• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

Keir Starmer at it again..

Yeah, good point. I'd think much more of her if she'd never had a real job like most of the real socialists.
 
To be slightly serious for a moment I have a huge issue with professional politicians of any flavour who believe they can govern people without any understanding of life for the majority of people.

That includes Boris, Jez, Blair and many others. It's to the huge credit of our current government that it has by far the lowest number of privately educated cabinet members ever.
 
Tredman said:
To be slightly serious for a moment I have a huge issue with professional politicians of any flavour who believe they can govern people without any understanding of life for the majority of people.

That includes Boris, Jez, Blair and many others. It's to the huge credit of our current government that it has by far the lowest number of privately educated cabinet members ever.
Click to expand...
Thick cunts like me then.😂
 
jlo said:
I don't particularly like the onslaught you're getting on this Epsom, you have set out clearly why you are commenting on Rayner's case. I also doubt I share your politics more generally but can accept your position.

Genuinely though, I would be interested particularly on your view of Farage's case, much more so than any much older examples because a) it's more timely than those and only a few months before Rayner's case, b) it's looking likely this is the next Prime Minster we are talking about c) you've got more expert knowledge on this area than many of us
Click to expand...
Ok, let’s have a go at this.

Farage has been very cute, played his hand cleverly and as difficult as it is to accept, morality aside I don’t think he done anything wrong.

He’s taken advantage of not being married and done what a lot of people in that situation with useful collective assets would (and imv should) do. Pretty obvious what the game is but it’s not illegal, and it does have major advantages over married couples in areas of avoiding stamp duty AND CGT. It does look like he hasn’t fucked up either in the areas people normally get caught out such as living together, subletting, registering an incorrect primary address and even really stupid things like registering to the wrong council on the electoral register. Unlike Angela, it looks like he’s watertight on all of those.

Worth pointing out the tories did do some very unTory things in closing loopholes. A standard practice was to buy an additional house in the (unmarried advantage again here) partner’s name, register that as their primary address, (avoiding higher SD), live together at house A, get the builders in to redevelop house B and nip round once a week to pick up the post as partner has registered everything there, then flog house B as soon as the overhaul is complete and builders cleared off, pocket all of the profit tax free being a ‘first’ property and not subject to Capital Gains Tax at all!! Couple pool resources and move onto the next project… and the next… and so on.

A lot of the changes were driven by anti-money laundering regulations but Michael Gove understood the housing sector and strangely enough for someone like him really seemed to care and want to implement change. The higher levels of SD on additional properties and things like renters reform bill and so on are having a major impact.

The banks and Land Registry have got their acts together too, no bank would let anyone borrow money nowadays on a property flipped quickly because the risks of money laundering involvement is too high. Properties can (and have been) seized from the new, innocent owner. At the very least the Land Registry would automatically trigger an investigation.

Sorting the next bit around social housing is going to be tricky and there is no doubt the loss of AR will have a negative effect on that, but there is still hope and at least some of the groundwork around tax evasion etc is paying off. Keep squeezing and keep closing loopholes and we might just get there.

So anyway, not condoning anything, just saying on this one Nige is in the clear, and let’s face it on that side morality doesn’t play much of a part so the punches aren’t going to land too heavily unfortunately.
 
Your dislike of left leaning northern women doesn't half lead you to tie yourself up in knots.
 
Tredman said:
Your dislike of left leaning northern women doesn't half lead you to tie yourself up in knots.
Click to expand...
And you’ve an unpleasant habit of telling people what you think they are and what they are thinking.

If debating the points is beneath you fair enough, but either join in or don’t and cut out the personal insults.
 
EpsomWolf said:
And you’ve an unpleasant habit of telling people what you think they are and what they are thinking.

If debating the points is beneath you fair enough, but either join in or don’t and cut out the personal insults.
Click to expand...
There's nothing to debate. It's a clear a double standard as you would wish to see.
 
EpsomWolf said:
Ok, let’s have a go at this.

Farage has been very cute, played his hand cleverly and as difficult as it is to accept, morality aside I don’t think he done anything wrong.

He’s taken advantage of not being married and done what a lot of people in that situation with useful collective assets would (and imv should) do. Pretty obvious what the game is but it’s not illegal, and it does have major advantages over married couples in areas of avoiding stamp duty AND CGT. It does look like he hasn’t fucked up either in the areas people normally get caught out such as living together, subletting, registering an incorrect primary address and even really stupid things like registering to the wrong council on the electoral register. Unlike Angela, it looks like he’s watertight on all of those.

Worth pointing out the tories did do some very unTory things in closing loopholes. A standard practice was to buy an additional house in the (unmarried advantage again here) partner’s name, register that as their primary address, (avoiding higher SD), live together at house A, get the builders in to redevelop house B and nip round once a week to pick up the post as partner has registered everything there, then flog house B as soon as the overhaul is complete and builders cleared off, pocket all of the profit tax free being a ‘first’ property and not subject to Capital Gains Tax at all!! Couple pool resources and move onto the next project… and the next… and so on.

A lot of the changes were driven by anti-money laundering regulations but Michael Gove understood the housing sector and strangely enough for someone like him really seemed to care and want to implement change. The higher levels of SD on additional properties and things like renters reform bill and so on are having a major impact.

The banks and Land Registry have got their acts together too, no bank would let anyone borrow money nowadays on a property flipped quickly because the risks of money laundering involvement is too high. Properties can (and have been) seized from the new, innocent owner. At the very least the Land Registry would automatically trigger an investigation.

Sorting the next bit around social housing is going to be tricky and there is no doubt the loss of AR will have a negative effect on that, but there is still hope and at least some of the groundwork around tax evasion etc is paying off. Keep squeezing and keep closing loopholes and we might just get there.

So anyway, not condoning anything, just saying on this one Nige is in the clear, and let’s face it on that side morality doesn’t play much of a part so the punches aren’t going to land too heavily unfortunately.
Click to expand...
Thanks EW! As much as tax avoidance can be in the realms of millions, our system means just £1 of tax evasion outweighs any of that. It is a shame the public doesn't get more of this morality argument on avoidance shoved down it's throats especially when people pretend to be better than it and then show to be a hypocrite.

I don't get Tred's attacks on you for stating the facts, and I'm sure I share more of his politics. It doesn't encourage debate and I'm sure next time you'll just not bother which isn't healthy.
 
It's all perspective isn't it, Angela Rayner clearly bought a house, just ended up paying the wrong tax on it. Mistake or not she's probably quite rightly lost her job over it.

Whereas Farage said he'd bought a house, and clearly likely he did, he just used his partner to pay for it so he wouldn't have to pay the extra tax on it.

One is potentially negligent over the tax, the other has quite clearly chosen to avoid it. I'm pretty sure one of these two people did this deliberately, I don't think it takes a genius to work out which.

However it might be the one though who has a ltd company to funnel his TV pay through, so he doesn't have to pay 40% income tax, instead of the 25% in corporation tax he gets by doing so.

Maybe!
 
Last edited:
the reality is that those that intend to avoid paying tax on a religious basis don't usually make mistakes like Rayner did because they do this stuff all the time and use advisors to assist them.

and most consultants I've worked with have used limited companies in the way JR above describes to limit the tax liability. It's often an individual hired on a day rate basis for their individual skill-set who can then turn themselves into a low paid employee of a company that they effectively* own (*a.n.other family member may own part of the Company for appearance sake, may even get paid a salary for a 'pretend' role, you know, sometimes just enough to make use of their otherwise unused personal tax allowance). I can remember maybe 15 years ago or so asking a fellow consultant what salary he put through his Company and he said £10k. Laughable.
 
Jack Regan said:
It's all perspective isn't it, Angela Rayner clearly bought a house, just ended up paying the wrong tax on it. Mistake or not she's probably quite rightly lost her job over it.

Whereas Farage said he'd bought a house, and clearly likely he did, he just used his partner to pay for it so he wouldn't have to pay the extra tax on it.

One is potentially negligent over the tax, the other has quite clearly chosen to avoid it. I'm pretty sure one of these two people did this deliberately, I don't think it takes a genius to work out which.

However it might be the one though who has a ltd company to funnel his TV pay through, so he doesn't have to pay 40% income tax, instead of the 25% in corporation tax he gets by doing so.

Maybe!
Click to expand...

Fundamentally though, Farage hasn’t bought another house. Or done anything illegal. From that point on everything else is about morality regarding him and we all have our own views about that.

AR played her hand exactly the same as Farage and every single one of us is doing, but she messed up. Whether intentionally deceitful or a naive error will likely be influenced by your political leanings, but the great spokesperson for all things Left James O’Brien tore into her and explained why it was unforgivable and she had to go in a way that put all other explanations to shame.

Back to Farage and his Limited company, it may be unpalatable but it makes perfect sense and who here wouldn’t have done the same?

But we’re tipping here into Andy’s ‘Financial Literacy’ thread again. As we see even small personal growth that opens opportunities, and the larger the growth the more the opportunities, and the true characters of all individuals manifest themselves in ways of tax avoidance, tax evasion, greed, and so on.

It’s morality, or rather the lack of, that hits so much harder when it comes from the left and why double standards get applied, and unfortunately why attacks on Farage etc are ineffective until such times as laws are actually broken.
 
The government has plenty of ways for people to avoid paying tax eg ISAs, or pension contributions coming out of gross salary. These are linked to specific policy goals., and nobody would bat an eyelid at a politician using them in this way.

What Farage has done isnt that. So yes, its 100% legal, and within the letter of the law, but not in the spirit. Rayner is the opposite, She broke the law, but seemingly because she had the wrong advice, or no proper advice at all. Its easy to envisage that, had she been given the right advice she would have followed it.

So theres a difference in approach between 'I bent the rules and got away with it' versus 'I fucked up, so Im resigning'.

I know which approach I'd prefer from politicians.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Wellen Wolf
Airwolf 90 report by Johnny Phillips 5 years ago.
Replies
1
Views
258
Bertiewolf
B
Deutsch Wolf
Bournemouth 1-0 Wolves: Verdict Thread
4 5 6
Replies
105
Views
4K
pavlosmacwolf
pavlosmacwolf
Jinky
Wolves 0-4 Man City (16/08/2025) - Verdict Thread
4 5 6
Replies
100
Views
5K
Lupo
Lupo
C
Coach Pereira seems lost early
Replies
1
Views
462
Shotbybothsides
Shotbybothsides
spanish Wolf
Works in Molineux?
Replies
14
Views
650
Keef
Keef
Back
Top