Pay your taxes, lorraine kelly

It shows you how crass the world is when such talentless people like LK can earn such vast sums. The more money they get, the greedier they get.

Talentless indeed. My neighbour calls her Mrs Wishy-Washy.
Agrees with everybody she interviews.

she's very successful in that slot because she's very inoffensive, and probably just genuinly nice, still to be a multi multi millionaire just sitting down chatting about showbizzy things for 30 years is a talent in itself, I bet she's never seen love island in her life.

Ferkin hell, the Guardian, notoriously run through a shell company in the CAYMAN ISLANDS to avoid tax, must be in righteous outrage at this.

If you can afford to pay a meaningful amount of tax - then taxes are completely optional to you anyway.

That she has CHOSEN to avoid paying them is all you need to know about how lovely she is and her outlook on society.

Hey TM. You can, if you want, at any point, send off a cheque to HMRC with any additional tax you think is nice. When are they going to get it?
Oh what's that? You are happy paying what you thought was entitled under law and won't give any more to silently prove your moral fortitude?
My, how your moral compass is wrong. Fecking hell when it's you own wallet isn't being a warrior of moral righteousness more difficult!

Are you suggesting I pay Lorraine's taxes for her? or that taxes should be optional? or are you accusing me of avoiding tax?

Not sure what you are saying? - Maybe calm down.

JC is making that dumb argument that people who complain about others not paying their taxes can send extra to the government if they feel that strongly about it. (and previously rather bash left/liberals than the person on the con)

All this bootlicking won't make him any more rich or successful

Excuse the ignorance, but what has happened here please?

TM I'm pointing out that people pay taxes generally according to what is legally obliged, and of course I've no time for people who confuse avoidance with evasion.
If you think paying more tax than you are obliged to do is virtuous, why not pay more. Nobody is stopping you. Knock yourself out.
I believe in the past you indicated you might have been well paid. Go on. Retrospectively do it, like the tax people did to her.
Go on. But if you do, please do it quietly, you know, no social media boasts as to your virtue.

Mar 24, 2019 -- 6:29AM, HGS wrote:

Excuse the ignorance, but what has happened here please?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-47648053

.

The irony is everyone here of course is a Pro Gambler paying no tax whatsoever

I agree with HGS.

HGS AFAIK LK worked for years as a Ltd CO for the BBC freelancing and had her taxed directed that way, treating her as a company offering service to the beeb.
Tax office at a later date decided she was in effect an employee of the Beeb, and tried to not just change the circumstances, but backdate it over X years for more tax.

The sums are actually quite large which surprises me but I suppose it's retrospective to some extent, nowadays they've equalised a lot of the Ltd Co "advatanges", while the disadvantages all still exist.

I.e. LK can point out all the things like sick pay, holiday pay, maternity pay, and so on, that she wasn't entitled to, yet TaxMan says she should be treated as if she was an employee.

Hey S_H if I could offset my incompetent gambling losses against my income that would be a great thing indeed :)

Cheers JC.

I am comfortably retired - happily paid taxes all my life via PAYE. Towards the end when working from home I declined the offer to become a "self employed consultant". I had no interest in being able to claim my toilet rolls as a business expense and was happy to continue to pay for all the services I had benefited from throughout my life.

I'm sure LK is a lovely lady but are you suggesting she had no option but to become a limited company?

I'm guessing she would be among the first to complain if they installed meters on her street lights, so I find it surprising that she chooses not to contribute towards paying for them or allowing her neighbours to subsidise them for her.

But hey, I guess if it's within the law it must be ok for the wealthiest woman in the street to sponge off her neighbours.

"Sponge off her neighbours". Charming.
So you didn't use ISAs TM? Pay into your pension at the rebate rate of 100% up to the 40k limit?
This is what gets me about Champagne Socialists. It's ALWAYS that they are virtous, and always someone else must pay more.
Like the Milliband Bros utterly maximising inheritance tax benefits while proclaiming we need higher taxes.
Or Red Ken Livingston having 1iss taking tax affairs muddier than Lorraine Kelly's eyeliner after a weepie marathon..

I merely pointed out that paying taxes is now optional.

You can't really argue with that - if you have the correct accountant/lawyer - you can choose how much to pay or avoid paying at all.
You seem very comfortable with that (unless of course it"s a "leftie" doing it) but I am not comfortable with anyone doing it. If the thread title had been someone whose politics you disagree with (say Red Ken), I would have made the same comment. There is no need for further discussion really and certainly no need to get emotional about it.

It's not a party political issue, I have no idea how Lorraine votes or if she votes at all.

If you think her eye-liner and loo rolls should be tax deductible - I'm going to disagree.
You point out it's legal - I agree it's legal but point out she has/had a choice. It's an option.

It depends, some people should not use tax avoidance schemes , in case they are being hypocritical  I should imagine she is one of these people , don’t know
others should pay as little tax as possible , because they see who it goes to and how it is wasted and disagree fundamentally with the British socialist government that we have
And therefore they are not hypocrites

Next time she gets all teary about  the nurses workload and how disgraceful their situation is, and she champions the NHS, schools, emergency services, she should have a word with herself, maybe she's helped to contribute to their underfunding.

She will quite probably be completely shameless and unfazed at her hypocracy and continue with her preaching , like most leftists
no ones fooled anymore

Now as you can see from those wretched remainers in London yesterday
In modern Britain it’s every person for themselves , it’s a game changer
Remember that

Seargeant: Left, Right, Left Right, Left Right.

Private: Are we nearly there yet sarge?

Seargeant: Hmm, no we seem to be stood in exactly the same place as we started -  Left, Right, Left Right, Left Right.

Private: What's that in the distance Sarge?

Seargeant: It's the rest of the world son. The cheating b@stards must have gone in a straight line!

LFC: Left, Right, Left Right, Left Right.

Your complete inability to view any issue in isolation without having to endlessly bring in the left/right ideology means that everything you ever say is completely predictable - as such there is very little need for you to post on most topics.

It is possible to have a views on taxation (or other topics) that don't make you an extremist in EITHER direction. I know socialism/communist doesn't work any more than a complete free-for-all does, so it gets a bit boring to be called a "leftie" just for pointing out that Income Tax is now optional if you can escape PAYE.

You’re not listening are you the management , I’m talking about hypocrisy and leftists  ( like you perhaps I don’t know ) and remainers preaching
about taxation or anything else really when they are trying to overturn the referendum and not paying their taxes , whatever
I’m merely saying no ones fooled , when people like that start to preach something within me starts to laugh , and jeer

So you might have your views on taxation , I’m not interested
If you can’t even respect a democratic vote

lfc1971    24 Mar 19 13:25 
So you might have your views on taxation , I’m not interested
If you can’t even respect a democratic vote


Not sure I have ever stated my views on Brexit - I am ambivalent tbh but this thread is titled "Pay your taxes Lorraine Kelly" - there are 200,000 other threads where you can endlessly drone about Remoaners, Brexiteers, Backstops, etc.

I’ve explained my views on kelly and tax , and I don’t want to hear her preaching again
And I’ve explained my views on you , it you are a remainer
I don’t want to hear you preaching either , then again I might be wrong and you’re  not a remainer
But I doubt it

You see as I said , it’s a game changer
Everything changes and the government has no moral authority on tax or anything else
If the referendum result is not upheld , and we don’t leave he EU
Let’s see

The one thing I can admire about your hero Walter the Softy, was when he explained that we might not see the benefits of Brexit for 50 years or more. I don't necessarily agree with him - but I admire any politician that is looking beyond trying to just get re-elected.

If he is doing it for the benefit of the little Rees-Moggies - Sixtus Dominic Boniface Christopher, Peter Theodore Alphege, Tom Wentworth Somerset Dunstan and Anselm Charles Fitzwilliam, that is very admirable.

didn't her brief she was employed for entertainment or something
only surprise was it took a court case to prove it,judge,hmrc only had to watch a minute of her show

Mar 24, 2019 -- 9:19AM, 1st time poster wrote:

didn't her brief she was employed for entertainment or somethingonly surprise was it took a court case to prove it,judge,hmrc only had to watch a minute of her show

Yes the theme was that she was just talking nonsense without it being factual. So good news on a low tax bill coming for Laura Kuenssberg.

Is it 'hypocracy' to accuse others of not understanding words if you can't spell them properly yourself?

Not aimed at anyone in particular...

:  ) Michaels a remainer I’m sure , they’re slow learners ,
and very slippery , don’t trust them understand that ,no no I’m not telling lies

if a good brief could prove comedians only had to pay tax if they were funny,the country would go broke,

Interesting theory - you thunk the pople wot can sspill proprety are al reminders?

It’s like this , if you are a socialist and a labour voter or liberal or snp you are duty bound to pay your tax

If you are not , you’re not

A good brief can prove anything imo - Ask OJ.

However a good brief is very expensive, so doesn't work for HMRC - the handful that used to have all been lured across to the dark side (probably on a freelance consultancy basis).

As JC pointed out earlier - avoiding tax is not exclusive to any flavour of politics.

Ken Dodd didn’t pay tax , about 10 million pounds worth , Lol
Quite right he wasn’t a socialist comedian

management I don’t want to explain hypocracy to Michael
Knowledge would only confuse him

I don't think he is looking to you for knowledge.

And i don't think you have much to spare.

That’s true management I’m not particularly intelligent
But I recognise what hypocracy is  when I see it

And it’s not Ken Dodd , unless he voted and was a member of the Labour Party
Like Tony Benn

See the difference  , I’m not sure Michel can , he’s like that

Doddy has a letter from the inland revenue but it didn’t apply to him because he lived by the sea ,
Like myself : )

I think it's attributed to Disraeli:

"A Conservative government is just an organised Hypocrisy".

Like I say, I hate it when every discussion turns party political but I do struggle with the concept of voting for a government that doesn't believe in government.

I can both spell AND understand words, lfc. Fwiw, I'm confident I have way more contempt for your average 'champagne socialist' than you do.

Tony Benn was my MP for 17 years btw. Great man.

The mega rich DONT pay tax,all hidden Cayman Islands, all mugs like us play the game,and if you don't pay your council tax off to jail you go, one rule for us and one for them-and its monumental boll0cks

She must of had a very poor accountant that all I can say to get found out

Ah there we go , I don’t know a great deal about Tony Benn I must say
But I do know he didn’t pay his taxes , and there’s another pr att in the Labour Party now called Benn trying to stop the democratic vote and keep us in the eu
No doubt you think he’s a great man also md

Hilary? He's a c\/nt!

That’s the one lol

Can't see your answer to JCs question TM - Do you have any ISAs?

Hi akabula - I thought the question had very little/zero bearing on the topic.

I guess JC (knowing that most people have or have had an ISA) was hoping to make me feel like a hypocrite or worse still was going to level an accusation that I am a tax dodging Champagne Socialist.

I am game for anything that doesn't require a specialist lawyer/accountant to set it up, or significant bending of the truth to set it up. I don't think ISA's fall into that bracket. I didn't send back my children's' Child Benefit either if you feel that is relevant.

So the problem for you is the use of accountants?
HMRC made the rules so why wouldn't anyone take advantage of them?
I'm not a fan of LK but
















So is the problem for you the use of accountants?
HMRC make the rules so why shouldn't anyone take advantage of them?
I'm no fan of LK but don't think she's done anything wrong here.

Retyped hat as I thought I'd lost it lol
Not sure what happened.

why isa,s
don't pay tax on any interest savings up to a certain point,does that make anyone under that threshold a tax avoider

It never fails to amaze me, that the "people" who defend high earners who use legal loopholes to avoid paying their fair share of tax, are the same folk who hate the wee man down the road for claiming £60 (or whatever) a week for not being able to get a job.

Like an earlier poster said, if the likes of LK just paid her full taxes without employing a fancy accountant to save money, the NHS and other social services would not be in the mess it is in.

And don`t give me that crap that everybody would do the same if earning vast amounts. Poppycock! Speak for yourselves, you greedy ********. There are many big earners who don`t revert to this scenario regardless of their political allegiance.

It`s got nothing to do with this leftie-rightie **** that this forum is obsessed with, it`s about having a moral compass and scruples which one either has or doesn`t.

..... mind you, the biggest crime is how that talentless woman, can earn such vast sums.

When Billionaires pay no tax why should we,play the f uckin game you parasites

Wow, what a lawyer she must have!!!! Or just a gullible Judge....

Judge Dean said: 'We did not accept that Ms Kelly simply appeared as herself - we were satisfied that Ms Kelly presents a persona of herself, she presents herself as a brand and that is the brand ITV sought when engaging her.'

The judge said that Kelly could be classed as a "theatrical artist", which would mean any payments to an agent would be allowed as a tax-deductible expense.

- If her additional tax bill was £1.2m HOW much was her agent getting then?!!!!!!

newsboy/yates made his 1st and only sensible remark on lucky today
said he went to a football match years ago with 9 millionaires and said in comparison he hadn't and still hasn't got a pot to pish in, but after listening to them go on and on about money all night not talking about the match or anything other than money,said he went home feeling like aillionaire,regards his life

Sorry akabula - had a phone call (not my accountant though!).

I guess we all draw the line somewhere. Claiming you are "self employed" solely for tax purposes and then continuing to exclusively work for your same/current employer doing exactly the same job (but pay much less tax than before) is what I witnessed many colleagues doing. LK looks to have done similar.

I'm up for an ISA and have benefited very significantly from Share Save Schemes and other stocks and shares. As stated I'm not a communist (!!) but I draw the line at setting up a PO Box as my Guernsey office, flying to Jersey or some far flung tropical island twice a year, even though I know it's technically legal to do so. I also draw the line at claiming my cars, clothes, eye liner, loo rolls, etc are all tax deductible.

You are correct that HMRC make the rules but in a world where money often trumps integrity anybody at HMRC with more than a sniff of intelligence is lured across to the "opposition".

I guess unless the law changes it boils down to Legal versus Moral but it surely isn't Party Political or Left versus Right.

I think the only Party Political aspect should be about the rate of tax - rather than if it should be paid or not.

tbf, the NHS is in the mess it's in because of the hundreds of millions spent on mimanagement consultants every single year, the health tourists, admin errors, negligence claims/legal fees etc.

When I worked on the market I was v a t registered and because I was over the threshold where you have to pay v a t I was discriminated against

If I bought a fashion garment for Ten pounds and wanted to sell it for 15 pounds I would have to pay v a t on the 15 pounds and reclaim the ten that I payed to purchase it .the Pakistani in the next isle who was not v a t registered and probably on benefits as well did not have to pay vat so he could afford to charge less than me for the garment to make the same profit as me .I had to charge the same as him meaning he would make more profit than me because people go for the cheapest they don't care that I'm legal and vat registered

Every three months I had to pay  the v a t office thousands while he paid nought

Really don’t get how she got off.

On the bbc website it says:
But part of the judge's ruling picked up on the point that she is more of a performer than a standard employee.

Surely you could say the same about a newsreader ... they present a persona of someone who reads from a TelePrompTer.
Any quiz/game show host could say they are putting on an act.

Surely to goodness tax could be simplified so we’d need fewer accountants.

The problem is that SOME people - who earn lots of money, pay large sums of it to avoid paying any to the society that has allowed them their wealth.

If they paid the tax - and not the accountant, they'd still be well off and so would everyone who never gets the chance to avoid theirs.

This also applies to the biggest corporations.
They use the savings made from non-payment of tax to put tax-paying opposition out of business.

But I guess that this view would make me a corbynista, leftie, hand-wringing liberal, eh?

Fortunately that would only be to the inmates who've taken over this shell of a forum and made every thread a political attack.

Ess-aitch-one-tee!
I must be a corbynista too then?

Quite a few of us are, RacingCert (though we're still a minority here).

Surely the problem then lies with the rules and not the taxpayer or non payer.
Easy enough to tighten them up but never been addressed by either of the main parties.

I think I have made my views clear but I am bit worried that I might actually be a hypocrite and/or champagne socialist - because if anyone knows a lawyer/accountant that can get me 0% commission on here I am willing to be more flexible with my principles. 

Maybe the Commission/Premium Charge team should be in charge at HMRC?

Avoidance and Evasion both futile - just need to get the rules watertight.

Whatever rules are developed are scrutinised by lawyers and accountants for loopholes. These are then exploited.
What rarely seems to take any precedence is morality.

Just think of how many MEGA rich people get done for fraud or tax evasion or avoidance - or whatever semantics you want to use to describe it.

Yet they're still wealthy and have enough money to do whatever they want.
For some reason only (relatively) poor people are supposed to be happy to pay tax!!!!!

No-one wants to pay it, but we have to. If you earn substantially more, then - as long as it doesn't impinge upon your ability to afford to live well - then you should pay more.

The majority of people try to avoid paying tax (not illegal as opposed to evasion)
Transferring shares into your spouses name to get their allowance when selling is commonplace.
Do you think that is wrong?
Biggest problem we have is companies registering overseas to pay less in corporation tax.
Individuals should be easier to attack by constantly closing the loopholes.

Risk takers might argue that tax rates are too high.
Maybe they are.
Isn’t there a line of reasoning that says that reducing tax rates increases tax take.
I don’t really know.
What is wrong surely is when there is no downside for risk takers.
Go bankrupt, then start up again under a different name.
And then ther’s Carillion.

Never having been a businessman though I can hardly speak with authority.

Carillion etc starting to look like a Ponzi scheme where govt (tax payers) are the victim.

I can RacingCert.
Small businesses cannot do the "avoiding" big ones can.

The line of reasoning you mention is generally spouted by those who earn or have the most money.

I'm not talking about little personal things like ISAs or a few shares.
More the Lorraine Kelly or Amazon types of things.

aka - I go back to what I said before - it would be better if the rules/laws were ideal in the first place.

As they are not, i feel if Martin Lewis can tell me how to do it in 5 minutes it's probably acceptable. If I have to hire a specialist to set it up for me and bend the truth, it's probably morally reprehensible.

But PM me if you can help with commission!

Isn’t there a line of reasoning that says that reducing tax rates increases tax take.
Depends who you ask RC. For and against arguments here.
I think we took more under the reduced figure of 19% than the 28% previous level.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQ2ZUEHBdI0

Aka can certainly help you pay zero commission the management - just bet his football tips

For some reason only (relatively) poor people are supposed to be happy to pay tax!!!!!



They should be grateful they've got jobs!


As we were told by our bosses, research shows that being paid more money doesn't motivate you.

By contrast, Herzberg set forth his theories on management – and specifically, on the common worker – in 1959. He believed that workers were motivated by anything other than money. He argued against Taylor's money theory as a motivator theory. Herzberg said that workers and employees were motivated by things such as achievement, praise, responsibility and advancement. To get the best out of workers, Herzberg argued, employers and business owners would have cater to these other, intrinsic, motivating factors.


Who am I to argue with such an esteemed management theorist but it's funny how only the rich need to be motivated by more money.

Didn't Henry Ford introduce a ground-breaking wage for his workers? His competitors thought he was crazy but he attracted the best employees and reduced staff turnover.

Also, as a result his aforementioned competitors had to raise their pay rates to remain viable.

*...attracted the best employees, increased productivity and reduced staff turnover.

When I go for a pint with ex-colleagues it seems there is a very good living to be made from "employee engagement" - advising employers on how to reduce attrition (staff turnover). Obviously you would need to dress it up a bit more than advising them to "stop paying them £7/hour and treating them like dirt".

One business owner when asked to consider doing employee engagement surveys and exit surveys - said he stopped doing engagement surveys because they were all so rude - and he wasn't interested in hearing the opinions of people that had already left, he just wanted to know how to stop them leaving!

actually at the lower end of the scale there,s millions of people either through ignorance,finance,time.etc miss out on tax breaks passing on earnings between wage earners in family,splitting shares,making plans for inheritance tax,zombie accounts etc,etc

There is also far  more money that goes unclaimed in state benefits than is lost to fraudulent claims - but it suits the agenda better to make shows/headlines about the fraud.