Bluff and bluster fails.

[MNW67]

That sounds like a fair summary.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

I see the chicken biker is working hard to distract attention from the Tory Bra Baroness who used her Tory buddy contacts in government to jump to the front of the queue and loot many millions from the nation for worthless tat.

And then lied that it was nothing to do with her.

And cynically took the company into administration.

Deliberate, obviously.

 

[MNW67]

And cynically took the company into administration.

Deliberate, obviously.

Did she put the profits in trust. Or was that another story.

 

[MNW67]

It looks like £29m was put into a trust which actually exists.

 

[motorbiking]

When you read the full story, the whole "trust" idea was invented by the Sunday Times.

And when you drill down into the tax rules, there would have been absolutely no advantage in doing it the way it is claimed Starmer did it, compared to keeping it in his sole name. That is the most frustrating part of the story. Nobody in the media has gone through and said, this is what the tax rules would have been if he had kept it in his own name, and this is what the tax rules would have been in a life interest trust. If they had done so they would have seen that the rules for IHT and CGT were actually identical both ways. He is being accused, with zero evidence, of using a tax structure which could never have been of any advantage.

thats obviously untrue.

The interview is clear and he is on record.

 

[motorbiking]

I see the chicken biker is working hard to distract attention from the Tory Bra Baroness who used her Tory buddy contacts in government to jump to the front of the queue and loot many millions from the nation for worthless tat.

And then lied that it was nothing to do with her.

I forgot, you've no interest in Labour MPs who dodge taxes.

 

[motorbiking]

And cynically took the company into administration.

Deliberate, obviously.

there is nothing cynical, it was inevitable.

Imagine you did some work on a car and charged someone £2,000, you spent £900 on parts and other costs. Your customer sues you and wins an award for £2,000, you don't get your parts and costs back. Now multiply that by 100. You are £9M out of pocket + your legal fees.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

there is nothing cynical, it was inevitable.

Imagine you did some work on a car and charged someone £2,000, you spent £900 on parts and other costs. Your customer sues you and wins an award for £2,000, you don't get your parts and costs back. Now multiply that by 100. You are £9M out of pocket + your legal fees.

Great if my business was just about 1 car and 1 transaction

No sympathy for bad business practice

 

[motorbiking]

Great if my business was just about 1 car and 1 transaction

No sympathy for bad business practice

me neither. particularly since there are allegations of Fraud in the judgement.

 

[blup]

I don't really see the connection. I have been trying to compare the rules back in 1996 when this "trust" was supposed to have been created. At that time, there seems to have been no potential tax advantage at all to doing it the way it was alleged. If Starmer had kept full ownership, any potential tax liability would have been exactly the same as if he had used a "trust". Nothing in the media has actually said anything different. It is all hints and innuendos.

I never even noticed this story at the weekend. It seems to have quickly died a death. If MBK hadn't brought it up as a distraction, I doubt anybody on here would have ever discussed it.

Post # 93, you refer to a trust being cgt/IHT neutral on any uplift until 2006

 

[blup]

And cynically took the company into administration.

Deliberate, obviously.

Company law needs amending to provide for personal liability in appropriate cases, or to enable the profits to be followed up

 

[carmanmemoranda]

Company law needs amending to provide for personal liability in appropriate cases, or to enable the profits to be followed up

Yes, lots of stories, including some in the news today, of cynical business practice to avoid debts and responsibilities.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

me neither. particularly since there are allegations of Fraud in the judgement.

So you'd like our money back too ?

Much like buying a faulty product from a shop and obtaining a refund

 

[motorbiking]

Company law needs amending to provide for personal liability in appropriate cases, or to enable the profits to be followed up

Laws already exist. Google "lifting the corporate veil"

 

[Londoner2]

Where will they recoup the £122m from?