Smear or in the public interest? Irrelevant or conflict of interest?
Printable View
Smear or in the public interest? Irrelevant or conflict of interest?
Fishy Rishi, absolutely in the public interest and clear conflict of interest.
I see his wife has decided to pay UK taxes on her overseas income now.
More fishy business https://twitter.com/mexcludeduk/stat...pLQeyW_90_I2WA
Oh and Fishi Sunak was an MP for 6.5 years, a UK government minister for 3.5 years and Chancellor of the Exchequer for 1.5 years - all while holding permanent residency of the United States.
And he was so Dishy....Not!!!
On the day Richard Osman leavs pointless we discuss this?
My God where are you people's sense of priorities
Identity politics, I remember folk going after Cherie after their dodgy £6.45million purchase . I'm sure if you dig deep enough there's tax avoidance everywhere it's a natural thing to do ( not give yer money away if you can find a loophole)
Gotta feeling this is a nos 10 leak .
What u gotta factor in Rishi is a Cummings man and appointment.
Still think he's got something about him
Such a ridiculous statement. That's why he spent billions supporting peoples jobs in lockdown, has risen the minimum wage significantly, raised the National Insurance tax thresholds by record amounts and just introduced a progressive tax policy to fund the NHS to help fund social care for those who earn the least.
On the wider question, it's both. Something of a smear, but certainly in the public interest.
I refuse to give any UK Government much credit for what they did with Covid - they were duty bound to introduce things like the furlough scheme. Are all of those people who have been critical of the recent spring statement/budget voicing ridiculous opinions as well?
No 10 death of a thousand cuts . Cummings/ appointment mate hung out to dry, pity besides his wealth I think he'd make a decent first black UK PM .
Just imagine what would be happening if a non Tory Government were behaving like this.
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...-non-dom-javid
The usual dose of healthy scepticism should be applied to this but some economists claiming that the UK would lose £7bn under Labours non dom plans. I think the reality is that if we force someone to do 100% of their tax in one country or another, then we risk getting 0% more often than 100%. I must say, it doesn't really strike me as fair that money made in India on the back of Indian workers is now paid to the British state. A whiff of colonialism about it.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/othe...b56bd5fa0207dc
When you say some economists presumably you mean the company mentioned in the article, Blick Rothenberg, the tax and advisory firm.
Here is Blick Rothenberg, the tax and advisory firm advising non-doms on how they could help them minimise their tax liability.
https://www.blickrothenberg.com/serv...non-domiciled/
Then we get 7 billion less. The Tories are walking a tightrope of 'greatest country in the world' and 'rich people will leave if we charge them a penny more'. It doesn't wash with me and increasingly won't with the voting public as their living standards are squeezed.
The fact that they charge Non Dom's 30k to avoid millions of tax just makes it more demoralising for working people, another massive flashing neon sign saying 'the system is rigged in favour of rich people'
Hate to change the back story and I know it's been a while since any other party had to actually govern and make real decisions UK wide, but it's not just "The Tories" that allow it of course. Multiple governments have. And my suspicion is that this is because removing it would lose the treasury more money.
I wouldn't take the loss of £7bn so lightly. What would you cut back on? Benefits? NHS? Education?
No easy decisions to make here, which I suppose is my point. These stories get spun with populist zeal, but the reality is quite different.
£ 7 billion is about 18/19 % of what was spent on our “world beating” track and trace isn’t it?
Useful bit of analysis that previous restrictions by George Osborne, which presumably weren't colonial did not lead to a great non-dom migration.
https://www.lse.ac.uk/News/Latest-ne...pr-22/Non-doms
Most seem embedded in some of the highest priced property in the country including Premier League superstar hotspots. Who knows if people decide to return to the US or India then there may be a trickle down to more affordable housing which should be good.
Personally I think that taxation policy should come in coherent packages. This seems a bit opportunist. I also agree that stories get spun with populist zeal and the reality is quite different. Probably more pertinent to the Rwandan thread though.
Sunak was riding very high in popularity polls not too long ago, but he's come under fire from the papers and Labour and his popularity has plummeted.
He was a shoe in for the next prime minister if Johnson was brought down, but now I don't think so.
No, that oft-quoted piece of misinformation has been debunked numerous times
https://fullfact.org/online/track-an...-project-cost/
https://fullfact.org/health/nhs-test-and-trace-cost/
https://fullfact.org/online/37bn-test-trace-spending/
Well now they have a decision to make Boris , Rishi who is better option , or the dark horse Ben Wallace , none have legs like Angela though, so her legs get my vote this week in the world of serous politics and no policy , unless Rishi is hiding something under those tracky bottoms ?