Osbourne Family avoided massive tax - ch 4 news soon

There is no suggestion the chancellor or Osborne & Little avoided any tax in the deal, or that they or offshore property developer Nightingale Mews Inc. did anything illegal.

but

A legal expert shown contracts obtained by Channel 4 News said Osborne & Little must have known the developer was based offshore, and had the potential to avoid millions in tax.

Tax haven
Barrister David Quentin, a senior adviser to the Tax Justice Network, said Osborne & Little must have been aware that Nightingale Mews Inc. was based in a tax haven.

He said: "It's quite clear that we're dealing with an offshore company. If you look at this agreement, you see that the buyer company is named and then it's expressly described as incorporated in the British Virgin Islands."

He added, by being based offshore, the company could have avoided any tax on profits it made. "Instead of paying UK tax on that profit, it would be able to realise that profit tax free," he said.

£8m profit
The development was later renamed Denning Mews, with analysis of Land Registry records showing the upmarket flats and houses were sold for around £20m. It is estimated the profit may have been up to £8m, with the developer able to legally avoid up to £2m in corporation tax by being based in a tax haven.

Following the sale of the new homes, Nightingale Mews Inc. was dissolved, in 2010. It is virtually impossible to know who was behind the British Virgin Islands company, which is registered to a PO Box in a legal office on the Caribbean island of Tortola.

As well as branding "aggressive tax avoidance" as "morally repugnant" in his 2012 budget speech, George Osborne has promised to clamp down on properties owned by offshore firms.

The government introduced an annual levy on those that were, but campaigners say the fee, which raised just £73m last year, has done little to dissuade wealthy investors.

Channel 4 News asked the chancellor if he was aware of the deal, and aware of the agreement to sell to an offshore company – and put to him that the taxpayer could have lost millions of pounds. His office refused to answer any questions and said only: "This is a totally bogus and desperate story."

'Commercial basis'
Sir Peter Osborne, managing director of Osborne & Little, said the wallpaper company "is not in the business of property development and simply sold the property on a commercial basis".

He said all relevant taxes on the sale of the London site were paid, adding: "The company retained no benefit in any future development of the property and the directors have no knowledge of the success or otherwise of the redevelopment."

Sir Peter said the directors of Osborne & Little "cannot comment on the tax affairs of another company, whose tax residence, rather than country of incorporation, is not known to them".

News
An analysis by Channel 4 News shows 73,853 commercial and residential properties in England and Wales were registered in tax havens since 2009.

While half the homes on Grosvenor Crescent in London's Belgravia - named by a Lloyds Bank study as the most expensive street in the country - were found to be registered to tax havens.

It's OK, we're all in this together.

Thread Title was a mistake but :

A legal expert shown contracts obtained by Channel 4 News said Osborne & Little must have known the developer was based offshore, and had the potential to avoid millions in tax.

From the Channel Four article:

Sir Peter Osborne, managing director of Osborne & Little, said the wallpaper company "is not in the business of property development and simply sold the property on a commercial basis".

He said all relevant taxes on the sale of the London site were paid, adding: "The company retained no benefit in any future development of the property and the directors have no knowledge of the success or otherwise of the redevelopment."

Sir Peter said the directors of Osborne & Little "cannot comment on the tax affairs of another company, whose tax residence, rather than country of incorporation, is not known to them".

I think this kind of investigative journalism is a useful way of keeping such people honest but Channel Four haven't really presented much in the way of raw meat here and end up looking a little desperate if that is all they have.

So a wallpaper company sells land it has to some development company and is expected to sniff around the tax affairs of the other company? Are they obligated to do this?
Is it normal to do this?
Has anyone who sold their home on this forum researhed the tax affairs of the buyer?
This seems the sort of mud slinging you expect from the C4.

The Tory party have legal experts who should have looked into this....they obviously didn't or thought it wouldn't be noticed.

Send them to ch 4

Tory scum.

Oh my. Facts is back.

Labour might be going to go one better and put Corbyn (backed by McCluskey) in and see if they can get completely wiped out in 2020?

Don't be like that Facts. What is life coming to if you can't laugh at other peoples calamities?

Well that would be no good for obvious reasons. They'd be a jibbering wreck after ten minutes with me.

Of course the Osbornes benefited from the buyer's tax avoidance: by avoiding £2 million in corporation tax the buyer was able to pay up to £2 million more for the land.

As for defending the Osbornes on the grounds of ignorance, just how much investigative work does it take to discover that a buyer called Nightingale Mews Inc. British Virgin Islands is incorporated in the British Virgin Islands?

I know Gidiot's an idiot - he wouldn't have been christened with such a name otherwise - but even he must be aware of why people incorporate companies in the Caribbean dependencies.