As I said before, it may not be. It probably has not been tested. The people who design and sell these schemes take legal opinion but an opinion is just an opinion. They also normally point out the risks in the small print and in the even smaller print there will be a huge fee for the salesman. Although I do not know this particular scheme's details it is almost certainly too simple to say it is legal.

I kmow. So make a law that says that people who take the p1ss are subject to severe sanctions. And anyone who can't see that this is a p1sstake is seriously stupid.

Fine, your task for the weekend is to frame that in a statement that could stand up in a court of law

I assume Carr, Barlow etc are all self employed. Why don't HMRC do what they do to the ordinary self employed chippy or bricky working for a builder and get the promoter or record company to deduct 20% (or 45% in their case) from any payment they make to the performer and send it to HMRC, it would then be up to the individual to submit accounts and get any refund themselves.

I would assume this legislation could be tweaked to include ALL self employed people working labour only for a third party without too much hassle. Whether the political will to upset major party donors is there is another question.

What part of "as it stands" did you miss?

The Daily Mirror nails ithttps://p.twimg.com/Av8g2XkCQAIphEG.jpg:large" >

Was Gary Barlow one of Ken Barlow's lovechildren? Would explain the w@nker genes.

bitter and jealous, who'd have thought.

Why isn't Milliband on that page, or Kinnock, or Prescott?

it suits the looney left to pillory the right, but they won't expose their own.

Do you have any evidence of them offshoring money to avoid paying tax on it?

I wondered when you'd pop up with your stock "jealous" comment

It's a stock comment because it's accurate cod'ead, I'm not ssaying it's "right", but it is legal, and labour had years to change the law and never did, how many millions did Blurgh and Brownose make out of being PM.

the whole political and social "elite" are allowed to do as they please, amazing how nobody has mentioned F1 drivers domiciled in Monaco (for tax purposes) or footballers with offshore "foundations".

to make tax avoidance a Cameron issue is to be blind to the facts.

Cameron made it a Cameron issue when he publicly derided one tax avoider, whilst conveniently ignoring the many tax avoiders who fund his personal wealth and that of his party.

Spot on.
Quite what how much Blair or Brown made as PM has to do with this, or why only Labour PM's were picked out I really don't know.

Cameron described one off-shore tax dodger as "morally wrong", why won't he pick anyone else out?

Presumably by calling Jimmy Carr's affairs morally wrong Cameron is just jealous?

he was an idiot to single out one individual, I agree, but it isn't just Conservatives that enjoy a questionable tax status, see Bono for details.

I don't think anyone has ever suggested it was. The reason people are singling out Conservatives is to highlight Cameron's hypocrisy. It wouldn't be a very strong argument if they were saying, "Oi, Cameron, what about Tony Blair? He's uses 'tax efficiency' schemes too."

You don't seem to be getting the point. When a [iTory[/i Prime Minister decides to publicly criticise an individual over their tax affairs then quite understandably the focus falls on his fellow [iTories[/i - particularly those he is either close to or has defended/refused to comment on in the past. This doesn't exonerate anyone else - Cameron has made a rod for his own back here.

I also assume that you think Cameron criticised Carr out of jealousy? After all that's the only reason rich folk get criticised at all in your book, isn't it?