Royal Gossip
April 25, 2019, 09:38:09 pm *
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 4333 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
True Brit
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4434


« Reply #20 on: December 16, 2012, 10:37:01 pm »

Timed out but this is from  Richard Murphy a tax specialist and accountant of Tax Research UK who points out two other taxes PC appears to avoid - capital gains and inheritance tax.

It's already being dubbed Starchucks!
.

Quote
If you haven’t read this Guardian report (and yes, I did contribute) then please do.
 
There’s not a shadow of a doubt the Prince’s tax arrangements are in the box marked “PR” because they sure as heck aren’t related to any tax law I can find.
 
Even if he does pay income tax on the Duchy’s income (and it’s never been clear to me that such arrangements accord with any recognised tax law) he does not pay capital gains tax on its gains and nor will his estate pay inheritance tax on the value of his life interest which would both seem appropriate in tax trust law. So, this looks decidedly like tax from the Starbuck’s PR book, but not from the statute book.
 
And the right question is, why is that?

http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2012/12/16/prince-charless-700m-estate-accused-of-tax-avoidance/
Logged

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

Posts: 2663



« Reply #21 on: December 16, 2012, 11:01:47 pm »

Charles doesn't take a salary - his salary is all the income of the Duchy - not some of it but all of it.

That is what people aren't getting when comparing the Duchy to other corporations.

The entire income of the Duchy is paid to Charles as his income - that is the purpose of the Duchy.

To pay corporations tax on the 18.5 million income from the Duchy is one thing but to say he has to pay corporations tax on the 18.5 million AND income tax on that same 18.5 million is to me wrong - it is a double tax on the same 18.5 million.

That is my point - what tax he should pay in the 18.5 million of the Duchy is one question and I have no argument that he should be paying tax on that money but there are people here who are saying he should be paying both income AND corporations tax on that 18.5 million.
Logged
True Brit
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4434


« Reply #22 on: December 16, 2012, 11:13:43 pm »

I just don't know how to explain this to make it any more clearer MMM.

The whole set up is wrong - that's what's being claimed. The Duchy of Cornwall should be paying Corporation Tax on its profits like every other company in the UK.

What is happening here is the whole of the profits are going straight to PC as income. Last year in excess of £18 million.

What should be happening is that CT should be deducted before anyone is paid a salary. Which obviously means PC would get a smaller (even though extremely substantial) income.

This happens to every company in the UK. Why should the Duchy be exempt?

Yes it's two levels of tax but that is the law of the land and PC is only getting away with it because the Govt allow it.

And I'm out of this as it's getting like Groundhog Day.
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 #23 on: December 16, 2012, 11:17:11 pm »

Charles does not own the Duchy it is a separate entity in itself and works as a Corporation and so the taxes Charles pays and the taxes the Duchy pays would be separate and different taxes.

I know in some minds everything Charles does is wonderful and correct, he can do no wrong. Whatever PR excuse is put out there for his benefit will be picked up by his most ardent supporters and spouted over and over but really will never change the minds of those who actually do research.
Logged
mrharrywales
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1029


Harryite #24


WWW
« Reply #24 on: December 17, 2012, 09:08:46 pm »

I didn't know she had to pay taxes OO'
Logged


Don't worry, be Harry
Keep calm and Harry on
What happens in Vegas, not always stays in Vegas
YooperModerator
Super Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15384



« Reply #25 on: December 17, 2012, 11:09:09 pm »

She?  huh

This is about Charles....right? blink
Did I miss something essential here?
Logged


\\\"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.\\\"  Thomas Jefferson
June
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3700


« Reply #26 on: December 27, 2012, 10:05:46 am »

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).


It's not the way it works. If he is drawing income from the Duchy, then that must be taxed in his hands. But he wouldn't be paying tax twice. They are two separate entities for taxation purposes. He cannot pay corporation tax on personal income.

I have been stating that Charles would be offsetting Kate's personal expenses against his assessable income. I wonder if something has been investigated?  Lips Sealed

@ all - I'll tell you how it works in Oz:

(a) assume the Duchy was a corporation for income tax purposes and provided Charles with "income", in the form of a dividend (which is how it must be paid legally, other than a "wage"); then

(b) the Duchy would pay the corporation rate of tax on that dividend (assuming it was "fully franked"); then

(c) the income in Charles' hands would be taxed and a credit would be offered for the tax paid on the dividend.

Now, should his true rate of tax be less than the corporate rate, he will receive a windfall. But given his vast income, he ought to be paying the top rate of tax. Therefore, there would be a residual sum unpaid. I'd need to check the current UK tax rates. But the principle remains the same.

The bottom line is: THERE IS NO DOUBLE DIPPING.

I suspect that the issue is that the Duchy is not being taxed at the corporate rate, and providing Charles a gratis dividend. This is tax evasion in Oz. I haven't read the article but I've read your comments. That's all I need.

Any questions?  sigh
« Last Edit: December 27, 2012, 10:13:34 am by June » Logged
True Brit
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4434


« Reply #27 on: January 28, 2013, 01:07:50 pm »

A new development. PC invokes Human Rights Act to stop release of tax details despite HMRC agreeing and stating it is in the public interest.

However the Cabinet Office (which is said to have a PC spy working secretly) overturned this AFTER conferring with PC!


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2268938/Charles-uses-Human-Rights-Act-guard-Duchys-tax-secrets-HMRC-said-disclosure-public-interest.html#ixzz2JCLOIWck

The HRA does state a right to privacy over private life and correspondence but in the case of public interest I think it can be over-rules but it's very complex. This could well end up at the ECHR in Strasbourg - which will take months, which is probably what PC is hoping although it would have to go before the Supreme Court first.

Have to say it sounds like they are getting desperate about this to try the HRA and aided and abetted by the Cabinet Office.

Quote
Article 8 is a qualified right, so in certain circumstances public
authorities can interfere with the private and family life of an individual.
« Last Edit: January 28, 2013, 01:16:54 pm by True Brit » 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 #28 on: January 28, 2013, 01:19:40 pm »

Barristers' blogs on the subject

http://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2013/01/27/royal-interference-courttube-and-religious-freedom-the-human-rights-roundup/

and the main one

http://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2013/01/26/tom-adams-royal-consent-and-hidden-power/
« Last Edit: January 28, 2013, 01:21:29 pm by True Brit » 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 #29 on: January 28, 2013, 02:24:20 pm »

Maybe Charles doesn't want to be King after all or he thinks he has it all ready sown up so that the people's thoughts on anything does not matter.

No leader should be above the laws the government of the country have set in place for all to follow.

This Monarchy needs to end.
Logged
Kuei Fei
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 38563



WWW
« Reply #30 on: January 28, 2013, 05:57:01 pm »

I wager all year is going to start being a very unpleasant one for the Windsors; entirely justified in my view.

A new development. PC invokes Human Rights Act to stop release of tax details despite HMRC agreeing and stating it is in the public interest.
However the Cabinet Office (which is said to have a PC spy working secretly) overturned this AFTER conferring with PC!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2268938/Charles-uses-Human-Rights-Act-guard-Duchys-tax-secrets-HMRC-said-disclosure-public-interest.html#ixzz2JCLOIWck
The HRA does state a right to privacy over private life and correspondence but in the case of public interest I think it can be over-rules but it's very complex. This could well end up at the ECHR in Strasbourg - which will take months, which is probably what PC is hoping although it would have to go before the Supreme Court first.

Have to say it sounds like they are getting desperate about this to try the HRA and aided and abetted by the Cabinet Office.
Quote
Article 8 is a qualified right, so in certain circumstances public authorities can interfere with the private and family life of an individual.

The royals are not 'just every private family life' and I bet this is the revenge of the MPs for his unqualified interference in their political affairs. Now Charles is using this act to keep things private that have no business being private. He used that act to marry his tart and now he's pulling this. The harder he makes this on the MPs, the more the MPs are going to start pushing themselves in and become a lot more ruthless and unfriendly. I look forward to it. He has no problems leeching other rich people for his precious trust, so time for him to start answering some hard questions.

Logged

To receive regular news, go to "@gossippsychotic" to get updates from various other gossip websites such as "Downtown Chatter" or "Royal Gossip Psychotic" and end up reading all about all sorts of peccadilloes.
Alexandrine
Super Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15304



« Reply #31 on: January 28, 2013, 10:19:17 pm »

I find it so funny how Charles uses the human rights act always in his favour.  tehe
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
Kuei Fei
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 38563



WWW
« Reply #32 on: January 29, 2013, 01:43:17 am »

Here's one view I take:

Charles is supposed to be credible and have clean dealings because he does travel on behalf of the British nation. Andrew lost his official position of Trade Ambassador because he ended up mixing with all the wrong people and how on earth is he supposed to be respected if he's up to filth like this. Andrew is held responsible for who he associates with because it's a reflection on him. Now, Charles already has mounds of money from the Duchy coming in and he's apparently also living high off of the taxpayres hog in the state palaces and he is acquiring more for his spoiled son. The RF maintains how they 'only' cost a few pence per person and it's about time that all things be accounted for; the government and people have a right to be informed where all the money is going and it's the RF's responsibility to cooperate.

The RF has shown that they aren't above pulling something if they can get away with it and lately there have been a lot of inconsistencies about their actions. If the RF is using money they have no business using on themselves or aren't paying their own way, it is the responsibility of elected officials to find this out. The RF has been enjoying a carefree life on the taxpayer penny and the Duchy does acquire funds from taxpayers via rents and other commercial enterprises. So it does come from taxpayers.
Logged

To receive regular news, go to "@gossippsychotic" to get updates from various other gossip websites such as "Downtown Chatter" or "Royal Gossip Psychotic" and end up reading all about all sorts of peccadilloes.
Alexandrine
Super Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15304



« Reply #33 on: February 15, 2013, 07:57:37 pm »

MPs challenge tax exemptions for Prince Charles's estate
Duchy of Cornwall does not have to pay corporation or capital gains tax on trading that last year earned prince £18.3m

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/feb/15/tax-exemptions-prince-charles-estate-duchy
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 #34 on: February 15, 2013, 10:02:38 pm »

I guess they didn't get the memo that Charles is now one of the people. He has gone to a Pub, drank Tea and even stirred in his own sugar and he has been at some openings of businesses so why should he also have to pay taxes.   tehe

Because Charlie Boy if we are all in it together then you have to open up your wallet also.
Logged
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!