| Paradise papers 17:17 - Nov 8 with 14338 views | No9 |
Anyone watched both parts and now not understand why Mr E has moved his operations from Bermuda to I.o.M.?
Anyone now still wondering why the super-rich and the wealthy want to UK out of the EU? |  | | |  |
| Paradise papers on 17:23 - Nov 8 with 6198 views | factual_blue |
I was advised this afternoon that Philip Ham is a name that will come out in the Paradise Papers. |  |
| |
| Paradise papers on 17:25 - Nov 8 with 6196 views | No9 |
| Paradise papers on 17:23 - Nov 8 by factual_blue |
I was advised this afternoon that Philip Ham is a name that will come out in the Paradise Papers. |
Ah! Ha! | | | |
| on 17:26 - Nov 8 with 6194 views | _ |
| | | |
| Paradise papers on 17:28 - Nov 8 with 6178 views | factual_blue |
| Paradise papers on 17:25 - Nov 8 by No9 |
Ah! Ha! |
This little titbit was passed on to me by a well-respected gentleman working in financial services. | |
| |
| Paradise papers on 17:28 - Nov 8 with 6175 views | SpruceMoose |
| Paradise papers on 17:23 - Nov 8 by factual_blue |
I was advised this afternoon that Philip Ham is a name that will come out in the Paradise Papers. |
I have been advised to try and get out in front of the news. Philip J Ham was never in the employ of any of my businesses or subsidiaries. |  |
| Pronouns: He/Him/His.
"Imagine being a heterosexual white male in Britain at this moment. How bad is that. Everything you say is racist, everything you say is homophobic. The Woke community have really f****d this country." | | Poll: | Selectamod |
| |
| How much money is enough? on 17:28 - Nov 8 with 6174 views | Pendejo |
no further comment |  |
| |
| Paradise papers on 17:29 - Nov 8 with 6173 views | No9 |
If you haven't seen it, it is well worth going to iPlayer and watching it.
The guardian as one of the news organisations involved are serialising it in print | | | |
| on 17:31 - Nov 8 with 6161 views | _ |
| Paradise papers on 17:29 - Nov 8 by No9 |
If you haven't seen it, it is well worth going to iPlayer and watching it.
The guardian as one of the news organisations involved are serialising it in print |
| | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Paradise papers on 17:35 - Nov 8 with 6154 views | No9 |
| Paradise papers on 17:28 - Nov 8 by factual_blue |
This little titbit was passed on to me by a well-respected gentleman working in financial services. |
The plot thickens | | | |
| Paradise papers on 17:49 - Nov 8 with 6130 views | factual_blue |
| Paradise papers on 17:28 - Nov 8 by SpruceMoose |
I have been advised to try and get out in front of the news. Philip J Ham was never in the employ of any of my businesses or subsidiaries. |
It's Philip A B Ham, and he's squirelling away the cash slush fund of Hammy Media in the discreet banks of Culebra | |
| |
| Paradise papers on 18:02 - Nov 8 with 6114 views | blueislander |
| Paradise papers on 17:29 - Nov 8 by No9 |
If you haven't seen it, it is well worth going to iPlayer and watching it.
The guardian as one of the news organisations involved are serialising it in print |
Do you not find it odd that the information was illegally, and has not brought any illegalities committed to light? The programme is sensationalist , and full of half truths, and unworthy of the BBC imo. | | | |
| Paradise papers on 18:03 - Nov 8 with 6106 views | No9 |
| Paradise papers on 18:02 - Nov 8 by blueislander |
Do you not find it odd that the information was illegally, and has not brought any illegalities committed to light? The programme is sensationalist , and full of half truths, and unworthy of the BBC imo. |
Why? | | | |
| Paradise papers on 18:11 - Nov 8 with 6097 views | blueislander |
| Paradise papers on 18:03 - Nov 8 by No9 |
Why? |
Mainly because it sheds no light on any illegal acts. It is just a diatribe against wealthy people. It omits one very important fact. There i now something called the Common Reporting Standard which obliges all the jurisdictions mentioned to automatically send information on bank accounts to the relevant tax authorities. Ihave answered your question, will you answer mine? | | | |
| Paradise papers on 18:14 - Nov 8 with 6095 views | No9 |
| Paradise papers on 18:11 - Nov 8 by blueislander |
Mainly because it sheds no light on any illegal acts. It is just a diatribe against wealthy people. It omits one very important fact. There i now something called the Common Reporting Standard which obliges all the jurisdictions mentioned to automatically send information on bank accounts to the relevant tax authorities. Ihave answered your question, will you answer mine? |
Based on what you are posting I don't think you watched all of the broadcasts.
"There i now something called the Common Reporting Standard which obliges all the jurisdictions mentioned to automatically send information on bank accounts to the relevant tax authorities"
The key is in 'supposed to'
Did you read the question in my original post? | | | |
| Paradise papers on 18:18 - Nov 8 with 6092 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Paradise papers on 17:29 - Nov 8 by No9 |
If you haven't seen it, it is well worth going to iPlayer and watching it.
The guardian as one of the news organisations involved are serialising it in print |
Would that be the same Guardian who have their own offshore investments?
The same Guardian who avoided paying £60 million of taxes in 2008 by winding up the not-for-profit charity, The Scott Trust and forming The Scott Trust Limited when it sold its 50%t holding in Auto Trader?
The same Guardian who have £223.8 million invested in an overseas/offshore hedge fund managed by Cambridge Associates which trades currency derivatives?
Just so we are clear. |  |
| |
| Paradise papers on 18:20 - Nov 8 with 6084 views | No9 |
| Paradise papers on 18:18 - Nov 8 by GlasgowBlue |
Would that be the same Guardian who have their own offshore investments?
The same Guardian who avoided paying £60 million of taxes in 2008 by winding up the not-for-profit charity, The Scott Trust and forming The Scott Trust Limited when it sold its 50%t holding in Auto Trader?
The same Guardian who have £223.8 million invested in an overseas/offshore hedge fund managed by Cambridge Associates which trades currency derivatives?
Just so we are clear. |
So are you saying two wrongs make a right ? | | | |
| Paradise papers on 18:21 - Nov 8 with 6078 views | blueislander |
| Paradise papers on 18:14 - Nov 8 by No9 |
Based on what you are posting I don't think you watched all of the broadcasts.
"There i now something called the Common Reporting Standard which obliges all the jurisdictions mentioned to automatically send information on bank accounts to the relevant tax authorities"
The key is in 'supposed to'
Did you read the question in my original post? |
"Supposed to" - No it is a legal obligation , with severe penalties for non compliance. | | | |
| Paradise papers on 18:22 - Nov 8 with 6080 views | factual_blue |
| Paradise papers on 18:02 - Nov 8 by blueislander |
Do you not find it odd that the information was illegally, and has not brought any illegalities committed to light? The programme is sensationalist , and full of half truths, and unworthy of the BBC imo. |
There are likely to a significant number of breaches of various securities exchange legislation passed by a number of countries.
In addition, the Furniss v Dawson principle and the Ramsay principle are both well-established in UK tax law, enabling HMRC to ignore the existence of non-commercial transactions, ie to apply 'substance over form'.
Whether somebody passing papers belonging to a commercial entity to a third party is illegal is a moot point. I'm by no means sure receiving them is.
I'm not sure of Lord sleazecroft's legal position, having apparently reneged on undertakings given about his domicile.
I'm also not sure what the problem is in being morally outraged by exposure of this sort of behaviour, | |
| |
| Paradise papers on 18:22 - Nov 8 with 6079 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Paradise papers on 18:20 - Nov 8 by No9 |
So are you saying two wrongs make a right ? |
I am calling out the hypocrisy of the Guardian. What they have done is all perfectly legal tax avoidance though.
But it's a case of don't do as I do. Do as I say. | |
| |
| Paradise papers on 18:27 - Nov 8 with 6067 views | bournemouthblue |
The same magic money tree which definitely didn't bail out all those banks to the tune of £24k per every UK Household |  |
| |
| Paradise papers on 18:29 - Nov 8 with 6057 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Paradise papers on 18:27 - Nov 8 by bournemouthblue |
The same magic money tree which definitely didn't bail out all those banks to the tune of £24k per every UK Household |
I think you will find that was your man Brown who did that. | |
| |
| Paradise papers on 18:35 - Nov 8 with 6048 views | blueislander |
| Paradise papers on 18:22 - Nov 8 by factual_blue |
There are likely to a significant number of breaches of various securities exchange legislation passed by a number of countries.
In addition, the Furniss v Dawson principle and the Ramsay principle are both well-established in UK tax law, enabling HMRC to ignore the existence of non-commercial transactions, ie to apply 'substance over form'.
Whether somebody passing papers belonging to a commercial entity to a third party is illegal is a moot point. I'm by no means sure receiving them is.
I'm not sure of Lord sleazecroft's legal position, having apparently reneged on undertakings given about his domicile.
I'm also not sure what the problem is in being morally outraged by exposure of this sort of behaviour, |
No breaches were exposed were there? Not sure where you are going with Furniss v Dawson. How does that apply? I think we can safely say that this information was stolen. Ashcroft,odious individual that he is, gave that committment to Cameron. By not fulfilling it I don't think that is illegal. I am sure that many people were outraged, but if the programme had presented some balance, by mentioning the CRS , and also explaining how investment funds are widely used by all and sundry, and that anyone with a pension fund has participated in "off shore" activity, perhaps the outrage would be less. | | | |
| Paradise papers on 18:39 - Nov 8 with 6036 views | BlueBadger |
| Paradise papers on 18:20 - Nov 8 by No9 |
So are you saying two wrongs make a right ? |
I think the point here, is if you're going to call out this bulls*t, it's probably a good idea to be well, not participating in said bulls*t as far as possible. |  |
| |
| Paradise papers on 18:46 - Nov 8 with 6014 views | longtimefan |
| Paradise papers on 18:22 - Nov 8 by GlasgowBlue |
I am calling out the hypocrisy of the Guardian. What they have done is all perfectly legal tax avoidance though.
But it's a case of don't do as I do. Do as I say. |
Not much different to the salary sacrifice schemes that many large employers imposed that reduced both company and employee national insurance contributions. | | | |
| Paradise papers on 18:48 - Nov 8 with 6008 views | No9 |
| Paradise papers on 18:22 - Nov 8 by GlasgowBlue |
I am calling out the hypocrisy of the Guardian. What they have done is all perfectly legal tax avoidance though.
But it's a case of don't do as I do. Do as I say. |
Did you watch the programmes?
Do you understand UK tax law?
Why would anyone claim to own companies then not show up as a direct at Companies house? | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
