Crosswords1 min ago
Did Other Affected Tax Authorities Pursue The Tax Dodgers Of Hsbc More Aggresively?
Does anyone know if the tax authorities of other affected countries in the HSBC scandal pursue their dodgers more aggressively than HMRC did in the UK.
HMRC decided to make quiet deals with tax dodgers rather than pursue them in the criminal courts citing it would rake in more money rather than complicated litigation.
Should these wrongdoers have been named and shamed as a deterrent to those who aggressively avoid to pay tax using companies like HSBC?
Answers
1 to 14 of 14
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by barney15c. 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.
Vodaphone was one of HSBC's clients. Vodaphone made a 'sweetheart' deal with HMRC which meant they avoided £8billion in tax. Dave Hartnett, Permanent Secretary for Tax at Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs who brokered the deal, later resigned and went working for the accountancy firm that audits... Vodaphone's accounts.
Hartnett also works for HSBC as an "Honesty" advisor.. I kid you not, incredible isn't it!!!!
http://
http://
I have no issue whatever with tax avoidance.
If I was able to afford to pay someone to tell me how to pay less tax, I would.
A multi-national company has a duty to its shareholders to pay as little tax as is legally possible, and that is what has occurred here.
The fault lies fairly and squarely with successive governemtns, together with HMRC who have between them concocted such a convoluted system of taxation that even they don't understand it fully.
If tax laws are horse high, pig tight and bull strong, there is no evasion - it's as simple as that.
Let the government and HMRC clean up its tax regulations, and tax avoidance would vanish over night.
But be under no illusion, lax tax laws are an immorality that has to be laid the government and HMRC's doors, not at the doors of companies who avoid tax because they can.
If I was able to afford to pay someone to tell me how to pay less tax, I would.
A multi-national company has a duty to its shareholders to pay as little tax as is legally possible, and that is what has occurred here.
The fault lies fairly and squarely with successive governemtns, together with HMRC who have between them concocted such a convoluted system of taxation that even they don't understand it fully.
If tax laws are horse high, pig tight and bull strong, there is no evasion - it's as simple as that.
Let the government and HMRC clean up its tax regulations, and tax avoidance would vanish over night.
But be under no illusion, lax tax laws are an immorality that has to be laid the government and HMRC's doors, not at the doors of companies who avoid tax because they can.
any, the issue here seems to be not tax avoidance, which is legal, but tax evasion, which is not.
To quote from the BBC:
Offshore accounts are not illegal, but many people use them to hide cash from the tax authorities. And while tax avoidance is perfectly legal, deliberately hiding money to evade tax is not.
To quote from the BBC:
Offshore accounts are not illegal, but many people use them to hide cash from the tax authorities. And while tax avoidance is perfectly legal, deliberately hiding money to evade tax is not.
Interesting clip from tonight's Panorama :::::
http://
There is a phrase containing the words pigs, snouts and troughs that easily comes to mind here.
http://
There is a phrase containing the words pigs, snouts and troughs that easily comes to mind here.
jno - "andy, the issue here seems to be not tax avoidance, which is legal, but tax evasion, which is not.
To quote from the BBC:
Offshore accounts are not illegal, but many people use them to hide cash from the tax authorities. And while tax avoidance is perfectly legal, deliberately hiding money to evade tax is not."
Your distinction is important, and valid, but it is missed by the overall tendency of the media to portray multi-national companies as greedy money-hoovers who are finding as many tax loopholes as they can.
True, companies do that, but as advised in my previous post, that is because they can - close the loops, the issue vanishes, and that is not the responsibility of the companies involved, as I am sure you will agree.
To quote from the BBC:
Offshore accounts are not illegal, but many people use them to hide cash from the tax authorities. And while tax avoidance is perfectly legal, deliberately hiding money to evade tax is not."
Your distinction is important, and valid, but it is missed by the overall tendency of the media to portray multi-national companies as greedy money-hoovers who are finding as many tax loopholes as they can.
True, companies do that, but as advised in my previous post, that is because they can - close the loops, the issue vanishes, and that is not the responsibility of the companies involved, as I am sure you will agree.
1 to 14 of 14
Latest Posts
Music4 mins ago
ChatterBank12 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles16 mins ago
Crosswords31 mins ago
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.