Royal Gossip
April 23, 2019, 05:31:30 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  

Pages: [1] 2   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Duchy of Cornwal to be investigated for tax avoidance  (Read 4328 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
True Brit
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4434


« on: December 14, 2012, 11:35:39 pm »

This follows the ruling last year that the Ducy was a separate entity to the Prince of Wales (on that occasion for environmental purposes) and HMRC are now set to investigate Duchy claims of exemption from Corporation Tax.

Interestingly it looks like there is to be another Public Accounts Commmittee scrutiny of the Duchy's affairs next year. The last one was in 2005 and was the first time such a hearing had been hld. PC was accusedof running the Duchy "like his own private fiefdom".


http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/dec/14/prince-charles-estate-tax-avoidance
Logged

" Kate, Pippa and Carole Middleton seen at Manolo Blahnik today.. overheard asking if they carried shoes for cloven hooves. "
Alexandrine
Super Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15304



« Reply #1 on: December 14, 2012, 11:38:51 pm »

This is not Charles' year!
Logged



“Three things are to be looked to in a building: that it stand on the right spot, that it be securely founded, that it be successfully executed.” ~ Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #2 on: December 14, 2012, 11:53:45 pm »

I think 2013 will be worse for Charles.  laugh

That is what I asked Santa to bring me for Christmas anyway.    loveshower
Logged
Alexandrine
Super Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15304



« Reply #3 on: December 15, 2012, 12:01:45 am »

 laugh let's see but he now has to deal with that and the black spider memos
Logged



“Three things are to be looked to in a building: that it stand on the right spot, that it be securely founded, that it be successfully executed.” ~ Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
CathyJane
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 5372


« Reply #4 on: December 15, 2012, 03:29:23 am »

I wonder if Carole will wrap herself up and send herself to charlie-boy; the postof mistress is open, I believe.  laugh
Logged
Alexandrine
Super Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15304



« Reply #5 on: December 15, 2012, 02:32:05 pm »

Prince Charles attacked over tax payments

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/prince-charles-attacked-over-tax-payments-8420041.html
Logged



“Three things are to be looked to in a building: that it stand on the right spot, that it be securely founded, that it be successfully executed.” ~ Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #6 on: December 15, 2012, 03:36:58 pm »

Quote
It claims that an information commissioner ruling in November last year means the 675-year-old Duchy is a separate legal entity to the Prince - to whom it paid more than £18 million last year - making it liable for corporation tax.

Quote
"The Duchy clearly operates as a separate legal entity. It is only in his possession for as long as he is heir to the throne or as long as parliament allows it."

"Charles doesn't 'earn' the profit from the Duchy, it isn't money made as the result of his own hard work. And the Duchy cannot claim, as the big corporations do, that it offers a net benefit to the economy. The Duchy is simply a cash cow for the prince and the prince is clearly set on minimising his tax contributions."

I agree with this statement and I am also getting really tired of people who are always trying to avoid their fair share of taxes. Those of us who do pay our fair share do not want the ones who don't to get the benefits of living in a western country anymore. This greedy attitude needs to stop.
Logged
sandy
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 11184


« Reply #7 on: December 15, 2012, 06:01:15 pm »

I think he married Camilla when he did to avoid a financial investigation. Seems Charles can't catch a break he's being investigated anyway.
Logged
meememe
Duchess
*****
Online Online

Posts: 2662



« Reply #8 on: December 15, 2012, 09:44:18 pm »

He is paying income tax on the income of the Duchy.  He doesn't pay corporations tax because he pays income tax.  To have to pay both would be paying tax on the same income twice and I am sure all right thinking people here would agree that it is unfair to pay tax twice on the same income.  If he has to pay corporations tax then he won't be paying income tax - there is only one income to be taxed.  It is the level of tax that is to be determined - should it be income tax or corporations tax?huh
Logged
Alexandrine
Super Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15304



« Reply #9 on: December 15, 2012, 11:31:21 pm »

You can be taxed twice, don't know about the UK system though. It wouldn't be fair if he avoided paying what the others have to in the same case.

---

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2248553/Prince-Charles-reported-revenue-entrenched-tax-avoidance-scheme-18m-earnings.html
Logged



“Three things are to be looked to in a building: that it stand on the right spot, that it be securely founded, that it be successfully executed.” ~ Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
True Brit
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4434


« Reply #10 on: December 16, 2012, 12:59:10 am »

The complaint is that Charles has only ever paid personal income tax as it was always claimed by his camp that the Duchy is his own personal, private estate. It is not PC is only allowed to take the profits as income by Parliament in his role as Prince of Wales.

There has been smoke and mirrors for years with the Duchy claiming it's private when it suits their case and not when it suits them to play it the other way.

Last year a high court hearing under the auspices of the Information Commissioner ruled the Duchy performed public functions and therefore was a public body. The complaint centres around this for if it is a public body it is not the personal property of PC and therefore should pay corportion tax like every other business.

PC's income is regarded as his private income and so he should pay full income tax on this. However he only makes an offer on his tax, as does the Queen and they have only being paying this amount since 1992 (PC a year or so later) when public opinion was sorely against their tax free status.

Further there is anger throughout the UK about multinationals not paying any corporation tax as they employ offshore jiggery pokery. Starbucks is one and they have seen their profits decline rapidly as the public is boycotting them due to their tax avoidance. So they made an offer to pay (I think) £12million in tax but HRMC has said they cannot make an offer to pay tax as they are the ones who set the rate of tax which is to be calculated fairly.

Now this statement puts both PC and HM in a difficult position as they both make an offer on their tax and yet HRMC says no-one can make an offer on their tax so this will get interesting.

As for Charles paying tax twice. Why not? When I ran my own business I paid tax on the profits in the shape of corporation tax and tax on my personal income and I can assure you our profits and income was a darned sight less than the Duchy of Cornwall.
Logged

" Kate, Pippa and Carole Middleton seen at Manolo Blahnik today.. overheard asking if they carried shoes for cloven hooves. "
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #11 on: December 16, 2012, 02:09:07 am »

Charles is not paying double taxes that is all smoke and mirrors. Corporate tax and personal income taxes are two very different and separate things. Charles doesn't even pay a fair tax on his personal income.

I guess Charles won't be able to avoid this by marrying his Mistress this time.
Logged
serene grace
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 10395


Appointed Moderator


« Reply #12 on: December 16, 2012, 05:27:17 am »

I wonder if Carole will wrap herself up and send herself to charlie-boy; the postof mistress is open, I believe.  laugh

 laugh laugh laugh I'll bet Carole drools when she's in Charles presence.  She would drop-kick MM so fast if PC even hinted that he wanted her.

 Angry (I don't get why these Billionaire$ are always looking for a way to get over!)
« Last Edit: December 16, 2012, 05:29:30 am by serene grace » Logged

[/URL]
meememe
Duchess
*****
Online Online

Posts: 2662



« Reply #13 on: December 16, 2012, 08:41:59 am »

Charles has been paying income tax on the income from the Duchy since he turned 21 - voluntarily as it was exempt from tax (not later than the Queen who only started to do so in 1992 at Charles' urging and after the Windsor fire when the people refused to pay to refurbish a building that is publicly owned and told the monarch that she had to pay for it).

Whether Charles should pay income tax on the income of the Duchy or Corporations tax on the income is one thing but to say he should pay both income tax AND corporations tax on the one income is totally unreasonable (although considering the poster who said it not surprising)

To pay his full income tax he should be paying 50% - after legitimate expenses such as donations to charity of course - that anyone else can claim along with the salaries of his official employees such as secretaries but not maids who clean his home.

To pay the full corporations tax he should be paying 23% in 2013.

He would be better off paying corporations tax as that rate is less than half the current income tax for someone earning as much as he does (the small income he has that would be charged at below 50% is so small that I have said that it is all at 50%).

If he has to pay both income tax and corporations tax on the same money it would total 73% (and be unfair if no one else has to pay both income tax and corporations tax on the same money).
Logged
serene grace
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 10395


Appointed Moderator


« Reply #14 on: December 16, 2012, 08:46:04 am »

Thank you for explaining it meememe.

Logged

[/URL]
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #15 on: December 16, 2012, 10:35:53 am »

I found this quote on another site and it explains it better.
Quote
Well, when income tax was reintroduced in 1842, Queen Victoria paid it in full, as did Edward VII, George V and Edward VIII - at the rate that was being applied to other citizens.

When George VI came to teh throne he decided that he didn't want to pay tax despite the great depression, the debt being 174% of GDP and us having to re-arm against Hitler - the govt of the day probably didn't like it, but didn't want another "crisis" over the BRF given that they'd just gone thru' abdication of Edward VIII.

But he was being unpatriotic at a time of great need.

QEII didn't pay any tax at all either, till 1992, when public anger grew so fierce, she caved, in order to prevent the monarchy from toppling.

I think top rate of tax in 1982 was 60%, so Prince Charles paying 50% was underpaying. And reducing his payment to 25% in 1982 when everyone else was kept on 60% was disgraceful!

Secondly, the courts have ruled that the trust is a separate legal entity from the prince. The rule in the UK is that all legal entities must pay tax. So a corporation will pay tax, then their shareholders will pay additional tax on their dividends, and their employees will pay income tax and National Insurance - all separate entities, so they are ALL taxed despite being involved in one business.

When you take into account the fact that Charles is not a corporation but that the Duchy is the Corporation then he is not paying taxes twice.

The CEO's of corporations pay taxes separately as do their share holders so why should Charles and the Duchy get special treatment.

He also cut his taxes when he got married because he was supporting a wife.   laugh  He pays what he wants to not what he is supposed to.
Logged
True Brit
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4434


« Reply #16 on: December 16, 2012, 05:32:47 pm »

^ Quite correct Snokitty and thankyou for adding. These taxes are completely different. Corporation tax is calculated on the profits of a business and income tax is paid by every individual who receives an income which can be from a number of sources such as pension, paid salary, dividends etc.

It is indeed smoke and mirrors.
Logged

" Kate, Pippa and Carole Middleton seen at Manolo Blahnik today.. overheard asking if they carried shoes for cloven hooves. "
True Brit
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4434


« Reply #17 on: December 16, 2012, 05:57:05 pm »

Err MeMeMe just which poster are you referring to here? All the comments that have been made are perfectly valid.

Quote
Whether Charles should pay income tax on the income of the Duchy or Corporations tax on the income is one thing but to say he should pay both income tax AND corporations tax on the one income is totally unreasonable (although considering the poster who said it not surprising)

If you have a business (which it is being claimed the Duchy is) you pay corporation tax on the profits. This is why Starbucks, Google, Amazon etc have been under severe criticism as they do not pay any corporation tax.

If, as an individual, you have a personal income you pay tax on that after all personal allowances have been deducted.

You are still working for the viewpoint that PC actually owns the Duchy like such as the Duke of Northumberland. He does not it has been established that the Duchy performs public duties and is therefore a separate entity to PC the person and deemed a business.

Therefore two lots of taxes come into play - the business is taxed (corporation) and the individual is taxed (income tax).

So let's say I have a business (which can be limited, private, trust etc) that makes profits. The company accountants tell me I have to pay corporation tax on these profits.

Being the MD I have paid myself an annual salary from the same source and this is subject to income tax. Just because I have already paid corporation tax doesn't mean I am not liable for income tax. HMRC has already said to Starbucks that is not for them to make an offer on tax HMRC tells them how much tax to pay. I beleive this now puts both PC and HM in a difficult position as both are seen to make an offer.

I really cannot understand how anyone can see a situation where a fabulously wealthy family (whose wealth has amassed due to public money and being allowed to avoid tax) should be able to avoid taxes in this way. The standard of living in the UK has now officially dropped; there are food banks operating in most towns and cities and the elderly are now being told they will have to sell very modest homes to pay for their old age care.

Something is radically wrong and it may be hard for die hard monarchists to accept the immorality of such a situation but it really is unacceptable
Logged

" Kate, Pippa and Carole Middleton seen at Manolo Blahnik today.. overheard asking if they carried shoes for cloven hooves. "
meememe
Duchess
*****
Online Online

Posts: 2662



« Reply #18 on: December 16, 2012, 09:02:43 pm »

My point is that there is only ONE income being produced.

Charles is currently paying income tax on that income.

Whether the tax he should be paying is income or corporation tax is the main question it seems to me - not whether he should be paying tax - that to me is a given but he shouldn't have to pay tax twice on the ONE income.

The income is produced by the Duchy for Charles - so charge the Duchy corporation tax at 23% or charge Charles income tax at 50% but it would be wrong to charge both corporation tax and income tax on that ONE income (he would actually be better off with the corporation tax as it is at a much lower rate than the income tax rate).
Logged
True Brit
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4434


« Reply #19 on: December 16, 2012, 10:01:14 pm »

I think we'll end up having to agree to disagree.  flower

There are profits being created by a successful company albeit Starbucks, Joes Soap's Garage Ltd or the Duchy of Cornwall. If it is a "body corporate" i.e. a separate legal entity (which rightly or wrongly is what is being claimed in regard to the Duchy) then it is liable for corporation tax on its profits. This applies to limited and private companies as well as trusts and other entities.

Now the owner of Starbucks, Joe Soaps Ltd of the Prince of Wales is entitled to take a salary out of those profits which is then regarded as earned income and is subject to personal income tax.

One original source of business income. Two entirely different taxes levied for entirely different reasons.

Any person who owns his or her own company and also draws a salary income from that company is in the same position as PC. I think you're missing the crucial point here that is a high court hearing of the information commissioner ruled that the Duchy is a separate entity from the person Duke of Cornwall as the former performs public functions such as operating harbours and in the court case had environmental duties under the law.

It is this ruling which has established that the Duchy is a "body corporate" and not the private property of the PoW. Of course, if it turns out that PC can prove the Duchy is his own personal property then your argument comes into play, but only then.
Logged

" Kate, Pippa and Carole Middleton seen at Manolo Blahnik today.. overheard asking if they carried shoes for cloven hooves. "
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines | Imprint Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!