Camoron's response when asked by Tom Bradby what he thought of Gary Barlow's tax situation I made an exception yesterday because it was a very specific case where the details seem to have been published and it was a particularly egregious example of an avoidance scheme that seemed to me to be wrong and I made that clear.

I think the rules of the road here should be pretty frank. Tax evasion is illegal and should be pursued with all vigour by the authorities[/i

So what about Ashcroft's tax situation then Dave? There's been plenty published about that

What about your father's tax situation? You know, the one you benefited to the tune of £300k from

Apparently No 10 are "considering" publishing the tax affairs of ministers - yeah right

Sign of the times, mediocrity is seen as genius these days.'"

Oh, and Cameron is a bell end.

Which current comedian(s) would you pay your money to go watch?

Not saying he's brilliant by the way, just that whenever a comedian is mentioned on here, there's a steady stream of posters afterwards saying how unfunny they are.'"

Agreed, so is his mate Gideon and the likes of Gove are f'kin 'dangerous'

Quite like Kevin Bridges, but in the main I am old school and still think the likes of Tommy Cooper, Eric Morecombe, Bob Monkhouse (politics apart) deserved the 'genius' title.

I often watch comedy shows on telly and you often see a really funny one, but I tend top forget their names.'"

The ones I was brought up on are mostly no longer here, the likes of Bill Hicks, Andy Kaufman and the old stager Jack Burns. I am not too familiar with current American comedians.

Well that is what I would do for anyone who sets up a company simply to avoid tax as opposed to trade. It's been common practice for years for self employed contractors to do as Carr has done. They are clearly being paid as individuals for their services and are just using the company to avoid tax.

I still think some sort of legislation about what is tax free as opposed to what isn't tax free would be far easier to police. ISA's and pension contributions tax free - fine. Pay yourself a pittance of a salary from your company and take income a different way thus paying less tax - tax it as income.

Not only that, but there have been several cases we've heard about (and thus dozens we haven't) where top earners eg council executives etc. have been allowed to "retire" on full pension and then carry on doing the same job as before, but as an outside consultant provided by the company now being paid by the Council to provide the service.

The problem with any attempt to simplify the tax system is that there will always be losers when allowances and exemptions are removed, and not necessarily the rich. Usually these exemptions were introduced for a valid reason, but have been exploited.

"Pastygate" was a fairly good example of a tax change that initially had good intentions, was mainly targeted at the supermarkets, but went horribly wrong because it hit the good guys as well.

Don't know if this has been posted but there's a terrific article in the New Statesman, by a Tory no less, on the tax avoidance issue. www.newstatesman.com/blogs/voice ... -democracy

Don't know if this has been posted but there's a terrific article in the New Statesman, by a Tory no less, on the tax avoidance issue. www.newstatesman.com/blogs/voice ... -democracy

I didn't think it went wrong because it hit any good guys. It went wrong because it was a ludicrous tax you couldn't police. In that sense it does have a lot in common with the seeming inability to police the current income tax system.

One way to simplify things would be to have all income taxed at the same rate. Then it would close loopholes where the self employed can pay themselves a small salary and then use their company to pay them in such as way as the rate of tax paid is less than it would be if they took the cash as salary.

I am sure income tax system it is a ludicrously complex one and IMO the only way you are going to prevent wholesale tax avoidance is to simplify it radically.

Avoidance or evasion, the difference is moot in my opinion when legal schemes can result in the likes of Carr paying 1% in tax so something needs to be done.

May I suggest that anyone who takes the p1ss like this should be subject to a huge retrospective fine. Preferably equal to their income. That would teach them.

Also I would suggest we should be fining their financial advisors an equal amount. That would teach them too.

But what he did was, as it stands, legal.

Why is anyone surprised at Cameron's hypocrisy? He's a hypocrite what what else should we expect?

BTW I know who Jimmy Carr is but I don't think I've ever seen him perform. He looks a bit like Cameron I think. Has anyone seen them in the same room together?