GoverBusineMedia are all in support
of globalisation because it kills off good unionised jobs.
They export our jobs, make billions, hide the money
in tax havens, and we sit around wondering whom to blame.
Then, in come the foreign workers dropping your wages even further.
They give you an extreme Right-Wing party,
so that you can focus your rage on the foreigners.
The real culprits are the oligarchy and their hangers-on.
They aren't many, but they're rich and pay no taxes.
[the real Fascist leader is revealed]
"government + business= fascism" Mussolini
[Wikipedia]
Someone with non-domiciled status, sometimes called a 'non-dom', is a person living in the United Kingdom yet registered as a foreign national, who doesn't pay income tax or capital gains tax on earnings abroad. It is a form of tax avoidance. Prominent examples include:
* Lord Paul
* Lord Ashcroft
* Jonathan Harmsworth, 4th Viscount Rothermere
* Alistair McAlpine, Baron McAlpine of West Green[1]
* Irvine Laidlaw, Baron Laidlaw[2]
* Sir Ronald Cohen
* Sir Christopher Ondaatje[3]
* Lakshmi Mittal[4]
* David Potter[5]
* Doug Richard[6]
* James Cann[7]
* Raj Bagri, Baron Bagri[8]
* Lydia Dunn[9]
Costick67 ~(8^P
checkitout: 2 things
from taxresearch.org.uk
Non doms and tax
February 15th, 2011
The following is a parliamentary answer on tax paid in the UK by non-doms.
Of course what it does not say is what tax was not paid in the UK by non-doms, but the sums involved (£48,000 of tax a head on average in 2008/09) suggest some must be doing very well out of the new arrangement, and that not surprisingly others are simply now paying their taxes in full and giving up the arrangement.
Nothing suggests that I’m wrong to believe that billions might be a lost a year to H M Revenue & Customs as a result of the domicile rule - not least because I have estimated that up to 7 million people qualify to claim each year - and only a tiny proportion put it on a tax return. The rest, I suspect, simply don’t declare their earnings or status on the basis of the fact they’re outside the UK tax system, in their opinion.
Harriett Baldwin: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) how many non-domiciled UK taxpayers filed tax returns with HM Revenue and Customs in each of the last five tax years; [39455]
(2) how many non-domiciled taxpayers have paid the flat annual charge to the Exchequer since its introduction; [39456]
(3) how much tax non-domiciled taxpayers paid to the Exchequer in each of the last five tax years. [39457]
Mr Gauke: The number of individuals who filed a self-assessment (SA) tax return and indicated that they were non-domiciled was as follows:
Number
2004-05 110,000
2005-06 111,000
2006-07 117,000
2007-08 140,000
2008-09 123,000
2008-09 is the most recent tax year for which data are available.
The figures above include both individuals who were UK resident and individuals who were not UK resident.
Individuals who complete a SA return are only required to indicate that they are non-domiciled if this affects their tax liability. Therefore the actual number of non-domiciled individuals who complete a return will be greater than the number who indicate their non-domicile status on their SA return.
The annual £30,000 remittance basis charge was introduced with effect from the 2008-09 tax year. The number of non-domiciled individuals who paid the charge in 2008-09 was 5,400. This is a provisional figure rounded to the nearest hundred and may be updated once all returns for the tax year have been received and analysed.
Figures are not available for the total amount of UK tax paid by non domiciled individuals. However, it is possible to calculate the total amount of UK income tax and capital gains tax (CGT) paid by individuals who completed an SA return and indicated that they were non-domiciled. These amounts for the past five tax years were as follows:
£ billion
2004-05 3.3
2005-06 4.0
2006-07 5.0
2007-08 6.9
2008-09 5.9
2
Letter on ZeroHedgeby rich_wicks
on Wed, 03/09/2011 - 23:47
The government - such as it is - carries out of the orders given by the Capitalists who own it.
Capitalists don't own the government.
Fascists do. That's the economic system of fascism - it's when corporations own the government. They aren't capitalists anymore - they don't compete on an even playing field. They are fascists now, because they can't compete one on one, they get the Federal government to pass regulations to protect them from competition, to give them money to help them when they screw up so that the competition that didn't screw up doesn't take over their market share.
They aren't capitalists.
Understand the difference. Capitalists will never control the government, but it's the fault of people like you that has allowed this government to go fascist. You gave it too much power.
Take away the power of the government to regulate and bail out private corporations, and there won't be any point for companies to control the government, because all the FEDERAL government will be able to do then is protect the nation, enforce the constitution, and aribtrate disputes between the states. They won't be able to bail out GM or Goldman Sachs, and they won't be able to keep a natural gas powered cars off the road, like they do now.
You think regulations are there to protect you, they are there to protect corporations and if it has the side effect of protecting you, well, that's just an accident.
