Tri Talk HomepageTri Talk EventsTri Talk ForumsBlogsTri Talk TrainingTri TradeTriPlayerWikiTeam Tri Talk
Tw@ts at HMRC
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    TriTalk.co.uk Forum Index -> Off-Topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
bradjenkins




Joined: 13 Sep 2018
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 8:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yep. I'm with you

Jorgan wrote:
I guess the Govt is afraid big business or billionaires will take their money/businesses elsewhere.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
explorerJC




Joined: 20 Oct 2005
Posts: 15684
Location: Farthingstone

PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 7:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The piece is titled: We allow the rich to escape charges, admits taxman; sub-title: HMRC says secret deals are done to avoid denting the reputations of the powerful, sparking fears for equality under the law

P2 Sunday times 9 sept 18

"The news raises fresh questions about the approach of HMRC, which has been criticised for failing to prosecute high-profile people with financial interests in offshore tax havens."
_________________
www.appliedtri.co.uk Tri and Du coaching

www.naturalrunningform.co.uk Natural Running Form Coach

2018 Training Camps http://www.appliedtri.co.uk/training-camps/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
GrahamO




Joined: 10 Apr 2005
Posts: 10129
Location: United Arab Emirates or an airport

PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well all the papers put titles which often have content which is at variance with the actual title.

If someone is allegedly tax evading, and all their money is offshore, then its going to take years and millions to get any evidence and even if they do, its by no means clear that a guilty verdict will be achieved.

One of the reasons that HRMC has failed to successfully prosecute many people is that they are found innocent, or that HMRC actually has no evidence but that doesnt make a good headline. Its not actually illegal to keep money offshore in a tax haven as HMRC have found all too often. They operate under the 'no smoke without fire' principle and have shown to be incorrect.

In typical newspaper fashion, the article conflates an accusation with guilt.
_________________
Arguing with engineers is like wrestling in mud with a pig - after a while you realise they like it
newMan : I don't know why you think you can address me like that! Don't ever reply directly to any of my posts again please.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tigger




Joined: 25 Apr 2005
Posts: 2789
Location: Hampshire

PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

GrahamO wrote:
In typical newspaper fashion, the article conflates an accusation with guilt.


Yep.

Here's an example of a prosecution of a failed prosecution. But you won't find it in The Times as it would contradict their headline: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/harry-redknapp-cleared-of-tax-fraud-zfnhqngl8j7

Out of interest, the BBC's article said on it said:

BBC wrote:
Following the verdicts, former Spurs chairman Lord Sugar told BBC Radio 5 Live: "If this was Harry Smith or Harry Brown, it would never have gone to court. This is an attempt by the authorities to make an example of a high profile personality which has backfired.


That's probably not in The Times article (but its behind a paywall so I don't care).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bradjenkins




Joined: 13 Sep 2018
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 8:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Interesting...

Tigger wrote:
GrahamO wrote:
In typical newspaper fashion, the article conflates an accusation with guilt.


Yep.

Here's an example of a prosecution of a failed prosecution. But you won't find it in The Times as it would contradict their headline: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/harry-redknapp-cleared-of-tax-fraud-zfnhqngl8j7

Out of interest, the BBC's article said on it said:

BBC wrote:
Following the verdicts, former Spurs chairman Lord Sugar told BBC Radio 5 Live: "If this was Harry Smith or Harry Brown, it would never have gone to court. This is an attempt by the authorities to make an example of a high profile personality which has backfired.


That's probably not in The Times article (but its behind a paywall so I don't care).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
explorerJC




Joined: 20 Oct 2005
Posts: 15684
Location: Farthingstone

PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 9:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

GrahamO wrote:
Well all the papers put titles which often have content which is at variance with the actual title.

If someone is allegedly tax evading, and all their money is offshore, then its going to take years and millions to get any evidence and even if they do, its by no means clear that a guilty verdict will be achieved.

One of the reasons that HRMC has failed to successfully prosecute many people is that they are found innocent, or that HMRC actually has no evidence but that doesnt make a good headline. Its not actually illegal to keep money offshore in a tax haven as HMRC have found all too often. They operate under the 'no smoke without fire' principle and have shown to be incorrect.

In typical newspaper fashion, the article conflates an accusation with guilt.


No, the article simply quotes the deputy director of HMRC
_________________
www.appliedtri.co.uk Tri and Du coaching

www.naturalrunningform.co.uk Natural Running Form Coach

2018 Training Camps http://www.appliedtri.co.uk/training-camps/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
explorerJC




Joined: 20 Oct 2005
Posts: 15684
Location: Farthingstone

PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 9:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tigger wrote:
GrahamO wrote:
In typical newspaper fashion, the article conflates an accusation with guilt.


Yep.


Nope
_________________
www.appliedtri.co.uk Tri and Du coaching

www.naturalrunningform.co.uk Natural Running Form Coach

2018 Training Camps http://www.appliedtri.co.uk/training-camps/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Tigger




Joined: 25 Apr 2005
Posts: 2789
Location: Hampshire

PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 9:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

explorerJC wrote:
Tigger wrote:
GrahamO wrote:
In typical newspaper fashion, the article conflates an accusation with guilt.


Yep.


Nope


So explain the last bit you quoted "prosecute high-profile people with financial interests in offshore tax havens."

A high-profile person goes on holiday to Jersey and uses £5 to buy £1 stick of rock. What should they be prosecuted for? They are in a tax haven, they have money in the tax haven, they even have strange and unusual transactions in a tax haven using cash. But what are they guilty of?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SloggingScotsman




Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Posts: 2875

PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 10:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tigger wrote:
. But what are they guilty of?
Not buying Edinburgh rock, itís so much better Razz
_________________
Vote Sloggers for Secretary General of the United Nations.

(Thatís humour, as far as I am aware it is not possible for a citizen of a member of the Security Council to have that job)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
explorerJC




Joined: 20 Oct 2005
Posts: 15684
Location: Farthingstone

PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 11:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tigger wrote:
explorerJC wrote:
Tigger wrote:
GrahamO wrote:
In typical newspaper fashion, the article conflates an accusation with guilt.


Yep.


Nope


So explain the last bit you quoted "prosecute high-profile people with financial interests in offshore tax havens."



Not my place to explain. The Commons public accounts committee chair shares the view...
_________________
www.appliedtri.co.uk Tri and Du coaching

www.naturalrunningform.co.uk Natural Running Form Coach

2018 Training Camps http://www.appliedtri.co.uk/training-camps/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
GrahamO




Joined: 10 Apr 2005
Posts: 10129
Location: United Arab Emirates or an airport

PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 11:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

explorerJC wrote:
No, the article simply quotes the deputy director of HMRC


Quoting someone who thinks that an accusation equates to guilt, does not make anyone guilty.

"which has been criticised for failing to prosecute high-profile people with financial interests in offshore tax havens"

They should only prosecute those for whom they have enough evidence to guarantee conviction. The evidence of their terrible conviction rate plainly shows that they are failing to do that, and so are by definition, pursuing innocent individuals over whom they have insufficient evidence.

Failing to prosecute is the right thing to do when they have no evidence to ensure a conviction.
_________________
Arguing with engineers is like wrestling in mud with a pig - after a while you realise they like it
newMan : I don't know why you think you can address me like that! Don't ever reply directly to any of my posts again please.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tigger




Joined: 25 Apr 2005
Posts: 2789
Location: Hampshire

PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 12:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

explorerJC wrote:
Tigger wrote:
explorerJC wrote:
Tigger wrote:
GrahamO wrote:
In typical newspaper fashion, the article conflates an accusation with guilt.


Yep.


Nope


So explain the last bit you quoted "prosecute high-profile people with financial interests in offshore tax havens."



Not my place to explain. The Commons public accounts committee chair shares the view...


k
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
explorerJC




Joined: 20 Oct 2005
Posts: 15684
Location: Farthingstone

PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 12:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

GrahamO wrote:
explorerJC wrote:
No, the article simply quotes the deputy director of HMRC


Quoting someone who thinks that an accusation equates to guilt, does not make anyone guilty.

"which has been criticised for failing to prosecute high-profile people with financial interests in offshore tax havens"

They should only prosecute those for whom they have enough evidence to guarantee conviction. The evidence of their terrible conviction rate plainly shows that they are failing to do that, and so are by definition, pursuing innocent individuals over whom they have insufficient evidence.

Failing to prosecute is the right thing to do when they have no evidence to ensure a conviction.


deary me...did you make all that up to prove a point that no one was arguing against?
_________________
www.appliedtri.co.uk Tri and Du coaching

www.naturalrunningform.co.uk Natural Running Form Coach

2018 Training Camps http://www.appliedtri.co.uk/training-camps/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
GrahamO




Joined: 10 Apr 2005
Posts: 10129
Location: United Arab Emirates or an airport

PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 1:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What a bizarre response ?

If I were you, I'd give up drinking at work.

You prosecute people if you have evidence. If you haven't then they are not guilty and stay that way. They don't prosecute many rich people because either they have no evidence or there is nothing else to prosecute. the 'belief' of the PAC is not evidence and is just speculation by politicians.
_________________
Arguing with engineers is like wrestling in mud with a pig - after a while you realise they like it
newMan : I don't know why you think you can address me like that! Don't ever reply directly to any of my posts again please.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
explorerJC




Joined: 20 Oct 2005
Posts: 15684
Location: Farthingstone

PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 1:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

GrahamO wrote:
What a bizarre response ?

If I were you, I'd give up drinking at work.

You prosecute people if you have evidence. If you haven't then they are not guilty and stay that way. They don't prosecute many rich people because either they have no evidence or there is nothing else to prosecute. the 'belief' of the PAC is not evidence and is just speculation by politicians.


Not once in the article did they mention prosecution where there was no evidence to justify such an action; neither did i either assume this may be the case nor did i infer it.

All of that was inferred by you and created by you. Take some responsibility for your posts.

Oh and I appreciate that this has been a struggle for you, but less of the slander please, there's a good lad...
_________________
www.appliedtri.co.uk Tri and Du coaching

www.naturalrunningform.co.uk Natural Running Form Coach

2018 Training Camps http://www.appliedtri.co.uk/training-camps/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    TriTalk.co.uk Forum Index -> Off-Topic All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3
  Share
 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum





Home | About TT | Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions | Advertising | Contact TT
Copyright ©2003-2015 TriTalk®.co.uk. All rights reserved.