Beeroclock wrote:I guess there are solutions if the authorities seriously want to make it more difficult to avoid tax. But they will upset a lot of vested interests and these authorities will not have the mandate/clout to take such a stand.
My thinking is that they can for the mainstream citizenry, but for the creative there will always be other options.
I’m not sure about upsetting ‘vested interests’ or whom they might be, but it would upset a lot of the better off, and ‘turkeys don’t vote for Christmas’ do they?
Even now the UK has a coalition government, and what with the reported growing threat from UKIP the Tories are never going to start persecuting and alienating, a significant element of their loyal established vote.
Beeroclock wrote:It just makes me wonder really what is the point of having a progressive income tax scale in the first place.
Because it covers 99.9% of the population, in a relatively straight-forward fashion?
VAT/GST or whatever its called in various countries should be replaced with a higher income tax.
Can't get more "progressive" than that
I appreciate that is at least somewhat tongue in cheek, but, do you remember the 70s ‘brain-drain’, when Labour brought in up to 95% tax, and hence all the talent fled, with a large segment going to the US?
re: your linked article. If people think ‘a man’s tax affairs’ are a national issue of concern, then corporate tax affairs are akin to putting nitromethane into the incentive to get creative. Pursue it how ever you wish, but those funds are going to be off like a rocket <geddit>
PNGMK wrote: Actually a consumption tax is probably better than an income tax that people can work around.
You reckon? Brits have been going on ‘booze-cruises’ over to the French Channel ports for perhaps 30 years now. Go on a booze-cruise day-trip, load up as much as your axles will bear, and you’re sorted. I think I previously recounted a story of a friends mother who, having to cater for a daughter and a nieces wedding, took a Land-Rover+horse-box over to France, where she proceeded to load it with a copious number of cases of various wines (maybe a hundred?). She was stopped on her way back into the UK, as they could not believe that the quantity met the test of ‘being for personal use’. They wanted to stick her a huge tax-bill. But being a hard-as-nails farmer’s wife she told them where to go, returned to France, then drove all the way down to Spain, maybe 800 miles, and came back in that way via Southampton. It goes back to the point of, threaten to punish people hard enough, and they will find a way around it.
- re: consumption tax? For one thing that kills tourism, it is the precise opposite of ‘Tax-free for Tourists’. How many Brits have been on holiday, or even weekend breaks, to Norway or Sweden. Why is that? Their insane consumption taxes.
Beeroclock wrote: if it's my country and I'm the King, I would just make these tax havens illegal. Any person or company found using them, directly or indirectly, to face fines and/or jail. oh, and no duty free shopping either.
But you couldn’t, because they’re not under your countries, and not under your jurisdiction. Because if you were a UK king you’d only have token-power, as you’ve given it all away to Parliament.
p.s. You’d ban duty free? Interesting, and a genuine question ... So you don’t shop in Duty Free, on ethical grounds?
@ GND. Yes, that is correct. The reporting requirements for US citizens can often outweigh the likely net-margin a bank can expect to make. So, apparently, US citizens have far fewer options regarding banking/investing overseas. Just one example of citizens abroad, paying the price of popular domestic/back-home policies?