Wikileaks to expose high profile tax evaders

[trousers]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12205690

 

A former Swiss banker has passed on data containing account details of 2,000 prominent people to Wikileaks founder Julian Assange.

According to a report in Swiss newspaper Der Sonntag, the data covers multinationals, financial firms and wealthy individuals from many countries, including the UK, US and Germany, and covers the period 1990-2009.

[dune]

Fair play to those who take advantage of offshore accounts. It's no different to me and you investing in an ISA.

[Viking Warrior]

What a knob

 

How is this tooser able to give details of bank details from 1990 to 2009 when he was sacked in 2002?

Most of the stuff will be above board so why should they be allowed to publish such info . I bet wikilinks will just concentrate on the US and UK info. Can I sue wikileaks if they post my bank details? is this not a breach of the Data protection acts, Human rights act el al?

[buctootim]

Of course its not Dune, of course it not.

[trousers]

Fair play to those who take advantage of offshore accounts. It's no different to me and you investing in an ISA.

 

I didn't hear the finer details on the news earlier but I believe this un-earths cases of tax EVASION rather tax AVOIDANCE. ISAs would fall into the latter category (i.e. a legal way of avoiding tax).

 

I believe that Wikileaks have uncovered illegal tax evasion here (again not sure about the details.)

[dune]

I didn't hear the finer details on the news earlier but I believe this un-earths cases of tax EVASION rather tax AVOIDANCE. ISAs would fall into the latter category (i.e. a legal way of avoiding tax).

 

I believe that Wikileaks have uncovered illegal tax evasion here (again not sure about the details.)

 

I guess we'll find out in due course. If it is just tax avoidance then it's disgusting that these peoples private details have been leaked and i'd hope legal action followed against wikileaks and the rogue ex banker.

[JackFrost]

Fair play to those who take advantage of offshore accounts. It's no different to me and you investing in an ISA.

 

except the limit on how much you can pay in each year, which is a big difference

[Wade Garrett]

Dune, I'd imagine that most of the avoiders are flag waving Tory supporters.

[dune]

Dune, I'd imagine that most of the avoiders are flag waving Tory supporters.

 

I'd imagine that most of the benefits slobs are flag waving Labour supporters.

[Saint 76er]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12205690

 

A former Swiss banker has passed on data containing account details of 2,000 prominent people to Wikileaks founder Julian Assange.

According to a report in Swiss newspaper Der Sonntag, the data covers multinationals, financial firms and wealthy individuals from many countries, including the UK, US and Germany, and covers the period 1990-2009.

 

A former Swiss banker ... OMG ...

[Wade Garrett]

I'd imagine that most of the benefits slobs are flag waving Labour supporters.

 

I'd imagine that most of the benefits slobs couldn't be arsed to vote.

[Whitey Grandad]

If taxes were at a sensible level of, say, 20%, then there would be no need for anybody to try to avoid them.

[Gingeletiss]

I guess we'll find out in due course. If it is just tax avoidance then it's disgusting that these peoples private details have been leaked and i'd hope legal action followed against wikileaks and the rogue ex banker.

 

I agree with you on most things, alas, not this issue. Anyone who seeks to avoid tax, deserves to be jailed, and this from someone who hates paying tax, but does so, as it is the law.

[Verbal]

Are you scared trousers? Are you?

[Eddie Lizzard]

Fair play to those who take advantage of offshore accounts. It's no different to me and you investing in an ISA.

 

This does not relate to tax avoidance, such as the creation of offshore companies to manage "image rights", the interest will be if the information concerns funds deposited that are the result of tax evasion.

[Jones91]

He'll get assasinated.

[Weston Super Saint]

He'll get assasinated.

 

That's a bit harsh, and not sure Trousers deserves it just for starting the thread, but if it must be, then it must be.

[Lord Duckhunter]

If taxes were at a sensible level of, say, 20%, then there would be no need for anybody to try to avoid them.

 

This is spot on.

 

Govt's should be concentrating on tax take and not tax rates. There should be some serious research and attempts to understand the rates of tax that would bring in the most money.The problem is no Govt of any party has the balls to do it.They are too busy playing to the gallery and tax cuts for the rich doesn't play well. People are going to come on here and say that Govt's should enforce the tax regime and chase the rich and make them pay, but just like clamping down on benefit cheats it's just empty words.

[Hatch]

If taxes were at a sensible level of, say, 20%, then there would be no need for anybody to try to avoid them.

 

Hatch likes this.

[dune]

Hatch likes this.

 

The Lefties shiver at the thought. The sheer cheek of people wanting to earn and spend their own money. It goes against nanny state Socialist thinking. How else can we provide non jobs for public sector wallors and keep benefits slobs living a life of riley?

[dubai_phil]

Swiss Bank leaks... Oooh I hope so.

 

Maybe buried down in the middle will be that well known name in these parts - Falcondrome, and we can see who REALLY was behind the Skate non-takeover....

[Jimmy_D]

Swiss Bank leaks... Oooh I hope so.

 

Maybe buried down in the middle will be that well known name in these parts - Falcondrome, and we can see who REALLY was behind the Skate non-takeover....

 

I thought that I have to admit... 'I bet Pompey are involved in this somehow...'

[OldNick]

lets hope HR's accoubnt has been leaked, it would be good if the Nazi gold was mentioned as well. The Swiss banks never had a conscience regarding that issue either

[anothersaintinsouthsea]

blah blah lefties blah blah socialist blah blah public sector blah blah benefits

 

wow, you are sinking to new levels of boring repitition.

[Whitey Grandad]

lets hope HR's accoubnt has been leaked, it would be good if the Nazi gold was mentioned as well. The Swiss banks never had a conscience regarding that issue either

 

Oh no! By referring to the Nazis you have now invoked Godwin's Law and the convention is that once this has happened the thread be closed

[dune]

wow, you are sinking to new levels of boring repitition.

 

I always try to be reasonable and effective.

 

Ian Smith - Prime Minister of Rhodesia.

[mcjwills]

A former Swiss banker ... OMG ...

 

Hope this swiss banker is not a chairman at a football club now

[badgerx16]

Ian Smith - Prime Minister of Rhodesia.

Or as it was known, "Surrey with the lunatic fringe on top".

[aintforever]

It would be fantastic if the corruption down the road is exposed by this, you can bet your life old saggy chops has a Swiss bank account.

 

Exposing tax-evading scum like this HAS to be a good thing, should be interesting to see who is involved.

[Saintandy666]

If taxes were at a sensible level of, say, 20%, then there would be no need for anybody to try to avoid them.

 

Well, this isn't true. Why would these people pay 20% when they can still pay nothing at all?

[Lord Duckhunter]

Well, this isn't true. Why would these people pay 20% when they can still pay nothing at all?

 

Because it costs money to aviod tax and together with a tough enforcement policy people would start to think it wasn't worth the risk. The other factor is with a low tax ecomony you would attract more business into the country, leading to more people paying tax.

[Verbal]

Because it costs money to aviod tax and together with a tough enforcement policy people would start to think it wasn't worth the risk. The other factor is with a low tax ecomony you would attract more business into the country, leading to more people paying tax.

 

On that basis, Germany would have a weaker economy than ours.

[Whitey Grandad]

On that basis, Germany would have a weaker economy than ours.

 

There are other factors at play, as of course you knew. A flat-tax policy has worked wonders for Hong Kong, for example.

[Saintandy666]

Because it costs money to aviod tax and together with a tough enforcement policy people would start to think it wasn't worth the risk. The other factor is with a low tax ecomony you would attract more business into the country, leading to more people paying tax.

 

I don't accept this point that avoiding tax costs 20% of income.

 

The overall tax receipts would collapse. We'd be ****ed.

[simo]

First he's ****ing off governments now some of the worlds richest people now that's a really good idea :-/

[hypochondriac]

TBH if he was really a threat he would have been killed already.

[Jonnyboy]

Because it costs money to aviod tax and together with a tough enforcement policy people would start to think it wasn't worth the risk. The other factor is with a low tax ecomony you would attract more business into the country, leading to more people paying tax.

 

if it was as tough as it should be, the tax rate wouldnt matter

[aintforever]

TBH if he was really a threat he would have been killed already.

 

Or killing one person won't stop Wikileaks publishing anything?

[Verbal]

There are other factors at play, as of course you knew. A flat-tax policy has worked wonders for Hong Kong, for example.

 

Compare like with like. Putting the UK economy in the same bracket as Hong Kong - now the 'City' for China - is pointless.

 

If LD's point were to be true, Germany would be poorer than us. A simple response to a singular point.

[JustMike]

I'd imagine that most of the benefits slobs are flag waving Labour supporters.

 

well, they are now!

[Lord Duckhunter]

In 1979 the high rate of tax was 83% and the basic rate was 33%. The Thatcher Govt reduced both rates quite condsiderably and the money raised from income tax went up.How does this tally with the "tax the rich until their pips squeak" posters on here.Surely we should be setting tax rates on the basis of what brings most money in, not out of some sort of misguided fairness agenda.The bottom line should be tax take, and if that means the rich paying the same as me, then so be it.

[Verbal]

In 1979 the high rate of tax was 83% and the basic rate was 33%. The Thatcher Govt reduced both rates quite condsiderably and the money raised from income tax went up.How does this tally with the "tax the rich until their pips squeak" posters on here.Surely we should be setting tax rates on the basis of what brings most money in, not out of some sort of misguided fairness agenda.The bottom line should be tax take, and if that means the rich paying the same as me, then so be it.

 

As ANYONE who lived through the dark days of 80s knows all too well, income tax cuts were matched - and more - by backhanded tax rises, in everything from VAT (almost DOUBLED), to national insurance and the poll tax.

[Lord Duckhunter]

As ANYONE who lived through the dark days of 80s knows all too well, income tax cuts were matched - and more - by backhanded tax rises, in everything from VAT (almost DOUBLED), to national insurance and the poll tax.

 

Maybe, but a top rated 40% brought more income tax in, than Healy's 83%.

[trousers]

As ANYONE who lived through the dark days of 80s knows all too well, income tax cuts were matched - and more - by backhanded tax rises, in everything from VAT (almost DOUBLED), to national insurance and the poll tax.

 

Yeah, but we had Frankie Goes To Hollywood and Dollar to soften the blow.

[Verbal]

Maybe, but a top rated 40% brought more income tax in, than Healy's 83%.

 

Healey. Healy at the time was the leader of IMG, the International Marxist Group. If he'd been chancellor, we'd all have axes in our heads.

[Verbal]

Yeah, but we had Frankie Goes To Hollywood and Dollar to soften the blow.

 

You're on the wrong thread. You're clearly thinking of Dr Who's little investigation.

[buctootim]

As ANYONE who lived through the dark days of 80s knows all too well, income tax cuts were matched - and more - by backhanded tax rises, in everything from VAT (almost DOUBLED), to national insurance and the poll tax.

 

Total tax take inc NI

Year £bn %of GDP

1970-71 23 43.3

1971-72 24.6 41.5

1972-73 26.3 39

1973-74 29.7 39.5

1974-75 37.9 42.1

1975-76 47.9 42.7

1976-77 56.4 43

1977-78 62.9 41.3

1978-79 69.8 40.1

1979-80 85 40.5

1980-81 100.9 42.2

1981-82 119.5 45.4

1982-83 129.7 45.1

1983-84 137.9 44.1

1984-85 147.6 43.9

1985-86 157.8 42.7

1986-87 164.6 41.6

1987-88 178.9 40.6

1988-89 197.1 40.2

1989-90 211.3 39.4

1990-91 221.7 38.4

1991-92 231.7 38.1

1992-93 227.6 36.3

1993-94 235.2 35.4

1994-95 255.9 36.4

1995-96 276.6 37.2

1996-97 288.8 36.4

1997-98 316.2 37.5

1998-99 335.3 37.7

1999-00 358.5 37.9

2000-01 382.3 38.6

2001-02 389.4 37.8

2002-03 396 36.3

2003-04 422.4 36.5

2004-05 452.6 37.3

2005-06 486.6 38.2

2006-07 519.2 38.5

2007-08 549.1 38.6

2008-09 533.3 37.2

2009-10 519.8 37

2010-11 548 37.2

[Lord Duckhunter]

All I want is some serious research into which tax rates will bring in the most revenue. It maybe that reducing rates will bring more in, it maybe that putting them up may do. My personal opinion is that at the moment tax rates are set on the basis of political positioning, rather than cold hard economics. If you could prove to the Labour party that reducing the top rate of tax to 30% would bring in an extra 3 billion a year, they would still not do it. If you proved to the Tories that putting the rate up to 60% would bring in 3 billion, they would not do it.

 

My feeling is that reducing rates would not only bring more in and attract extra jobs, but it would make people feel richer, spend more and growth would continue to rise. Provided you kept inflation in check, everyone would be a winner.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Healey. Healy at the time was the leader of IMG, the International Marxist Group. If he'd been chancellor, we'd all have axes in our heads.

 

Very good, but the problem is I was educated under the Labour Govt and Grocer Heath in the 70's, so my spelling and English is somewhat lacking.

[Verbal]

Total tax take inc NI

Year £bn %of GDP

1970-71 23 43.3

1971-72 24.6 41.5

1972-73 26.3 39

1973-74 29.7 39.5

1974-75 37.9 42.1

1975-76 47.9 42.7

1976-77 56.4 43

1977-78 62.9 41.3

1978-79 69.8 40.1

1979-80 85 40.5

1980-81 100.9 42.2

1981-82 119.5 45.4

1982-83 129.7 45.1

1983-84 137.9 44.1

1984-85 147.6 43.9

1985-86 157.8 42.7

1986-87 164.6 41.6

1987-88 178.9 40.6

1988-89 197.1 40.2

1989-90 211.3 39.4

1990-91 221.7 38.4

1991-92 231.7 38.1

1992-93 227.6 36.3

1993-94 235.2 35.4

1994-95 255.9 36.4

1995-96 276.6 37.2

1996-97 288.8 36.4

1997-98 316.2 37.5

1998-99 335.3 37.7

1999-00 358.5 37.9

2000-01 382.3 38.6

2001-02 389.4 37.8

2002-03 396 36.3

2003-04 422.4 36.5

2004-05 452.6 37.3

2005-06 486.6 38.2

2006-07 519.2 38.5

2007-08 549.1 38.6

2008-09 533.3 37.2

2009-10 519.8 37

2010-11 548 37.2

 

Which rather proves my point. Tax take inc NI reaches a peak under Thatch - just at the point when, were it not for the Malvinas, she'd have been slung out of office.