On 3 Jan 2016 11:56:00 GMT, Huge wrote:

On 2016-01-03, MM wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jan 2016 20:07:45 +0000, soup
wrote:

On 02/01/2016 19:35, Richard wrote:
"soup" wrote in message ...

On 02/01/2016 11:38, MM wrote:
Amazon sent an emergency
locksmith, who arrived 10 minutes ago. I'm rather surprised that he
hasn't got it open yet!
What would you do ? Open it in two minutes and get just the call-out
fee or spin the job out to sixteen minutes and get the call-out fee and
the first part of an hour that you are able to charge an entire hour for.
I'd do the job I was asked to do, without ripping off the customer.

When Amazon stops ripping off Britain then I would worry about cutting
them a square deal.

How on earth is Amazon ripping off Britain? They adhere to the tax
laws to the letter. If the tax laws are constructed in such a way that
legal loopholes are created, then I would recommend anyone to use
them. Did YOU never try to save tax?

As Lord Clyde, Lord President of the Court of Session, noted (in Ayrshire
Pullman Motor Services v Inland Revenue [1929] 14 Tax Case 754, at 763):

"No man in the country is under the smallest obligation, moral or other,
so to arrange his legal relations to his business or property as to
enable the Inland Revenue to put the largest possible shovel in his
stores. The Inland Revenue is not slow, and quite rightly, to take
every advantage which is open to it under the Taxing Statutes for the
purposes of depleting the taxpayer's pocket. And the taxpayer is in
like manner entitled to be astute to prevent, so far as he honestly
can, the depletion of his means by the Inland Revenue"

Hats off to that old lord for stating the obvious.

By comparison, you have Margaret Hodge.

I firmly believe it is in *every* taxpayer's interest to avoid any tax
wherever possible as long as it complies with the letter of the *law*.

MM