Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

100 celebrities named in 'tax dodge'.

«13

Comments

  • Scott Parker, Marcus Bent and Danny Murphy in there. Shock
  • clive said:
    Hayden Mullins is on the list - hope you incuded him.
    No, nor Simon Charlton.
  • What about errr.........corporation tax
  • "The celebs named were not doing anything illegal"

    Government creates a tax-efficiency scheme to help the film industry and wealthy individuals sign-up to it.

    Move along....nothing to see here.
  • Wouldn't believe a single thing that scummy paper says and I certainly would click on a link and give them a hit.
  • Thought it was well known Danny Murphy was I on these film things
  • non-story. UK citizens trying to pay less tax. Just like an ISA. Nothing different.

    Only problem in this particular case is that Ingenious (avertedly or in-avertedly) tried a trick too far. As the article says, all the rest of their schemes (and there have been a few) have all been ok.
  • Sponsored links:


  • There are lots of schemes like this that the rich and famous use in order to avoid paying taxes and they are legal.
    For me there lies the problem, close all the loopholes that make them legal therefore making them illegal and make the buggers pay their tax.
    They won't do it though it's much easier to go after single parents etc.
  • All of those found guilty should be automatically excluded from having contracts with publically owned entities (including the BBC) for at least 10 years. They have tried to rip off the general public so why should we enrich them further.
  • There are lots of schemes like this that the rich and famous use in order to avoid paying taxes and they are legal.
    For me there lies the problem, close all the loopholes that make them legal therefore making them illegal and make the buggers pay their tax.
    They won't do it though it's much easier to go after single parents etc.

    The authorities do go after them, hence this scheme and others being closed down.

    Rich people though can afford good tax experts to find a new loophole to exploit, thus it's an ongoing battle.
  • Just shocked Joey Barton is on there
  • There are lots of schemes like this that the rich and famous use in order to avoid paying taxes and they are legal.
    For me there lies the problem, close all the loopholes that make them legal therefore making them illegal and make the buggers pay their tax.
    They won't do it though it's much easier to go after single parents etc.

    The authorities do go after them, hence this scheme and others being closed down.

    Rich people though can afford good tax experts to find a new loophole to exploit, thus it's an ongoing battle.
    I don't believe they go after them enough.
    How many people who use these schemes are doners to the Tory party, quite a few I would think.
    But Labour also share the blame for not closing the loopholes.
    Blair after all won three elections.
    Corrupt bastads the lot of em.
  • edited June 2017
    Yes I totally agree, but Blair's Labour and Corbyn's Labour are not the same. The corrupt establishment don't want us to vote for Corbyn.
  • edited June 2017
    If you look at the accounts of the entity and the incredible amounts that were borrowed against their investment, to suggest it was remotely similar to an ISA or other tax scheme (eg EIS) is highly disingenuous - if it looks and quacks like a duck (or tax dodge in this case) then it probably is.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Ingenious have many such funds and variants. It is just one scheme that has been ruled against. The government set the rules up, and they have just interpreted them.

    A similar non U.K. Scheme led to Michael Hutchence make most of his money as he invested as a tax write off in a film called crocodile Dundee and made more from that than his musical career
  • The issue here is that the entity was created with the express purpose of evading tax, not invest in films which happened to bring with them a tax incentive.

    The amounts they will end up owing will be multiples of the tax they saved due to the leverage - suspect many will go bust.
  • Hang the rich bastards OR have Diane sit on em! Grrrr...
  • The issue here is that the entity was created with the express purpose of evading tax, not invest in films which happened to bring with them a tax incentive.

    The amounts they will end up owing will be multiples of the tax they saved due to the leverage - suspect many will go bust.

    Good
  • Curious why The Sun is publishing the story now - the list of participants has been in the public domain for years.
  • The ruling was this week.
  • There are lots of schemes like this that the rich and famous use in order to avoid paying taxes and they are legal.
    For me there lies the problem, close all the loopholes that make them legal therefore making them illegal and make the buggers pay their tax.
    They won't do it though it's much easier to go after single parents etc.

    Unless I am very much mistaken the "film scheme incentives" and tax breaks were brought in by Tony Blair and a Labour government. There were many proper schemes set up and some dodgy ones. This would appear to be a dodgy one and HMRC have challenged it and won. So HMRC are doing the right thing here. Single parents have nothing to do with the issue and is an emotive irrelevance.
  • If you look at the accounts of the entity and the incredible amounts that were borrowed against their investment, to suggest it was remotely similar to an ISA or other tax scheme (eg EIS) is highly disingenuous - if it looks and quacks like a duck (or tax dodge in this case) then it probably is.

    I thought it was an EIS Scheme.

    I cant see what the problem is. These schemes are all legal & have pre-approval by HMRC. I believe the one is question just went a bit too far & why HMRC challenged it. The investors are doing nothing illegal & it was the investment firm (Ingenious) who were at fault.

    There isn't anyone on here who wouldn't do the same in their position. Most of us are not in the position to have a few million spare, but if you had a spare £50k & put it in an ISA or a Pension so that you didn't have to pay tax on the interest does that make you a tax dodger ?
  • As for the individuals, I assume they were advised to invest in this scheme by their accountants/advisers, and probably paid no attention to the detail of it





  • If you look at the accounts of the entity and the incredible amounts that were borrowed against their investment, to suggest it was remotely similar to an ISA or other tax scheme (eg EIS) is highly disingenuous - if it looks and quacks like a duck (or tax dodge in this case) then it probably is.

    I thought it was an EIS Scheme.

    I cant see what the problem is. These schemes are all legal & have pre-approval by HMRC. I believe the one is question just went a bit too far & why HMRC challenged it. The investors are doing nothing illegal & it was the investment firm (Ingenious) who were at fault.

    There isn't anyone on here who wouldn't do the same in their position. Most of us are not in the position to have a few million spare, but if you had a spare £50k & put it in an ISA or a Pension so that you didn't have to pay tax on the interest does that make you a tax dodger ?
    It had as much in common with an EIS scheme as Johnnie Jackson has with Usain Bolt.

    You should dig out the accounts - it is frightening the risks they took.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!