Quizzes & Puzzles16 mins ago
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Khandro. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
// On the import of his jet a GBP 3.3 million VAT refund was given based on a British Virgin Island Leasing structure. Hamilton's advisers formed a VAT-registered leasing business on the Isle of Man. The Isle of Man company, named Stealth (IOM) Limited, leased the jet from Hamilton's British Virgin Islands company, Stealth Aviation Limited, and imported it into the Isle of Man. It was then leased on to a UK jet management company that provided Hamilton with a crew and other services - and which leased it back to Hamilton and his Guernsey company, BRV Limited. //
So nothing fishy there then.
So nothing fishy there then.
The international system allows it - and the IoMan has hundreds if not thousands of these wealthy corporate/private jets registered. It's unfair to single out LH - I would do it to minimise my tax exposure if I had his sort of wealth and wanted my own jet - personally though, I would use Netjets...more value in that to paying for usage..... So if they want to close this off, then it's the system that should be looked at.
"Nobody is objecting to him spending money on a jet, it's avoiding paying the VAT, that's the problem."
This is a fuss about nothing. VAT being what it is (an inequitous but above all the most cumbersome tax ever devised) Mr Hamilton would not have paid the VAT anyway. "Lewis Hamilton plc" (or whatever it's called) is a company and, with a turnover undoubtedly considerably north of £85k, it will be registered for VAT. If Lewis Hamilton plc had paid VAT on the aircraft it would simply have been claimed back when the company's VAT return was done in th esame way that a builder reclaims VAT on tools and materials he buys. If the government wants to collect "Purchase Tax" it needs to come up with a better idea than VAT.
This is a fuss about nothing. VAT being what it is (an inequitous but above all the most cumbersome tax ever devised) Mr Hamilton would not have paid the VAT anyway. "Lewis Hamilton plc" (or whatever it's called) is a company and, with a turnover undoubtedly considerably north of £85k, it will be registered for VAT. If Lewis Hamilton plc had paid VAT on the aircraft it would simply have been claimed back when the company's VAT return was done in th esame way that a builder reclaims VAT on tools and materials he buys. If the government wants to collect "Purchase Tax" it needs to come up with a better idea than VAT.
I was thinking more along the lines of spending money being better than hoarding it from the point of view of so many people have been employed in the making and now and maintaining this machine, all presumably paying taxes on their earnings and a lot of VAT will have been collected from the materials used in its manufacture, what goes around, comes around.
Harping on about the VAT on the plane itself, seems a bit churlish.
Also his money is earned by working (driving in GPs) on every continent in the world. I have a feeling that there is just a tad of envy being shown here by his critics.
Harping on about the VAT on the plane itself, seems a bit churlish.
Also his money is earned by working (driving in GPs) on every continent in the world. I have a feeling that there is just a tad of envy being shown here by his critics.
"Perhaps New Judge is able to suggest a reason for such complications as have been detailed above by Gromit."
I don't think the arrangements were simply to avoid the VAT on the purchase price. They seem to be a way of deferring the running costs of the aircraft as well.
If a VAT registered builder buys tools for £100 and pays £20 VAT on top, when he does his VAT returns the £20 is credited to him and is deducted from the VAT he owes HMRC (which he has collected from his customers). Of course any of his customers who are VAT-registered can also claim the VAT back that the builder has charged them (being credited against the VAT they owe the VATman from the tax they have collected from their customers). A more convoluted way of collecting what is, effectively, an end user purchase tax (with nearly everybody else being eligible to reclaim most of the VAT they paid) is hard to imagine. Abolishing it (which the UK can only do after Brexit as VAT is an EU requirement) and replacing it with something a little simpler (which even a child of ten could devise) would save an enormous sum which is currently spent administering this farce. As a result not so much tax would need to be collected. Or at least that which is collected could be put to better use that paying armies of scribes an inspectors to check on the collection, payment and reclaim nonsense which adds to the overheads of every business.
I don't think the arrangements were simply to avoid the VAT on the purchase price. They seem to be a way of deferring the running costs of the aircraft as well.
If a VAT registered builder buys tools for £100 and pays £20 VAT on top, when he does his VAT returns the £20 is credited to him and is deducted from the VAT he owes HMRC (which he has collected from his customers). Of course any of his customers who are VAT-registered can also claim the VAT back that the builder has charged them (being credited against the VAT they owe the VATman from the tax they have collected from their customers). A more convoluted way of collecting what is, effectively, an end user purchase tax (with nearly everybody else being eligible to reclaim most of the VAT they paid) is hard to imagine. Abolishing it (which the UK can only do after Brexit as VAT is an EU requirement) and replacing it with something a little simpler (which even a child of ten could devise) would save an enormous sum which is currently spent administering this farce. As a result not so much tax would need to be collected. Or at least that which is collected could be put to better use that paying armies of scribes an inspectors to check on the collection, payment and reclaim nonsense which adds to the overheads of every business.
Well I for one trust our masters to deal fairly with a replacement for VAT should it ever come about.
I imagine something along the lines of using the VAT included price as a benchmark then adding, say, 15% would be par for the course on this rip-off backwater we live in with further increases 'just because'.
As for Mr Hamilton, I can barely manage a shrug. His worth as a commodity has been decided by sponsors and employers and it's surely up to him to try and stretch his meagre earnings as far as they'll go in these lean times. :-)
I imagine something along the lines of using the VAT included price as a benchmark then adding, say, 15% would be par for the course on this rip-off backwater we live in with further increases 'just because'.
As for Mr Hamilton, I can barely manage a shrug. His worth as a commodity has been decided by sponsors and employers and it's surely up to him to try and stretch his meagre earnings as far as they'll go in these lean times. :-)
//I don't think the arrangements were simply to avoid the VAT on the purchase price. They seem to be a way of deferring the running costs of the aircraft as well. ??
NJ...How can what LH has done be a way to defer the running costs of his aircraft. Come on, be realistic and acknowledge that it was all a ploy to get more money into his small bank account.
@Khandro.......I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong. All materials for the building of Aircrafts and Commercial Ships are Zero Rated.
Hans.
Hans.
NJ...How can what LH has done be a way to defer the running costs of his aircraft. Come on, be realistic and acknowledge that it was all a ploy to get more money into his small bank account.
@Khandro.......I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong. All materials for the building of Aircrafts and Commercial Ships are Zero Rated.
Hans.
Hans.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.