Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#1
a topical question....
Who said:
"""""Of course, you can make a perfectly good case for wealthy people paying more, and around the edges - National Insurance and so on - I was content that they did, but I wanted to preserve, in terms of competitive tax rates, the essential Thatcher/Howe/Lawson legacy. I wanted wealthy people to feel at home and welcomed in the UK so that they could bring more business, create jobs and spread some of that wealth around."""""
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#2
i am thinking teflon tony but knowing barry's sense of irony it could have been that nice scottish chap that succeeded him as prime minister.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#3
Tony Blair indeed.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#4
Very fair minded of you Barry to clearly associate your aims and aspirations with such as he, and indeed he is doing tolerably well for himself yet. I am so glad he welcomes himself, in effect.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#5
Nice to see also that Messrs Blair and Livingstone are not above arranging their affairs so as to pay the minimum in tax on their earnings. I reckon they pay their fair share, so why not?
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#6
Do you mean the form of company that they arrange so that they can be paid other than by PAYE Peter?
My main gripe with this arrangement is that it is often used by pensioned public servants post redundancy in order for them to circumvent the rule that prevents them drawing down their pension while earning under PAYE. There is one such, as an example, currently working the wheeze on the IoW. Six figure salary plus the pension he would not be getting if he worked in the normal way. Good for him, but at a cost to the public purse that there were rules to prevent what is in effect double payment.
The fact that there is some sophisticated duelling going on between the tax man and his 'foe', the expensive 'clever' accountant, is all well and good if it were not for the in-built political bias that insists that the tax man must always lose. All talk of tax simplification will remain just that, all talk, until a way is found for this catch-weight nature of the conflict is sustained.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#7
Quite right, Blair it was.
Simpler and lower taxes is the best way to get rid of tax dodges Tom. The complex tax code makes it easy for schemes to be devised.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#8
T. Blair's statement there is just one proof of how naive he was.
Wealthy people usually know how to remain wealthy, and become even more wealthy.
We see now where it all led us to!
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#9
It did not lead us to this Alexander, poor management of the national finances for an extended period by Brown did that.
Blair was right on the button for once.
#10
Blair was never naive!!
