Member Since: 31 Dec 2005
Location: South West
Posts: 23832
Garagegmx wrote:
I agree with you Lid. If the scam was a legal loophole, then Barlow wouldn't have to pay back the money. Therefore the tax avoidance was illegal:
I CBA to look it up now, it's too late, but the correct term is something like Non Permissible or Non Allowable.
If it was illegal, HMRC would be technically party to an Illegal activity. As it was they that allowed the Tax Relief to be claimed.2006 D3 HSE (Original & still the best)-GONE
2010 D4 HSE (A bit bling)-GONE
2014 D4 HSE (Almost too bling)-GONE
2015 D4 HSE (A heated what?)-GONE
2016 D4 Landmark (Written Off)-GONE
2016 D4 Landmark (Surely the last!) PD1881 rims-GONE
2017 FFRR SDV8 Autobiography (now semi-retired)
I just tried looking it up, but cannot find a decent explanation yet. One description says:
Quote:
They claimed tax relief on greater losses than they invested in the partnerships. The return on the partners’ ‘investment’ was the tax relief, which was considerably larger than their cash contribution.
My point is very simple, perhaps too simple - are these loses real, or is the money somewhere else still and so not really lost to them at all?
12th May 2014 10:54 pm
LT
Member Since: 31 Dec 2005
Location: South West
Posts: 23832
Whilst I think the Icebreaker scheme that Barlow invested in was based around Song Writing royalties and not Film making. The tax relief is probably identical.
This is a simple explanation of the old Film Partnership plan:
Who can we thank for this type of scheme coming into existence in the first place? Good old Tony Blair and his Chancellor Gordon Brown.
A classic example of just how "Tory" New Labour really were. A lovely Tax Relief for the wealthy. Good for Range Rover sales though
Unfortunately, Gordon wasn't sharp enough to realise how ridiculously open to abuse such schemes were.
It's a disgrace that the current Government has taken so long to clampdown on improper use of schemes that allow tax relief as the principle reason for investors to partake. They really do need to be be much more strictly regulated, so that they work as the Government/HMRC intend. It wouldn't be very difficult to do so.
Goodnight all 2006 D3 HSE (Original & still the best)-GONE
2010 D4 HSE (A bit bling)-GONE
2014 D4 HSE (Almost too bling)-GONE
2015 D4 HSE (A heated what?)-GONE
2016 D4 Landmark (Written Off)-GONE
2016 D4 Landmark (Surely the last!) PD1881 rims-GONE
2017 FFRR SDV8 Autobiography (now semi-retired)
12th May 2014 11:20 pm
DG Site Moderator
Member Since: 12 Dec 2005
Location: The Gaff
Posts: 50978
Deflect.. deflect ..deflect ....you can only do that for so many years ...tbh the most telling aspect of this story is that Cameron called Carr immoral for his scheme which is still legal ....and has today loved up to his best Tory tax dodging mate Barlow.
Also ....notable in your link
Quote:
Once such mandates are announced, financing companies look at creating schemes which offer attractive terms to investors - usually at the same time as meeting government requirements, but sometimes sailing close to the wind or making flawed assumptions about the likely return on investment.
Then it is over to advisers, IFAs and tax accountants, agents and managers who are incentivised to promote the schemes to investors. Again, while many advisers are squeaky clean, some have been less than honest about the nature of such schemes or the likelihood of returns - note again that tax advantages depend on whether HMRC accept the structure and the schemes deliver the planned benefits. - See more at: http://www.investorcentral.co.uk/news/2013...LIQfi.dpuf
so a decent scheme set out with the intention of the greater good in fact exploited by those
Quote:
advisers, IFAs and tax accountants, agents and managers
Member Since: 31 Dec 2005
Location: South West
Posts: 23832
Nicely taken out of context DG
It's the companies who set up and operate these scheme that need to be far more tightly regulated. With HMRC checking them out thoroughly prior to allowing the Tax Relief.
As for advisers etc. being the exploitive The full paragraph was:
"Then it is over to advisers, IFAs and tax accountants, agents and managers who are incentivised to promote the schemes to investors. Again, while many advisers are squeaky clean, some have been less than honest about the nature of such schemes or the likelihood of returns - note again that tax advantages depend on whether HMRC accept the structure and the schemes deliver the planned benefits."
As I said, Barlow was given bad advice. Remind yourself of how he made his millions. By singing, writing songs and pouncing about on a stage. He's not a business man, I bet he knows next to nothing about our tax regime. He relies on his advisers.
There are plenty of advisers who aren't as thorough as they should have been when recommending such plans. No surprise, there are good and bad in all fields.
He's a good target for the press though, as he's a celebrity and seen to be matey with Cameron.
Of course it's hypocritical of Cameron to support a mate and put down a critic. He's a human and a politician, what do you expect?
I really am going to bed now. 2006 D3 HSE (Original & still the best)-GONE
2010 D4 HSE (A bit bling)-GONE
2014 D4 HSE (Almost too bling)-GONE
2015 D4 HSE (A heated what?)-GONE
2016 D4 Landmark (Written Off)-GONE
2016 D4 Landmark (Surely the last!) PD1881 rims-GONE
2017 FFRR SDV8 Autobiography (now semi-retired)
13th May 2014 12:20 am
Phantomf4
Member Since: 01 Jan 2014
Location: Renfrewshire
Posts: 201
I find myself drawn to both sides of this debate, as I like both Jimmy Carr and Gary Barlow.
For me the answer is simple, pay back the money plus any fines due and move on. Trying to turn this into a political argument is pointless. Both guys are entertainers and earn loads more than I do. I don't blame anyone for trying to avoid paying tax, but if the schemes are dodgy, lets get them closed down pronto and the unpaid tax collected.
And lets keep things in perspective, all of the various "scams" these entertainers entered into, either knowingly or through dodgy advice pale into insignificance compared with the amount "avoided" by messrs Green and Ecclestone!
Forgive my dodgy memory, but wasn't there a scheme some years back whereby other lauded celebrities found an overwhelming love for forests? I seem to recall even Saint Terry of Wogan was involved in one of those......
big or small need to be dealt with you or I would get "done" either the dose taken off (or given back)or you are fined..
Why is it that if you are some sort of celebrity you are immune ?
As I said previously FINE the T.W.A.T....BREXIT - done properly.
Right now ...We need Government - not Politics
Save the Dipstick Flagbearer-keep it simple, less likely to fail campaign-agenda items:Starting Handles, Acetylene Lamps.
Founder: Dipsticks-R-Us Inc
D3 HSE-perfectly formed, passenger friendly...has real DIPSTICK
Jag XK-but sadly no DIPSTICK...HUGE design fault
FL2 has DIPSTICK..."real comfort in rear seats"
VW Golf wondermobile (?)..has real DIPSTICK
Morris Minor..original DIPSTICK technology..and a real KEY.
13th May 2014 5:41 am
Moo D3 Decade
Member Since: 13 Aug 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 14429
Who says he's immune? He's done nothing wrong other than accept bad advice to reduce his tax bill.
Most journalists are self employed, it would be interesting to review their tax affairs and expense claims.
Just because he's in the public eye doesn't mean he should be hung out to dry any more than you or I.
The tax system in the UK is in a mess and HMRC need to get a grip on it but until they do people from all walks of life will find ways to avoid paying more tax than they need to whether its £5000 or £5m.
I'm sure there are many on here that do it now, whether it is using ISA's or tools to reduce inheritance tax. Whats that saying? 'Let he be without sin cast the first stone'.
13th May 2014 6:36 am
Garagegmx
Member Since: 09 Feb 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 916
Everyone should be equal, but the more you have the more you get away with and Barlow is an example of this, not the other way round.
Ultimately, good or bad advice, he's responsible for his own tax affairs. I don't suppose for one second he went to a reputable and renownwed firm of accountants for tax advice. They wouldn't go anywhere near these schemes.
Also I'd hesitate to mention this scheme is the same vein as ISA's or anything else. There's absolutely no comparison,
And yes, I am without sin, so here the first stone Mr. Barlow.
13th May 2014 6:50 am
DG Site Moderator
Member Since: 12 Dec 2005
Location: The Gaff
Posts: 50978
Here's the case page with a download link for those who like all the gory detail
Member Since: 20 Feb 2006
Location: Here
Posts: 10865
Some will understand this statement
The UK needs to be very careful as those who foot the round will choose to leave the table soon
the 5% to 45% was not enough
13th May 2014 7:14 am
Moo D3 Decade
Member Since: 13 Aug 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 14429
So true!
Simplify tax: flat 20% for all.
13th May 2014 7:33 am
ruggedpeak
Member Since: 10 Jun 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 1625
Ken wrote:
Some will understand this statement
The UK needs to be very careful as those who foot the round will choose to leave the table soon
the 5% to 45% was not enough
To where exactly? France? Nope, they are all coming over here. US? Get taxed on all global earnings? Yeah right.
They have nowhere to go. They can't hide money away and parking it in traditional tax havens ain't too bright since the CIA, FBI, IRS and every major intel agency in the world is looking at them for both tax revenue and terror funds. Swiss bank accounts are now more holey than their cheese, so no hiding there.
This is just like the "ooo don't tax the City or they'll leave". Just pandering to tax dodgers using fear. If they don't like it then off, but they won't. They could probably get away without paying much tax in Somalia or Yemen but they'd rather just live parasitically in comfort here.Tony
Club RLD Wheel Protector & Sump Guard
Club 4x4 Info activated
13th May 2014 9:34 am
simon645
Member Since: 22 Feb 2012
Location: cumbria
Posts: 141
Discoed wrote:
A real credit to society
Click image to enlarge
GUILTY as Charged Barlow, send the gong back and PAY UP
13th May 2014 12:14 pm
Pelyma
Member Since: 06 Jan 2005
Location: Patching, Sussex
Posts: 15496
I'm not sure we know enough to say he received bad advice, he received advice that HMRC have subsequently prevented from working. Most of you on here will have avoided tax at some stage, be it by an ISA or a pension a few may even have used trusts or esoteric investments such as a VCT or an EIS. over the years I have avoided enough tax for my clients to be firmly off HMRC's Christmas card list.
My clients' come to me and pay me for my advice on how to maximise their wealth and to do that I will exploit tax legislation as much as investment performance. Sometimes I can achieve what a client is looking to do and sometimes I can't. For those that I can't I often have discussions regarding why I can't help and what the issues are with schemes that purport to achieve the goal.
Over the years there have been many very clever schemes to avoid Stamp Duty Land Tax, Long Term Care Costs, Income Tax, Capital Gains Tax and Inheritance Tax. As LT said earlier, some you know are too good to be true, they all come with Councel's opinion that they work but with experience you know they are a whole bag of hurt. I work with ordinary people who are very wealthy but not in the league of Mr Barlow. They have the time and interest to examine the solutions themselves, what I have seen of advisers that work with "stars" they don't have that much contact with the individual only their team around them. I very much doubt that Gary Barlow had the foggiest what was happening or even how much he was paying for the advice.
Should Gary Barlow pay up? Yes he needs and undoubtedly will pay up what he owes, but I don't feel he needs to hand back his gong. Before anyone starts slagging him off I suggest you look at your own situation and see what tax you try to avoid be it now or in the future.DS3 TDV6 HSE - Silver with Alpaca (old one) Gone
DS3 TDV6 HSE- Silver with Alpaca (new one) Gone
D4 HSE Lux - Montalcino Red Gone
Porsche Cayenne V8 Diesel S
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
...tbh the most telling aspect of this story is that Cameron called Carr immoral for his scheme which is 
....and has today loved up to his best Tory tax dodging mate Barlow.
off, but they won't. They could probably get away without paying much tax in Somalia or Yemen but they'd rather just live parasitically in comfort here.
