Current Affairs The Conservative Party

[hullefc]

I wonder when Rees Mogg will explain why he, and his Eton mates, do not want to do their patriotic duty and pay all their taxes to the UK government.

 

[orchard]

Theresa May's husband has 'serious questions to answer' on tax avoidance

• Adam Payne, Adam Bienkov and Camilla Hodgson
  
• 1h
• 38

Theresa May with her husband Philip, who works for a firm linked to the Paradise Papers scandal.Reuters/Wolfgang Rattay

• Exclusive: Labour calls on Theresa May's husband Philip to answer questions about his role at a company linked to the Paradise Papers tax avoidance scandal.
• Philip May works for investment management firm Capital Group, which reportedly used offshore-registered funds to make investments in a Bermuda-registered company.
• Shadow Minister for the Cabinet Office, Jon Trickett, says May has "serious questions to answer."
• Downing Street says May has no role in investment decisions at the company.

LONDON - Labour has called for the prime minister's husband Philip May to answer "serious" questions about his role at a company linked to the Paradise Papers tax avoidance scandal.

Leaked emails seen by Private Eye suggest that investment advisors Capital Group, where Mr May is a relationship manager, used offshore law firm Appleby to arrange investments in tax havens.

Capital Group's Cayman Islands funds, CGPE V LLP and Capital International Private Equity Funds (CIPEF) V LP, invested in a Bermuda-registered South American agriculture company, called El Tejar, Private Eye reported. Both the Cayman Islands and Bermuda are offshore jurisdictions, known for their zero rates of tax.

Labour's Shadow Minister for the Cabinet Office, Jon Trickett, told Business Insider that Philip May now had serious questions to answer.

"There are some serious questions for Philip May to answer about his firm's use of tax havens, whether he had any knowledge of it and if he thinks this is an acceptable way to do business," Trickett said.



He added: "Labour has previously asked Theresa May what her government plans to do to clamp down on the tax havens where money is squirrelled away to avoid paying taxes for public services in this country. When it comes to paying tax, there is one rule for the super-rich and another for the rest of us and, in refusing to act, the Prime Minister appears to condone this."

A spokesperson for the prime minister told Business Insider that Philip May was not involved in any investment decisions at the company

"Mr May is involved in the development of Capital Group's retirement solutions. He is not an investor but consults with other Capital associates on retirement products and solutions for clients," they said.

Theresa May's 'blind trust'

Theresa May and Philip MayLeon Neal / Getty

Downing Street has denied that either the PM or husband have any "direct" investments offshore.

"Neither the prime minister nor Mr May have any direct offshore investments," her spokesperson said last week.

"Their investments have been declared to the Cabinet office and are held in a blind trust."



The use of a blind trust raises the possibility that the Mays could have money invested offshore without their knowledge.

Asked about this, the PM's spokesperson replied: "The nature of a blind trust is just that. It is a well-established mechanism for protecting ministers in their handling of interests and it means they are not involved in any decisions on the management, acquisitions or disposal of items in the trust. By definition a blind trust is blind."

Asked by BI whether the prime minister had requested that the blind trust was ethical in terms of tax, they replied that they "have nothing more to add," on the matter.

The leaked emails concerning Capital Group are part of the cache of documents stolen from Appleby last year, which detail the complex financial arrangements of some of the world's richest individuals, and have been dubbed the "Paradise Papers."

The use of offshore tax havens to register companies and make investments has been put under the spotlight in recent years due to numerous leaks, another example being the Panama Papers, published in 2016.

However, there are many legal means by which companies and individuals can structure their finances via offshore jurisdictions to avoid tax. Capital Group is not accused of any wrongdoing.

Capital Group is yet to respond to emails seeking comment.

 

[orchard]

 

[orchard]

Theresa May and Amber Rudd suppress Westminster child abuse documents for national security reasons
Guest Contributor
November 20, 2017

ShareTweetGoogleDiggRedditStumbleuponMail

Breaking:
Labour MP Lisa Nandy just revealed in parliament the embarrassing inconsistencies between Prime Minister Theresa May and Home Secretary Amber Rudd over documents being hidden from the inquiry into allegations of child abuse by MP Cyril Smith.

“The Home Secretary told me that some papers would be withheld from the Cyrill Smith inquiry for national security reasons,” Nandy told the House of Commons, yet she added: “this week the Prime Minister has written to me to say we are clear that the work of the security services will not prevent information being shared with other such inquiries.”

– And she challenged Amber Rudd to confirm “for the survivors of Cyril Smith who have waited for decades” for justice – whether papers on historic allegations of child abuse against Smith will be withheld from inquiries for reasons of national security.

 

[orchard]

Britain on course for longest fall in living standards since records began over 60 years ago

Published on 23 November 2017



Britain is on course for the longest period of falling living standards since records began in the 1950s, with the current crunch forecast to last longer than the post-crisis income squeeze, the Resolution Foundation said today (Thursday) in its overnight Budget analysis.

The report Freshly Squeezed highlights the unprecedented scale of the economic downgrade handed down to the Chancellor by the OBR, and how this impacts on the public and families’ finances.

The analysis finds that:

• The OBR has handed the Chancellor the biggest downgrade to productivity forecasts since its creation in 2010.
• On a ten-year rolling basis, productivity growth is set to fall to 0.1 per cent by the end of 2017, marking this as the worst decade for productivity growth since 1812 – when Napoleon was busy invading Russia.
• As a result the economy is on course to be £42bn smaller in 2022, compared to the March 2017 forecast.

Faced with these grim economic forecasts driving projections for an extra £30bn of borrowing by 2021-22, the Chancellor has chosen to accept that public finance deterioration and increase it by a further £15bn. In doing so, he has all but abandoned his main fiscal objective (and manifesto aim) of reaching an absolute surplus by the middle of the decade.

The Foundation notes that:

• If the Chancellor did decide to meet the Conservative Manifesto aim it would require a doubling of the pace of deficit reduction in the three years running up to 2025-26.
• A slight pause in cuts to day to day departmental spending (per person) is set to take place in 2018-19. However, budgets are still set to be 16 per cent lower in 2022-23 than in 2010-11. In contrast, capital spending per person is set to exceed pre-crisis levels by the start of the next decade.

Looking at how the revised economic forecasts affect household incomes, the analysis finds that:

• The current income squeeze is set to be longer (though shallower) than the post-crash squeeze, with real household disposable incomes set to fall for an unprecedented 19 successive quarters between 2015 and 2020.
• Despite welcome but relatively small shifts on Universal Credit, tax and benefit policies announced since Summer Budget 2015 are set to put downward pressure on living standards and upward pressure on inequality. The poorest third of households are set for an average loss of £715 a year by the end of the parliament, while the richest third gain an average of £185.

The Foundation’s analysis of the measures making up the Chancellor’s welcome focus on housing finds that:

• Additional housing capital investment is set to take spending to levels greater than the 2000s (outside the fiscal stimulus peak of 2008 to 2010) driving progress towards building 300,000 homes a year.
• The cumulative £3bn cost of the abolition of stamp duty for many first time buyers could have supported the building of 40,000 social rented properties or around 140,000 homes through the government’s own Housing Infrastructure Fund.
• The policy is set to cost £160,000 for every additional home owner created, sufficient for the Chancellor to have instead simply given people typically priced properties in over a quarter of local authorities in England and Wales.

Torsten Bell, Director of the Resolution Foundation, said:

“Following years of incremental changes, yesterday the OBR handed down the mother of all economic downgrades pushing up borrowing for the Treasury.

“While Philip Hammond chose to take a relaxed approach to additional borrowing, families are unlikely to do so when it comes to the deeply troubling outlook for their living standards that the Budget numbers set out. Families are now projected to be in the early stages of the longest period of continuous falls in disposable incomes in over 60 years – longer even than that following the financial crisis.

“On the substance of the Budget the Chancellor has made the right call in boosting housing investment and focusing on this key issue of intergenerational concern. However, yesterday’s stamp duty rabbit is in reality a very poor way to boost home ownership. Its £3bn cost could have been better spent building 140,000 new homes through the government’s own Housing Investment Fund.

“Faced with a grim economic backdrop the Chancellor will see this Budget as a political success. But that would be cold comfort for Britain’s families given the bleak outlook it paints for their living standards.

“Hopefully the OBR’s forecasts will prove to be wrong because, while the first sentence of the Budget document reads ‘the United Kingdom has a bright future’, the brutal truth is: not on these forecasts it doesn’t.”

 

[Ron Swanson]

I love that Hammond is trying to lift the doom and gloom around the projections by saying 'come on, prove them wrong.' The Economy doesn't work like that, sweetheart.

 

[Connor]

 

[Tubey]

Actual scum like.

 

[summerisle]

The lies, the whole lies, and nothing but the lies. The Mother of Parliaments strikes again.

 

[DanEFC92]

Spent how much with the DUP deal? Tossers.

 

[Number_25]

Organised spivery.

 

[Zezti]

This entire government just makes it up as it goes.

 

[peteblue]

Britain on course for longest fall in living standards since records began over 60 years ago

Published on 23 November 2017



Britain is on course for the longest period of falling living standards since records began in the 1950s, with the current crunch forecast to last longer than the post-crisis income squeeze, the Resolution Foundation said today (Thursday) in its overnight Budget analysis.

The report Freshly Squeezed highlights the unprecedented scale of the economic downgrade handed down to the Chancellor by the OBR, and how this impacts on the public and families’ finances.

The analysis finds that:

• The OBR has handed the Chancellor the biggest downgrade to productivity forecasts since its creation in 2010.
• On a ten-year rolling basis, productivity growth is set to fall to 0.1 per cent by the end of 2017, marking this as the worst decade for productivity growth since 1812 – when Napoleon was busy invading Russia.
• As a result the economy is on course to be £42bn smaller in 2022, compared to the March 2017 forecast.

Faced with these grim economic forecasts driving projections for an extra £30bn of borrowing by 2021-22, the Chancellor has chosen to accept that public finance deterioration and increase it by a further £15bn. In doing so, he has all but abandoned his main fiscal objective (and manifesto aim) of reaching an absolute surplus by the middle of the decade.

The Foundation notes that:

• If the Chancellor did decide to meet the Conservative Manifesto aim it would require a doubling of the pace of deficit reduction in the three years running up to 2025-26.
• A slight pause in cuts to day to day departmental spending (per person) is set to take place in 2018-19. However, budgets are still set to be 16 per cent lower in 2022-23 than in 2010-11. In contrast, capital spending per person is set to exceed pre-crisis levels by the start of the next decade.

Looking at how the revised economic forecasts affect household incomes, the analysis finds that:

• The current income squeeze is set to be longer (though shallower) than the post-crash squeeze, with real household disposable incomes set to fall for an unprecedented 19 successive quarters between 2015 and 2020.
• Despite welcome but relatively small shifts on Universal Credit, tax and benefit policies announced since Summer Budget 2015 are set to put downward pressure on living standards and upward pressure on inequality. The poorest third of households are set for an average loss of £715 a year by the end of the parliament, while the richest third gain an average of £185.

The Foundation’s analysis of the measures making up the Chancellor’s welcome focus on housing finds that:

• Additional housing capital investment is set to take spending to levels greater than the 2000s (outside the fiscal stimulus peak of 2008 to 2010) driving progress towards building 300,000 homes a year.
• The cumulative £3bn cost of the abolition of stamp duty for many first time buyers could have supported the building of 40,000 social rented properties or around 140,000 homes through the government’s own Housing Infrastructure Fund.
• The policy is set to cost £160,000 for every additional home owner created, sufficient for the Chancellor to have instead simply given people typically priced properties in over a quarter of local authorities in England and Wales.

Torsten Bell, Director of the Resolution Foundation, said:

“Following years of incremental changes, yesterday the OBR handed down the mother of all economic downgrades pushing up borrowing for the Treasury.

“While Philip Hammond chose to take a relaxed approach to additional borrowing, families are unlikely to do so when it comes to the deeply troubling outlook for their living standards that the Budget numbers set out. Families are now projected to be in the early stages of the longest period of continuous falls in disposable incomes in over 60 years – longer even than that following the financial crisis.

“On the substance of the Budget the Chancellor has made the right call in boosting housing investment and focusing on this key issue of intergenerational concern. However, yesterday’s stamp duty rabbit is in reality a very poor way to boost home ownership. Its £3bn cost could have been better spent building 140,000 new homes through the government’s own Housing Investment Fund.

“Faced with a grim economic backdrop the Chancellor will see this Budget as a political success. But that would be cold comfort for Britain’s families given the bleak outlook it paints for their living standards.

“Hopefully the OBR’s forecasts will prove to be wrong because, while the first sentence of the Budget document reads ‘the United Kingdom has a bright future’, the brutal truth is: not on these forecasts it doesn’t.”

You have no idea what living standards were like 50/60 years ago.....

 

[orchard]

You have no idea what living standards were like 50/60 years ago.....

I didn't write the secondary article, conduct the research, nor lay claim to either. What's your point?

 

[tsubaki]

Ladies and Gentlemen - the Home Office.