Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
If the rich were happy to be taxed more, they wouldn't use tax avoidance measures in the first place.
Perhaps if everyone, irrespective of income, was taxed at the same rate it would be better. In the UK, as with many jurisdictions, there are different rates for higher earners. As people earn more, they are taxed more 20% then 40% etc. This encourages active avoidance.
Just tax everyone 20% of every £ and scrap tax offsetting measures.
If you are more fortunate than others, build a larger table not a taller fence.
This thread is degenerating into a political debate that has nothing to do with F1. Some posts have been disapproved or removed. Please do not use this topic as a political soapbox.
I think there's a huge misconception going on. What Hamilton is doing, is almost certainly not tax evasion, but tax avoidance. The first one is illegal, the latter is legal. A better word here would be tax optimisation. It's the exact same why he is domiciled in Monaco.
What this particular move is designed to do is to turn cash into a minimally taxable asset, whilst avoiding VAT at the time of purchase.
I think what's going on here as mentioned he's a corporate entity, which makes he primarily gets taxed on the divident he gives himself. Tax on dividends is a lot lower than normal income tax. Add in a bunch of structures to avoid entreprise tax by being registered at the Bermudas, which again is legal, and you are doing solid legal tax optimisation.
It boils down to how you view tax avoidance, morally acceptable or not. But that's a debate that's not really suited to F1.
As mentioned, it is up to the government to act on this by resisting lobby work (oh yes, there's a huge machine at the background that will resist at any cost such reforms!) and introduce a better legislative framework. That has to be done on EU level, but Great Britain already excluded themselves from that effectively. No way one country alone can manage such tax reforms. Capital will always go to the least taxed location. If the last option to not be taxed was opening up an office on the Moon, that would happen at a surprisingly short timeframe.
Well no. The UK is quite capable of closing down British Tax Havens if the Government wanted to do that. Of course other tax havens would come into prominence. But they lack what makes British Tax Havens so attractive to those with a lot of money - they are governed by English Common Law for the most part.
F1 drivers aren't a strange breed; they do the exact same thing as basically anyone else who has accumulated enough capital. Even social institutions that promote these tax reforms ironically do tax optimisation.
They are just as mobile as the Super Rich. Nothing strange about them really, more money just means you have a different set of problems to deal with. Including tax bills.
This sounds like a rather cheap shot at creating some headlines and i’m disappointed such drivel makes it on to this forum in the first place. This includes similar stories about any other F1 drivers.
Have you been following the news at all? This isn't some hit piece by some toilet paper tabloid in the UK, this is proper investigative journalism being conducted by the worlds best news organisations in what will probably be the largest leak in history. The fact you can characterise such work as 'drivel' is truly beyond me.
Because it is. I could have told you that every single multi millionaire outthere is on top of tax optimzation before this story leaked. What is the surprise? Hamilton doesnt do his tax papers himself, nor would he do dealings of buying a jet himself either. This topic is simply about the “little people” complaining about the perceived injustice of the rich and mighty. This topic is a waste, especially since political discussion is not allowed, so it renders 99.9% of the relevant content useless because its not wanted here.
Not my rules btw, i wouldn’t mind discussing this topic on a political level.
Not for nothing, Rosberg's Championship is the only thing that lends credibility to Hamilton's recent success. Otherwise, he'd just be the guy who's had the best car. — bhall II #Team44 supporter
So true. Apple Inc. processes almost every European iphone purchase in Louxemberg to avoid hefty taxes. The number of iphones "sold" in Louxemberg out numbers the populations many times. It was some legal loop hole which is actually more under the table that what Lewis and other regular Rich people do.
This thread should be closed. It's worse than ying yang.
Whenever there is a thread that's technical but puts lewis in a good light it is closed.
Now that there is something negative and totally for TMZ or Daily mail, its on F1T front page.
I am disappointed in the moderators for accommodating this. It sets a bad precedent.
I think there's a huge misconception going on. What Hamilton is doing, is almost certainly not tax evasion, but tax avoidance. The first one is illegal, the latter is legal. A better word here would be tax optimisation. It's the exact same why he is domiciled in Monaco.
What this particular move is designed to do is to turn cash into a minimally taxable asset, whilst avoiding VAT at the time of purchase.
I think what's going on here as mentioned he's a corporate entity, which makes he primarily gets taxed on the divident he gives himself. Tax on dividends is a lot lower than normal income tax. Add in a bunch of structures to avoid entreprise tax by being registered at the Bermudas, which again is legal, and you are doing solid legal tax optimisation.
It boils down to how you view tax avoidance, morally acceptable or not. But that's a debate that's not really suited to F1.
As mentioned, it is up to the government to act on this by resisting lobby work (oh yes, there's a huge machine at the background that will resist at any cost such reforms!) and introduce a better legislative framework. That has to be done on EU level, but Great Britain already excluded themselves from that effectively. No way one country alone can manage such tax reforms. Capital will always go to the least taxed location. If the last option to not be taxed was opening up an office on the Moon, that would happen at a surprisingly short timeframe.
Well no. The UK is quite capable of closing down British Tax Havens if the Government wanted to do that. Of course other tax havens would come into prominence. But they lack what makes British Tax Havens so attractive to those with a lot of money - they are governed by English Common Law for the most part.
F1 drivers aren't a strange breed; they do the exact same thing as basically anyone else who has accumulated enough capital. Even social institutions that promote these tax reforms ironically do tax optimisation.
They are just as mobile as the Super Rich. Nothing strange about them really, more money just means you have a different set of problems to deal with. Including tax bills.
Good post.
No I do not see tax avoidance as morally acceptable. However, I perfectly understand that entreprises do this and I am happy to accept they make use of it. I can even understand and accept they use lobby groups. After all, such entreprises have the main goal of making profits, as much as possible. I will only deem it unacceptable on their side if they use illegal practices.
Where I find it morally unacceptable is that governments allow it. Might sound contradictory when I already stated I accept lobby groups. However, it's up to the governments to resist lobbying (and for the record, you also have 'good' lobbying) and push through legislation in an united front. The issue is that states and countries are in competition with eachother, with arguments like tax reductions/tax simplifications/tax exceptions will bring in jobs. Well, I believe there are 2 states in the USA with a city right on the state border, putting each half of the city under respective state legislation (I don't remember which states and city). Instead of those 2 states simply working together, they compete over who can hand the biggest tax cuts. What you got over the last few decades was that jobs would go from one side of the city to the other (and I mean in a physical way), without any new jobs actually being created in the city as a whole.
This thread should be closed. It's worse than ying yang.
Whenever there is a thread that's technical but puts lewis in a good light it is closed.
Now that there is something negative and totally for TMZ or Daily mail, its on F1T front page.
I am disappointed in the moderators for accommodating this. It sets a bad precedent.
We allow this thread because it's not religious, not fan preference or necessarily political (although some people try to make it). If people cannot handle to discuss a debate like tax avoidance in proper, then we should limit all debates strictly to technical topics. And I think that would create a huge backlash.
I do understand people would love to go back to a pure technical forum. And we increase efforts every year to more strict on that in for instance the hardware topic. The issue is however, back in 2010 and before this was a much smaller place with less members who more dedicated to pure hardware. Back then almost no moderation was required!
I will take this in consideration however. But things at one point have to go 2 ways: moderators can be strict and limit discussion, but there also has to be acceptance from the members to act under stricter policy and also be able to discuss matters like this in a technical way. What I missed in this topic is the specific construction Hamilton used to avoid the tax. That's a 100% technical debate.
Tax avoidance, its causes and remedies is political. Putting a driver's name in the title doesn't alter that. By your own rules about "no politics" this thread shouldn't be allowed at all.
If you are more fortunate than others, build a larger table not a taller fence.
Tax avoidance, its causes and remedies is political. Putting a driver's name in the title doesn't alter that. By your own rules about "no politics" this thread shouldn't be allowed at all.
I think this might be a political statement, but whatever : I find, atleast for my country, government decisions on tax policy suprisingly neutral. When we say no politics allowed, we don't mean any authoritive decision can't be discussed. That would forbid any technical or sportive regulation change to be discussed as that would fall as well under politics.
What we mean by it, is that the messages shouldn't either be left wing or right wing inspired. To put it blunt: no communism, no extreme capitalism. It has to come from a neutral viewpoint, or atleast without any obvious preference for left or right. For instance, my standpoints come from an economic viewpoint (although not obviously stated).
For instance, this is not allowed:
Well, the rich wanna keep their money. Surprise surprise.
To your credit, that should be in the forum policy. Noted.
: I find, atleast for my country, government decisions on tax policy suprisingly neutral. When we say no politics allowed, we don't mean any authoritive decision can't be discussed. That would forbid any technical or sportive regulation change to be discussed as that would fall as well under politics.