On 02/03/2011 11:56, John Rumm wrote:
On 02/03/2011 07:50, Roger Chapman wrote:
On 01/03/2011 23:45, Doctor Drivel wrote:

He would have probably lost £2,940,000 in tax! (given it was probably
during the 70's when the 98% tax rate applied to "unearned income"
such as royalties from inventions etc).

A pity they never exteded that to land instead.

I am sure Investment bankers would be united in their support for
Dribble if they knew there was a chance of introducing a tax system that
would leave them paying next to no tax.

Are you suggesting Dribble is some kind of banker? ;-)

I don't think so, but the word does rhyme :-)

Dave