Hamilton stays away from the tax man

[Scott]

No breaking news here, just that for some reason someone in the media thought he might want to move back to the UK after his 2nd title.  Um, no.

For the record, I thought he lived just outside Geneva.  Well, I guess depending on how you look at it, Monaco is not far away from Geneva.

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/f1-autosport/541747/Exclusive-Lewis-Hamilton-F1-coming-home-tax-exile-news

[Jericoke]

The IRS is going VERY hard after Americans who have left the USA for tax purposes.  They're closing loopholes, and making things very difficult for people who are trying to cheat* the system.

If they're successful, I imagine other countries, such as the UK, will follow suit.

*I don't blame anyone who moves into 'tax haven' countries.  I would too.  Even if I had to pay the same taxes, I'd rather live in Monaco than, well, pretty much anywhere.

[Scott]

The IRS is going VERY hard after Americans who have left the USA for tax purposes.  They're closing loopholes, and making things very difficult for people who are trying to cheat* the system.

If they're successful, I imagine other countries, such as the UK, will follow suit.

Like Burger King? 

[cosworth151]

There is an active consumer boycott of Burger King & Tim Hortons. Once they see that their corporate treason will cost them far more money than it saves them, they will reconsider. It's just too bad that we don't have a functioning government to do something about it.

[Scott]

I can't speak for BK, but I can tell you that during my trip to Toronto last week the lineups at Tim Hortons are as long as they've ever been - out the door and around the corner.

[cosworth151]

The last time I checked, Toronto wasn't in the States. 

Tim Hortons has never done all that well here in Lancaster. after all, we've got Donut World. Much, much better!

[Jericoke]

The last time I checked, Toronto wasn't in the States. 

Tim Hortons has never done all that well here in Lancaster. after all, we've got Donut World. Much, much better!

Them's fightin' words Yankee!

[Scott]

Frankly it's news to me that Tim Hortons even has a store in Lancaster.  I thought their US expansion was minimal and carefully chosen. 

[cosworth151]

Wendy's had the rights to them for a while. Since Wendy's HQ is right up the road in Columbus, they're all over the place around here.

They still can't hold a candle to Donut World (or Jolly Pirate, either!)

[Scott]

That makes sense...Wendys and Timmys had a joint venture for quite some time in Canada.  Mostly at highway gas stations.  I think that was ditched some time ago though.

[Jericoke]

That makes sense...Wendys and Timmys had a joint venture for quite some time in Canada.  Mostly at highway gas stations.  I think that was ditched some time ago though.

When Dave Thomas passed away, Wendy's tried to become a big corporation to compete with Pepsico, who then owned 'restaurants' like KFC, Taco Bell and Pizza Hut.  At the same time, Tim Horton's was planning to expand into the USA.  So Wendy's bought Tim Horton's, and paid for their US expansion.

In the 2000s it was no longer fashionable for companies to own multiple sidelines, so Wendy's spun Tim Horton's into an independant Canadian company (including its American operation) through an IPO.

Canada is still dotted with Wendy's/Tim Horton's sharing buildings.

[Alianora La Canta]

The HMRC (UK's answer to IRS) has been trying to crack down on tax evaders for years, with two small problems:

1) For political reasons, they can't go after anyone who actually misses that much in payments. Otherwise, the likes of Vodafone (£6 bn evaded per year) would have at least received a sharply-worded letter by now, but no. They are too involved in the politics of the current administration to receive such an "attack" as a tax collection. So instead it goes after people who evade a relative pittance.

2) Also for political reasons, the HMRC is subject to annual funding cuts from the government.  Please don't get me started on the logic behind this...

[John S]

The HMRC (UK's answer to IRS) has been trying to crack down on tax evaders for years, with two small problems:

1) For political reasons, they can't go after anyone who actually misses that much in payments. Otherwise, the likes of Vodafone (£6 bn evaded per year) would have at least received a sharply-worded letter by now, but no. They are too involved in the politics of the current administration to receive such an "attack" as a tax collection. So instead it goes after people who evade a relative pittance.

2) Also for political reasons, the HMRC is subject to annual funding cuts from the government.  Please don't get me started on the logic behind this...

There is a difference in law between tax avoidance and tax evasion Alia, a subtle and perhaps wafer thin difference in some cases. My point being choice of words can be vital in this context, evasion is illegal with all the ramifications that go with that - avoidance whilst possibly reprehensible is not.

I'm sure Vodafone and their lawyers prefer the word avoided, since no wrong doing has actually been recorded against them.   

We all try to avoid paying tax in one way or another, some big companies and individuals however have turned it into an art form. I suggest the biggest single problem for HMRC and all tax enforcers is the intellectual brain drain, accountants and tax specialists can offer highly trained tax officials much, much higher salaries and so turn nearly all the good gamekeepers into poachers. 

   

[Alianora La Canta]

There is a difference in law between tax avoidance and tax evasion Alia, a subtle and perhaps wafer thin difference in some cases. My point being choice of words can be vital in this context, evasion is illegal with all the ramifications that go with that - avoidance whilst possibly reprehensible is not.

I'm sure Vodafone and their lawyers prefer the word avoided, since no wrong doing has actually been recorded against them.   

We all try to avoid paying tax in one way or another, some big companies and individuals however have turned it into an art form. I suggest the biggest single problem for HMRC and all tax enforcers is the intellectual brain drain, accountants and tax specialists can offer highly trained tax officials much, much higher salaries and so turn nearly all the good gamekeepers into poachers. 

 

So wafer-thin that behaviour that is penalised in small businesses up and down the country is accepted when the likes of Vodafone do it. As far as I'm concerned, moving country to avoid tax is an example of tax avoidance and legitimate (i.e. making sure the tax isn't owed in the first place). Doing stuff to not pay tax that is reasonably owed (by dint of doing things that according to a reasonable reading of the law should attract tax) is tax evasion and not legitimate. The reason no wrongdoing is recorded against them is that the government doesn't want to enforce its laws against a company that could do it so much harm. The government won't let its subsidiary HMRC take a court case to Vodafone, so of course it doesn't. That is why Vodafone gets the easily-dismissed critical reports thrown at it, instead of court cases like people who decline to pay much smaller amounts of owed tax.

Living in a place where even the smallest degree of tax avoidance simply isn't an option for 95% of the people living here may have an influence on this thinking.

HMRC has been forced to downsize - it often can't offer salaries in the first place, meaning the young poachers were denied the opportunity to ever become gamekeepers, and many older ones have to find something to do with their careers after losing their jobs through redundancy and other mechanisms.

I'm sure the "golden hellos" and many-figured salaries you mention would have come into it had HMRC been able to hold a decent staff base in recent years.

[John S]

Alia I was simply trying to save you any embarrassment with Vodafone and their lawyers.