Monday, 1 March 2010

The Stushie about Non-Doms

Does it matter if those classed as Non-Doms and therefore don't pay tax to the UK on their overseas earnings are in government?

Lord Ashcroft has finally declared he fits the bill as a Non-Dom thus producing howls of protest from the Labour party as well as other political persuasions.

In case you've missed any of Labour's Non-Dom contributers Iain Dale has a detailed list here. Labour only have 8 compared with the Conservatives 1, but it's one too many for the tories lament Labour.

The following is a comment on this Coffee House blog. I cannot guarantee the authenticity of all of the comment but I can confirm Lord Ashcroft has helped past and present holders of the Victoria Cross.

Strapworld: I have mentioned this before and I can never understand why Cameron, Hague and any front bencher of the Tory party have never mentioned it. But Lord Ashcroft created, with his money and organising ability, that great crime fighting organisation CRIMESTOPPERS. Which has helped the police and others solve major crimes, restore stolen goods and is now helping in missing persons and other enquiries.

It is also a fact that Lord Ashcroft has personally helped holders and relatives of those brave soldiers past and present whose bravery was rwarded with the Victoria Cross. Lord ashcroft also loaned his personal collection of Victoria Crosses to the Imperial War Museum.

Now, perhaps Conservative Central office could do some work and ascertain just what
Lord Paul, Lakshmi Mittal and Sir Ronald Cohen have done for the general betterment of the British people and not just the Labour Party.

The attack on Lord Ashcroft has been one sided and the weak approach by Tory front benchers was been disgraceful. Now is the time to show some steel!

Lord Ashcroft confirmed he will abide by new rules to ensure he can remain in the Lords and continue to play a part in public life. Contrast that to Lord Paul, one of Labour's biggest donors, who has indicated that he will leave the Lords rather than expose himself to UK tax requirements. Naturally he'll take the title of Lord with him.

If it is confirmed Lord Ashcroft created Crimestoppers (see update below), then he deserves credit. I wonder how many Labour Non-Dom persons have given anything for the benefit of the general public.

Anyone living in the UK should pay tax on earnings acquired from work in the UK. If they also have businesses overseas then I would not expect them to pay UK taxes but taxes in the countries where the business is operated. If they wish to use part of the profits gained in their overseas businesses for the benefit of the UK all well and good.

Some may argue that it is the size of donations from Lord Ashcroft which causes this to be a problem for the Tories, but if Iain Dale's figures are correct (and I have no reason whatsoever to doubt they are not accurate), then this should backfire on Labour. Of course having a government mainly funded by union donations is another subject altogether!

The media are particularly biased in their reporting of this matter this evening, with Labour being given the majority of air time. David Vance will be telling me not to be so surprised I'm sure!

Update: My thanks to Mrs Rigby for this update. Lord Ashcroft did indeed found Crimestoppers.


Mr. Mxyzptlk said...

Yep! so boring and unimportant it took Ashcroft ten years to enlighten the British public.

Lord Ashcroft was originally refused a peerage and only given one on the understanding that he would take up permanent residence in the UK .

Ten years later still a non dom

If you live in the UK permanently you'll pay tax on overseas income. If you live here temporarily, you'll normally pay tax only on overseas income you bring into the UK. If there's a 'double taxation agreement' between the UK and a country in which income originates you won't have to pay tax twice.

subrosa said...

Yet labour has 8 of them and you find that acceptable Niko? The only difference being is that the labour lot owned up?

Auch away and have another dreamy pill.

banned said...

The weakness of the Tory position on this issue is symptomatic of why they are losing the plot entirely.
They should havew simply said, yes, he's a non dom, so what?

subrosa said...

I think Cameron handled it quite well banned although Michael Grove on Newsnight wasn't as effective. Mind you he did eventually get the upper hand with Ms Wark.

Mrs Rigby said...

Here you go!


"In 1985, PC Keith Blakelock was murdered during the riots at the Broadwater Farm estate in London and the police appealed for information, stating that people knew who had been responsible but were frightened of coming forward.

Michael Ashcroft (now Lord Ashcroft and Chairman of the Trustees of Crimestoppers), a businessman, offered to provide the police with money for a reward to encourage somebody to come forward with information. This led to discussions with the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, resulting in Michael Ashcroft founding the establishment of the Crimestoppers operation in the UK in January 1988. He set up the charity and together with some business colleagues who were also concerned about the rise in violent crime, they funded the UK operation."

There's quite a bit more.

subrosa said...

Thanks very much for that Mrs Rigby. I had found it but haven't had time to post it. What I'll do is put it as an update right now as I'm too tired to do a full post.

Much appreciate you motivating me. :)

strapworld said...

Subrosa, Thank you for repeating my comment. I repeated this to the BBC/SKY etc asking for balance in their! I also copied Iain Dale's excellent breakdown of the Labour Non Doms and their 'gifts' to Labour.

As a matter of interest iain dale did a later post in which he mentioned that Lord Ashcroft supports Help the Hero's Campaign (as you do) he also has given the money for the Imperial War Museum to construct a special Victoria Cross wing and in addition helped, with finance, The New Zealand Government with a Victoria Cross recipients family.

The man is a quiet gentleman who does so much for the people.

Now, who apart from the Labour Party and we all know they ALL pay their full income tax and never claim a penny that they should not, WHO blames Lord Ashcroft?

Thank you for spreading the word so that more people are aware of the good side of Lord Ashcroft.

You may note from my frequent comments on Coffee House, in particular, that I am no supporter of Cameron.I would not want the Prime Minister's rebuttal service to call me a typical tory!

subrosa said...

Strapworld I'm so pleased you've commented. I don't particularly like using people comments from elsewhere without their permission and I didn't know where to find you.

As I said in the post I knew about his help for the military and the IWM contribution but I don't have full details about NZ.

I've another wee post up my sleeve for tomorrow. Don't have time today unfortunately but it will be ok tomorrow.

Like you I'm no supporter of Cameron either but I believe in giving credit where credit's due.

Crinkly & Ragged Arsed Philosophers said...

Labour are masters at guiding peoples eyes off the ball.

The tax avoidance shenanigans of individuals are but a drop in the cesspit of the tax avoidance schemes utilised by the global corporations that Labour have invested so much of our money in we can only regard our future as one of austerity.

In 2006/07 the Government and the Treasury was so concerned by the paucity of corporation tax being paid by these corporations they decided 'something' had to be done about it. That 'something' evolved into Lord Turner having some light touch lunches with the CEO's where it would be mooted the 'Old Boy's' should perhaps be a bit more generous and circumspect in the amounts they allocate to the tax pot.

Not an all together comfortable arrangement when you consider its almost an affirmation of the accountancy practices of the conglomerates being too obfuscate and complicated for the taxman to audit.

In a letter to the Telegraph at the time I suggested the solution was quite simple - remove the word avoidance from the lexicon of tax affairs.

In essence it's exactly what they have done in the case of PAYE.

But that generally applies to Subjects not to Overlords.

subrosa said...

RA as always you contribute much in your comment.

As I said in a earlier post, the SG was told no way could HMRC deal with a separate form of local taxation and now they say they can do just to give us 'more powers'

A nasty move with England and English votes in mind but nothing truly to do with Scotland.

Crinkly & Ragged Arsed Philosophers said...

Rosa - well certainly not to its benefit. But its another crumb from a crumbling wall.

subrosa said...

I've a feeling, if it does happen RA, that it'll be so tied up in legislation that it will be of far more benefit to the Treasury than Scotland.

Related Posts with Thumbnails