“We did have one billionaire client who literally on the day of the budget, 6 March, got on his private jet with his wife, with his children, with the private tutor, and flew to one of his other 17 houses in the world – and said ‘I’m not coming back’,” said John Barnett, a partner at the law firm Burges Salmon, which specialises in advising the super-rich on how to legally reduce their tax bills.
screw the kids' friendships, school life, sport teams and sense of belonging, eh
7
7
Presumably if you have over a billion quid paying some tax isn't exactly a hardship
Unfortunately some weirdos make avoiding tax their personality
See rof for some examples
0
3
More the obvs humblebrag from BS, non?
0
4
hard to be mad at anyone who has made avoiding paying tax to this government a priority
3
4
If you can avoid tax, avoid tax.
0
4
that assumes his kids are bothered as you suggest, Heff. With 17 homes, they may not be.
5
3
I'm happy to pay tax
You know, because I like having a health service, police, fire brigade, roads, social security, human rights, etc etc
If you don't pay tax, you are a weirdo
1
2
we should all diligently pay our taxes so the Tories can spunk £10b on a track and trace system built by their mates
OK
thankfully some people can think for themselves
2
2
Davos202128 May 24 09:23
I'm happy to pay tax
You know, because I like having a health service, police, fire brigade, roads, social security, human rights, etc etc
______________________________________________________________________________
not happy about it but mature enough to realise it is a necessity, like dentistry etc
however, the problem is that you pay tax to this government and you don't actualy get the things you mention
it's become sort of a rented serfdom experience
2
4
The answer to that really is that we need a government that spends our taxes in a better way. Getting rid of tax is not going to solve any problem. It will just make it more difficult for government to hand out money to their friends. While that may make me feel better, it doesn't really help anyone with anything.
2
3
Many of these 'tales' are fed out by the firms' PR bods...
0
1
Sumo is right of course. And top of the heap is Work Experience, who has given millions of tax payers money to his own family in contracts in a process entirely unscrutinised. Do you really think people like him have the right to any place in British society? He has literally rinsed the country he calls his own for money he does not need, and will shortly jump continent. Never again.
0
4
Make a public announcement that the police will not investigate and the CPS will not charge for any crimes against a tax avoider, on the basis that they can fund their own security and prosecutions, as they don't want to pay the state for providing it.
Then publish their addresses.
0
2
Wot Sumo said.
0
8
3
2
Imagine ringing the fire brigade because your house is on fire
And they respond
"But your a billionaire who doesn't want to pay tax, let the mother Fer burn"
5
2
Has anyone noticed the startlingly high correlation between those roffers who moan loudly about tax in any form and those who rent their moments of intimacy by the half hour.
I don’t think that this can just be a coincidence.
3
5
I suppose you could be the sort of bellend that wastes his adult life grinding away in the London legal services sector.
4
2
Choosing another place to live because the UK offers a poor deal is not tax avoidance.
This will result in a loss of revenue to the UK. It is likely that this person was paying a significant amount in tax under the existing rules and spending a very significant amount in the economy.
2
3
Allowing ourselves to be held to ransom by obscenely rich khunts is exactly how we've ended up in the mess we are in.
Let them all f off to monaco and confiscate their UK assets on the way out.
Yes London might not have as many Michelin stars and posh clubs but who cares?
2
1
"Has anyone noticed the startlingly high correlation between those roffers who moan loudly about tax in any form and those who rent their moments of intimacy by the half hour.
I don’t think that this can just be a coincidence"
Hahahaha so true
They also seem to claim to live in jurisdictions with human rights abuses being common
Are they good people?
0
1
"Yes London might not have as many Michelin stars and posh clubs but who cares?"
What are the benefits of losing people who pay a lot of tax and spend a lot of money in the economy?
1
6
George Graham28 May 24 10:19
It is likely that this person was paying a significant amount in tax under the existing rules and spending a very significant amount in the economy.
_______________________________________________________________________________
no it's not
he would have been paying something, getting the shopping in, the odd meal out but with 17 houses to choose from I imagine they'd be abroad for big chunks of the year and off on jaunty shopping trips across europe and the US
6
2
The mistake most wealthy people make is resenting giving up a proportion of their nominal right to resources provided by that magic of collective imagination, money, in tax rather than marvelling that society connives with them to imagine that they have a right to such a huge amount of resources that can be purchased with the money that they keep. They should be grateful that their mansions are not invaded and that they are not torn limb from limb, as would happpen without "the civilisation" their tax helps pay for
0
2
I think it's really khunty to spend your life jetting around the world to avoid tax, yes. I suppose like anything there are extremes. I wouldn't blame someone from running from an outright oppressive tax regime. And you can see a logic to Italy's system where there is a cap on how much tax an individual can pay, but I disagree with the approach. My own view is that a % on income system is fair, although I don't like the way it ramps up the more you earn; I think it should be flatter. Why not e.g. a 30%* tax for everyone (after personal allowance) no matter how much you earn?
*or whatever the number is, just so long as its the same.
I wonder with the super-wealthy who run from tax whether their finances are more fragile than they make out i.e. if they paid full tax here, would they be "unprofitable"?
0
3
Very poetic, Guy. However, I doubt he will be "grateful" about the UK trying to shake him down for more tax in return for the generous benefit of not being torn limb from limb. Any number of other countries will be very grateful to have him without rinsing him for tax.
1
2
While I know rof hates them, here’s a factoid to add into discussions
1
2
Guernsey has an absolute tax cap
2
5
I would also note that these figures don't take into account the significant sums that non-doms spend in the economy, or the tax their employees pay. However, RoF is resistant to facts. They want mass unskilled immigration combined with telling high value immigrants either to accept a tax shakedown or fvck off, no matter how conclusively this is proved to be a shyte idea.
1
4
The issue though Dalek is how much they would have paid if they weren't non-doms. And whether their non-dom status is a piss take or not.
2
1
"whether their non-dom status is a piss take"
The question should be whether it's good for the UK.
If someone pays £1m/ year in tax and spends £1m/ year in the economy, we want that person here.
The fact that they would have paid £5m/ year in tax under UK rules is irrelevant if attempting to tax them as UK doms will result in them paying £0 in tax and spending £0 in the economy.
7
1
average of £167k in tax per year makes many Roffers bigger tax payers than them, so that frankly doesn't impress me much
0
1
17 houses seems very unrealistic.
That’s three weeks per year per house.
People that rich don’t live like that, they live in hotels for those three weeks.
0
2
It's £167k in tax per year even taking into account what many Roffers would wrongly describe as unjustified tax breaks. Their average income will be much higher than this figure grossed up at UK tax rates. So they will spend much more money in the economy than Roffers do and many will also be business owners who employ people in the UK (taxed at full UK rates).
5
1
The story sounds even less credible than Hugey's expat yarns.
2
1
If you frame the question dishonestly you can expect a non answer in future. They don't pay their share. "A lot" is meaningless drivel.
The benefits of reducing inequality in society are massive. Making the rich pay their share and helping the less well off be more productive helps the majority do better. If that means a few pampered moneynonces decide to up sticks and leave then that's a benefit too beause they obviously aren' committed to the UK and are just using it for tax breaks.
Not having a very obvious ubermensch and underclass in society would do a lot to reduce the friction that leads to protest votes like Brexit and Boris.
2
1
LOLLERS
tHeY pAy a LOt of TaX iF YOu cOunT tHe tAX otHeR pEoplE PaY!!1
1
0
So GG it would be ok for someone to wrongly claim non-dom status because we should be grateful for what they do spend? Can’t agree with that, sorry.
0
2
@ RR, tax paid by employees whose positions were created by the non doms being in the UK is a relevant consideration here. This tax revenue will disappear if the non-doms do.
@ Sorry, I don't understand this. What do you mean by "wrongly claim non-dom status"? Do you mean that non-dom status shouldn't exist and therefore they are wrong to claim it?
1
2
Why is everyone here so interested in other people's money?
5
0
Looking forward to your weekly thread asking people how much their netnet is.
0
2
Let's have you.
2
1
Fake news. Burges Salmon would not have a billionaire client.
1
0
This is you supporting massive protectionism and tax subsidies for industries that otherwise wouldn't / couldn't do business in the UK then? You must have hated Thatcher.
0
0
No, this isn't the same thing at all.
An industry of the type you describe would receive money from the UK Govt.
The UK Govt receives money from non doms in tax, even if you don't take into account their employees and their UK spend.
Taxing something at a lower rate is not the same thing as paying it money.
1
2
What Davos 2021 has been saying.
If these super-rich parasites are avoiding paying their fair share of taxes, then fook em.
Their kids will grow up never knowing what it's like to struggle and how others live, never know what it's like to open or close a door, wash a dirty dish or piece of cutlery, check the price of a menu, experience at some time in their life the need to rely on the state for money (not enough) to 'reasonably' live on, struggle to look for a job, use public transport.
Their pals will be other twotty, spoilt, rich brats.
This country is shyte because of Brexit, austerity and not taxing the rich heavily enough.
Jeremy Khunt's scrapping of non-dom tax status is too little too late.
We need a better funded NHS, Armed Forces, state benefits, more jobs, abolition of tuition fees,more investment in education, renationalisation of the railways and utilities and Post Office.
2
3
In the UK the obvious problem is state services are commandeered by union pigs who are intent on self-improvement, or private operators that do the same. Contrast with other European countries where e.g. works councils work collaboratively with employers and rich citizens a) don't insist on ostentatiousness and b) take pride in "giving back".
The end result for the UK is the middle class carries a massive cross on its back, funding everyone else while many of them effectively conduct charity work for the public sector (e.g. teachers, doctors, social workers) while subsidised by better paid partners or limited inheritances. The rich and poor spivs take what they can around them. Until the country wakes up to the fact that a) monopolies can't be run by private operators, b) public operators need incentives that encourage performance and c) there are no short term fixes to the shit we are in and most politicians are lying when they say otherwise, we are going nowhere.
1
2
You're talking raw shite here GG.
0
0
Burges Salmon tops FOTY but seems tainted now if they represent these parasitic super-rich.
These are the real parasites, not those on welfare benefits.
0
1
No I'm not. You quoted Thatcher, which presumably means coal mines. The coal mines were losing money. The Govt had to provide direct financial support. Clearly, paying money out is not the same thing as getting money in (but getting the money in at a lower rate than from UK doms).
0
2
"The end result for the UK is the middle class carries a massive cross on its back, funding everyone else while many of them effectively conduct charity work for the public sector (e.g. teachers, doctors, social workers) while subsidised by better paid partners or limited inheritances"
This is such a city lawyer view. Doctors in particular are in the top 5-10 per cent of earners and most will be the highest earner in a partnership. Teachers, once pensions and holidays and job security are taken into account are more comfortable than most.
0
2
Let them all f off to monaco and confiscate their UK assets on the way out.
Yes London might not have as many Michelin stars and posh clubs but who cares?
not the main point, granted, but it does
3
2
It's quite funny that those who have failed in London and in their personal lives always crow on about UAE
Wonder why?
1
0
Guy teachers pay is clearly crap compared even to bog standard grad jobs in IT, HR, marketing, you name it, worse still when you calc by the hours worked inc prep and marking. You’re so far off piste it’s unreal.
4
2
Nana is right on the money here. The middle classes in this country are sold a dream and taxed to buggery to prevent them achieving it, all those who don’t inherit enough to help them thru, and even that part complain about it. Britain is beyond uncompetitive. It is feudal. A haven for super rich foreigners who give not one shit about the indigenous population.
0
2
Vote tory get Tory
0
1
Struggling to see why that's wrong tbf. It's how insurance used to work.
0
4
lol @ secular jurist. ‘We needs better funded….’ While arguing to chase away the funding
lol @ royalty ‘Making the rich pay their fare share’. While arguing for policies to make them pay zero.
See also ‘oh we want foreign investment to create jobs’. ‘’Oh no you can’t count those jobs created as a benefit of foreign investment’ !
0
3
Most people with that kind of money have inherited it anyway. Very few are making it themselves
Just up inheritance tax to 90%
1
0
Bananaman has nailed this.
2
1
There is a tipping point where too much money stops being a laugh “ooh look at that lambo” and starts being downright 3rd world - politicians bought and paid for, no justice because lawyers can delay and threaten any normal claimant to give up or settle for a small amount, hoarding essential land and putting up financial moats around businesses to stop competition.
That’s kind of where we are in the U.K.
0
0
What Banana and Bertha said, with the slight caveat that the issue identified is magnified in London/SE England and not really much an issue at all in, say, Northern Ireland.
1
2
Ah Rob, I thought of you when bananaman said that the foreign residents of London don’t give a shit about British people. I thought ‘it’s actually worse, they often despise us’.
0
3
Labour cannot be as bad as the Tories in this regard. Yes, there are plenty of corrupt Labour politicians - especially on the Labour right - but the level of venality of the average Labour MP is nothing like the level of that of the average Tory. The problem with the Tories was that when they started having as candidates those from less affluent background (think those who had to buy their own furniture) it opened the door to lots of spivs just looking to feather their own beds.
2
1
I haven't quoted anyone. You are literally too thick to deal with anymore.
0
0
As you know perfectly well, I meant "quoted Thatcher as an example of someone I would hate", not gave a quote from Thatcher herself. I.e. your comparison between non doms and coal mines was a poor one. I imagine now you'll claim that you weren't talking about coal mines at all.
2
1
No you've shown yourself to be too stupid to bother with. Try again after you've been back to school eh?
0
1
I don’t pay tax. I just transfer a load of money to the bra Lady every few months.
Cut out the middleman.
1
1
If you're a billionaire with multiple bases across the globe, and you choose one based on tax benefits, and those benefits evaporate - it's perfectly understandable to leave. It's not as if you're leaving your home country, you're responding to change.
People migrate for jobs and for love and all sorts of reasons. This is just another reason.
0
0
I really don't get what Davos is trying to get at.
Is it that irrespective of how sh1t a government is (as in how they manage to deploy tax money) we must pay tax and consciously choose to move to a country with higher taxes?
And those whish are applying lower rates or having alternative forms of levies on public to add to government coffers, those should be shunned because obviously they do not have police, fire services, roads, hospitals etc?
2
1
Heh - have the tozzas done to tax what they have done to the NHS?
why pay tax when the tax system is is broken and corrupt?
You broke it tho
shrugs
0
2
"Guy teachers pay is clearly crap compared even to bog standard grad jobs in IT, HR, marketing, you name it, worse still when you calc by the hours worked inc prep and marking. You’re so far off piste it’s unreal. "
No, they may be by London standards, but not nationwide and there are huge additional advantages to teaching that I have pointed out.
Public sector workers are badly underpaid in London but in many parts of the country, doctors are still just about the highest paid people around and teachers are considerably above average.
0
1
Public sector workers are badly underpaid in London but in many parts of the country, doctors are still just about the highest paid people around and teachers are considerably above average.
Plus those pension benefits on which they pay minimal tax compared with what these would be valued at on an open market basis if properly treated as an emolument.
Join the discussion