivia - one of biggest operators of these loan schemes was AML. A company owned by The Knox Group. Which is owned by Doug Barrowman. Who is married to Baroness Mone." I seem to remember HMRC going after Glasgow Rangers for this very thing. The company had to fold. Does that mean that sometimes companies are prosecuted? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not sorry but actually I like the policy as there seems to be a lot of people pretending they cant work because they're too lazy to work. Im not paying taxes for someone else to have a comfortable life by not lifting a finger. Obviously help those in genuine need but on a rare occasion I actually agree with Sunak on this This is exactly what I said further up. Sunak knows that focusing voter ire away from billionaire tax avoiders really emboldens a section of the electorate. you can say what you want about billionaire's but at least they weren't lazy to reach where they are which is why I give them credit for that. How do you know they're not lazy? Some of them inherited their wealth. Fair enough you might have a problem with billionaires not paying their fair share of taxes which is something to be looked at The point is, sketchy benefit collection, not paying taxes, is illegal for poor people. But perfectly legal for the ultra wealthy. Not true. Tax avoidance is legal for everybody and likewise tax evasion is illegal for everybody. You clearly dislike the rich, but the totalitarian alternatives are hardly compelling are they? Just going to add my 2 pence to this… Totally correct re avoidance vs evasion. A problem in this area has been exacerbated by HMRC themselves who have deliberately conflated these terms in their own messaging. This is deliberate as it is part of nudge theory to create a sense of confusion and concern amongst tax payers who will theoretically err on the side of caution. The Loan Charge is also a big warning to tax payers. Go back 10-15 years and being paid via a loan scheme was classed as avoidance not evasion. HMRC retrospectively changed laws to go back up to 20 years to recover money from individuals (but criminally not the companies who were operating the schemes and continued up until fairly recently*) So you might be legally/confidently avoiding tax today but there is precedent that HMRC may change the goalposts and come after you in future! I think one of the reasons why people get pissed off at tax avoidance (not evasion) by the rich is that due to the complexity of UK tax rules, and the requirement to have high value assets in the first place, the legal means to avoid is only really available to the very wealthy who can afford to pay tax experts to enable their avoidance. *bit of trivia - one of biggest operators of these loan schemes was AML. A company owned by The Knox Group. Which is owned by Doug Barrowman. Who is married to Baroness Mone. I seem to remember HMRC going after Glasgow Rangers for this very thing. The company had to fold. Does that mean that sometimes companies are prosecuted?" I believe more recently HMRC have started going after companies and Rangers was a high profile case (I don’t know any detail though but I think they arranged it themselves rather through an umbrella company - could be wrong). HMRC spent years only going after the individual “contractors” but pressure grew via the Loan Charge Action Group and eventually a Select Committee (I think). | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not sorry but actually I like the policy as there seems to be a lot of people pretending they cant work because they're too lazy to work. Im not paying taxes for someone else to have a comfortable life by not lifting a finger. Obviously help those in genuine need but on a rare occasion I actually agree with Sunak on this This is exactly what I said further up. Sunak knows that focusing voter ire away from billionaire tax avoiders really emboldens a section of the electorate. you can say what you want about billionaire's but at least they weren't lazy to reach where they are which is why I give them credit for that. How do you know they're not lazy? Some of them inherited their wealth. Fair enough you might have a problem with billionaires not paying their fair share of taxes which is something to be looked at The point is, sketchy benefit collection, not paying taxes, is illegal for poor people. But perfectly legal for the ultra wealthy. Not true. Tax avoidance is legal for everybody and likewise tax evasion is illegal for everybody. You clearly dislike the rich, but the totalitarian alternatives are hardly compelling are they? Just going to add my 2 pence to this… Totally correct re avoidance vs evasion. A problem in this area has been exacerbated by HMRC themselves who have deliberately conflated these terms in their own messaging. This is deliberate as it is part of nudge theory to create a sense of confusion and concern amongst tax payers who will theoretically err on the side of caution. The Loan Charge is also a big warning to tax payers. Go back 10-15 years and being paid via a loan scheme was classed as avoidance not evasion. HMRC retrospectively changed laws to go back up to 20 years to recover money from individuals (but criminally not the companies who were operating the schemes and continued up until fairly recently*) So you might be legally/confidently avoiding tax today but there is precedent that HMRC may change the goalposts and come after you in future! I think one of the reasons why people get pissed off at tax avoidance (not evasion) by the rich is that due to the complexity of UK tax rules, and the requirement to have high value assets in the first place, the legal means to avoid is only really available to the very wealthy who can afford to pay tax experts to enable their avoidance. *bit of trivia - one of biggest operators of these loan schemes was AML. A company owned by The Knox Group. Which is owned by Doug Barrowman. Who is married to Baroness Mone. I seem to remember HMRC going after Glasgow Rangers for this very thing. The company had to fold. Does that mean that sometimes companies are prosecuted? I believe more recently HMRC have started going after companies and Rangers was a high profile case (I don’t know any detail though but I think they arranged it themselves rather through an umbrella company - could be wrong). HMRC spent years only going after the individual “contractors” but pressure grew via the Loan Charge Action Group and eventually a Select Committee (I think)." Rangers arranged their finances through Murray Group Holdings, David Murray owned Rangers at the time so although not directly through themselves, definitely tied. It was over 10 years ago, so not sure what is meant by 'more recently'. Do HMRC now go after 'companies' as well as or opposed to 'contractors'? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Notably no clampdown on 68,700 non doms or complicated trusts that enabled the Duke of Westminster to inherit a £9,000,000,000 property portfolio free of any inheritance tax. For some bizzare reason I thought this thread was about people on sick benefit. Making the point that it’s the least well off again that have been targeted. £3.2bn a year supporting non doms and £4bn tax avoided by the duke, but let’s demonise the less well off. Add all the spv and offshore trusts ‘legally’ avoiding tax. Shouldn't all gaming the system be targeted. I feel if your claiming something your not entitled to, whether that's some rich non Dom or anyone else then it should be stopped. Saying we can't clamp down on one area until we have clamped down on something else seems crazy to me. Stop it wherever it's found I would think. The thing is, it always seems to be the people on benefits they target, never the rich people." Hence my comment about clamping down on fraud wherever it is found. If someone is claiming non Dom status who is not entitled to it then that should be dealt with. If someone claims sick benefit who is not entitled then that should be dealt with. Neither should rely on the other to take action. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not sorry but actually I like the policy as there seems to be a lot of people pretending they cant work because they're too lazy to work. Im not paying taxes for someone else to have a comfortable life by not lifting a finger. Obviously help those in genuine need but on a rare occasion I actually agree with Sunak on this This is exactly what I said further up. Sunak knows that focusing voter ire away from billionaire tax avoiders really emboldens a section of the electorate. you can say what you want about billionaire's but at least they weren't lazy to reach where they are which is why I give them credit for that. How do you know they're not lazy? Some of them inherited their wealth. Fair enough you might have a problem with billionaires not paying their fair share of taxes which is something to be looked at The point is, sketchy benefit collection, not paying taxes, is illegal for poor people. But perfectly legal for the ultra wealthy. Not true. Tax avoidance is legal for everybody and likewise tax evasion is illegal for everybody. You clearly dislike the rich, but the totalitarian alternatives are hardly compelling are they? Just going to add my 2 pence to this… Totally correct re avoidance vs evasion. A problem in this area has been exacerbated by HMRC themselves who have deliberately conflated these terms in their own messaging. This is deliberate as it is part of nudge theory to create a sense of confusion and concern amongst tax payers who will theoretically err on the side of caution. The Loan Charge is also a big warning to tax payers. Go back 10-15 years and being paid via a loan scheme was classed as avoidance not evasion. HMRC retrospectively changed laws to go back up to 20 years to recover money from individuals (but criminally not the companies who were operating the schemes and continued up until fairly recently*) So you might be legally/confidently avoiding tax today but there is precedent that HMRC may change the goalposts and come after you in future! I think one of the reasons why people get pissed off at tax avoidance (not evasion) by the rich is that due to the complexity of UK tax rules, and the requirement to have high value assets in the first place, the legal means to avoid is only really available to the very wealthy who can afford to pay tax experts to enable their avoidance. *bit of trivia - one of biggest operators of these loan schemes was AML. A company owned by The Knox Group. Which is owned by Doug Barrowman. Who is married to Baroness Mone. I seem to remember HMRC going after Glasgow Rangers for this very thing. The company had to fold. Does that mean that sometimes companies are prosecuted? I believe more recently HMRC have started going after companies and Rangers was a high profile case (I don’t know any detail though but I think they arranged it themselves rather through an umbrella company - could be wrong). HMRC spent years only going after the individual “contractors” but pressure grew via the Loan Charge Action Group and eventually a Select Committee (I think). Rangers arranged their finances through Murray Group Holdings, David Murray owned Rangers at the time so although not directly through themselves, definitely tied. It was over 10 years ago, so not sure what is meant by 'more recently'. Do HMRC now go after 'companies' as well as or opposed to 'contractors'?" I don’t know enough about Rangers apart from the time period they were done for was 2001-2010 but I believe the case was not resolved until 2017. Pretty sure HMRC have only targeted a handful of umbrella companies, though it appears to be ramping up in the last year but only as a result of a Public Accounts Committee hearing (I think). They still also go after individuals as far as I know. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
