Quote
Paying a plumber cash in hand is "morally wrong" because it denies the
revenue vital funds, a Treasury minister said as the government outlined
new ways of cutting down on £5bn in tax avoidance.

David Gauke, the exchequer secretary to the Treasury, risked shining a
spotlight on whether any of his government colleagues have ever made
cash in hand payments to plumbers when he described the practice as a
large part of Britain's "hidden economy".
Unquote

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...dspending-hmrc

Trades poeple operate to current moral norms, as displayed by bankers,
politicians, journalists, entertainers, pro footballers etc. Is that news?

Nemo wrote:
Quote
Paying a plumber cash in hand is "morally wrong" because it denies the
revenue vital funds, a Treasury minister said as the government outlined
new ways of cutting down on £5bn in tax avoidance.

David Gauke, the exchequer secretary to the Treasury, risked shining a
spotlight on whether any of his government colleagues have ever made
cash in hand payments to plumbers when he described the practice as a
large part of Britain's "hidden economy".
Unquote

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...dspending-hmrc

Trades poeple operate to current moral norms, as displayed by bankers,
politicians, journalists, entertainers, pro footballers etc. Is that news?

Its bloody silly.

We should not tax the things we want to happen, like working. We should
tax the things we need to reduce, like fuel, smoking, and importing
materials and finished goods.

I have long advocated a state pension age related (but not work related)
that replaces the complex system of the dole and benefits, and zero
income tax, with infinitely more taxes raised on the sale on non
subsistence goods. Then scrap the minimum wage, because its no longer
needed as people get the pension whether they work or not.

There are issues of policing BUT it has the following advantages

- people who live here pay the sales and import taxes on goods bought
here. And high earners will WANT to live here. The presence of slots of
stinkingly rich people here with miney to burn can only be goodm,, even
if luxury goods are expensive.

- the labour market is totally flexible. People can work when they like
for who they like - they lose no benefits by working - at anything at
all. From fruit picking to washing cars and polishing your boots.

- because the state pension is limited to those who are actually born
here, not those who arrive (tough, but fair) low income people will not
find it easy to immigrate. However high earners to whom the state
pension is almost an irrelevance, will.

- because taxation is not applied to subsistence goods - essentially
food clothing and other basics - lower paid workers will be massively
subsidised and be able to compete well with offshore workers without any
directives needing to be applied. If the state pension is say £3.50 and
hour you only need pay - say - £3 an hour on top of that to employ
someone at a living wage and with no tax or NI to pay its not a bad crack.

- Because imported goods and materials are now expensive, there is a
huge incentive to recycle refurbish and repair. Essentially it baises
the national economy towards re-use and away from consumer buy and trash.

- naturally this free market in labour with the government simply not
caring about who earns what - only what they spend and what they spend
it on - would require exit from the EU. Well, so what?

Its time we put Britain first, and British workers, yea even unto the
man who cuts your grass.

--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

Huge wrote:
On 2012-07-24, Nemo wrote:
Quote
Paying a plumber cash in hand is "morally wrong" because it denies the
revenue vital funds, a Treasury minister said as the government outlined
new ways of cutting down on £5bn in tax avoidance.

David Gauke, the exchequer secretary to the Treasury, risked shining a
spotlight on whether any of his government colleagues have ever made
cash in hand payments to plumbers when he described the practice as a
large part of Britain's "hidden economy".
Unquote

Dear Mr. Gauke,

**** you. **** your 10 grand in fiddled expenses, **** your tax avoidance
consultant wife, **** your lying hypocrisy, **** the State stealing 50% of
my income, **** your interfering hooter being poked in where it doesn't belong,
**** your implicit assumption that all the money belongs to the State and
**** the noise that paying extra taxes will somehow stop the State from
****ing money away.

Yours,

A taxpayer.


Yep. I have disagreed with you on many things, but not this.


--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

Nemo wrote:


Trades poeple operate to current moral norms, as displayed by bankers,
politicians, journalists, entertainers, pro footballers etc. Is that news?

I used to feel bad about the odd fiddle. Now I do not, because I see the
government wasting my money on wars based on lies, bankers being bailed out
of their own self inflicted failure, and big fat contracts worth billions
being awarded to the incompetant like G4S for no good reason.

--
Tim Watts

Huge wrote:

On 2012-07-24, Nemo wrote:
Quote
Paying a plumber cash in hand is "morally wrong" because it denies the
revenue vital funds, a Treasury minister said as the government outlined
new ways of cutting down on £5bn in tax avoidance.

David Gauke, the exchequer secretary to the Treasury, risked shining a
spotlight on whether any of his government colleagues have ever made
cash in hand payments to plumbers when he described the practice as a
large part of Britain's "hidden economy".
Unquote

Dear Mr. Gauke,

**** you. **** your 10 grand in fiddled expenses, **** your tax avoidance
consultant wife, **** your lying hypocrisy, **** the State stealing 50% of
my income, **** your interfering hooter being poked in where it doesn't
belong, **** your implicit assumption that all the money belongs to the
State and **** the noise that paying extra taxes will somehow stop the
State from ****ing money away.

Yours,

A taxpayer.

+ 1-googleplex.


--
Tim Watts

The Natural Philosopher wrote
Nemo wrote

Quote
Paying a plumber cash in hand is "morally wrong" because it denies the
revenue vital funds, a Treasury minister said as the government outlined
new ways of cutting down on £5bn in tax avoidance.

David Gauke, the exchequer secretary to the Treasury, risked shining a
spotlight on whether any of his government colleagues have ever made cash
in hand payments to plumbers when he described the practice as a large
part of Britain's "hidden economy".
Unquote

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...dspending-hmrc

Trades poeple operate to current moral norms, as displayed by bankers,
politicians, journalists, entertainers, pro footballers etc. Is that
news?

Its bloody silly.

We'll see...

We should not tax the things we want to happen, like working. We should
tax the things we need to reduce, like fuel, smoking,

Can't raise anything like the sort of revenue thats needed to pay for
what the voters have decided a modern first world country needs to do.

and importing materials and finished goods.

Mindlessly parochial. The world's moved on, dinosaur.

I have long advocated a state pension age related (but not work related)
that replaces the complex system of the dole and benefits, and zero income
tax, with infinitely more taxes raised on the sale on non subsistence
goods.

More fool you. Makes a hell of a lot more sense for those
that work to provide for their own time past working instead.

Then scrap the minimum wage, because its no longer needed as people get
the pension whether they work or not.

Even sillier.

There are issues of policing BUT it has the following advantages

- people who live here pay the sales and import taxes on goods bought
here.

But that's a very regressive tax system where those who dont
earn much pay a lot more tax than they do currently. No thanks.

And high earners will WANT to live here.

Doesnt necessarily mean that their jobs will allow them to do that.

The presence of slots of stinkingly rich people here with miney to burn
can only be goodm,,

Even sillier, and you are clearly completely blotto, again.

even if luxury goods are expensive.

Even sillier. They will in fact **** off to where they arent taxed at all.

- the labour market is totally flexible.

Even sillier.

People can work when they like for who they like - they lose no benefits
by working - at anything at all.

Hordes won't bother to work at all.

From fruit picking to washing cars and polishing your boots.

**** all bother with polished boots anymore, you silly old fart.

- because the state pension is limited to those who are actually born
here, not those who arrive (tough, but fair) low income people will not
find it easy to immigrate.

Their situation will still be much better than where they
come from, so they will still keep pouring into the country.

However high earners to whom the state pension is almost an irrelevance,
will.

Nope, they'll keep ****ing off to where
they dont have to pay any taxes at all.

- because taxation is not applied to subsistence goods

Have fun actually defining those.

- essentially food clothing and other basics

Pity about how you define subsistence food and clothing.

- lower paid workers will be massively subsidised and be able to compete
well with offshore workers

Only in your pathetic little drug crazed fantasyland.

without any directives needing to be applied. If the state pension is say
£3.50 and hour you only need pay - say - £3 an hour on top of that to
employ someone at a living wage

So your hare brained 'state pension' isn't even a living wage eh ?

So their kids will just starve to death if they dont work eh ?

and with no tax or NI to pay its not a bad crack.

Pity about the starving kids of those who dont work.

- Because imported goods and materials are now expensive, there is a huge
incentive to recycle refurbish and repair.

So we will see a return to how people operated during the great depression
eh ?

Can't see too many of the voters ever buying that any time soon.

Essentially it baises the national economy towards re-use and away from
consumer buy and trash.

Until the voters pull the plug on your hare brained scheme.

- naturally this free market in labour with the government simply not
caring about who earns what - only what they spend and what they spend it
on - would require exit from the EU. Well, so what?

Its time we put Britain first, and British workers, yea even unto the man
who cuts your grass.

So you expect all the immigrants that aren't born
there to head off back where they came from eh ?

Completely off with the ****ing fairys, as always.

"Huge" wrote in message
...
On 2012-07-24, Nemo wrote:
Quote
Paying a plumber cash in hand is "morally wrong" because it denies the
revenue vital funds, a Treasury minister said as the government outlined
new ways of cutting down on £5bn in tax avoidance.

David Gauke, the exchequer secretary to the Treasury, risked shining a
spotlight on whether any of his government colleagues have ever made
cash in hand payments to plumbers when he described the practice as a
large part of Britain's "hidden economy".
Unquote

Dear Mr. Gauke,

**** you. **** your 10 grand in fiddled expenses,

**** your tax avoidance consultant wife

mmm...could be onto a winning proposition here.
Assuming she is flexible, innovative and forward looking.
And takes cash (amongst other things) in hand.
And is looking to boost the economy.


**** your lying hypocrisy, **** the State stealing 50% of
my income, **** your interfering hooter being poked in where it doesn't
belong,
**** your implicit assumption that all the money belongs to the State and
**** the noise that paying extra taxes will somehow stop the State from
****ing money away.

Yours,

A taxpayer.


--
Today is Setting Orange, the 59th day of Confusion in the YOLD 3178
"If there is anyone here who I have not insulted, I beg their
pardon." Johannes Brahms (1833-97).

--
No plan survives contact with the enemy.
[Not even bunny]

Helmuth von Moltke the Elder

(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
...
In article , "78u77"
wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote
Nemo wrote

Quote
Paying a plumber cash in hand is "morally wrong" because it denies the
revenue vital funds, a Treasury minister said as the government
outlined new ways of cutting down on £5bn in tax avoidance.

David Gauke, the exchequer secretary to the Treasury, risked shining a
spotlight on whether any of his government colleagues have ever made
cash in hand payments to plumbers when he described the practice as a
large part of Britain's "hidden economy".
Unquote

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...dspending-hmrc

Trades poeple operate to current moral norms, as displayed by
bankers, politicians, journalists, entertainers, pro footballers etc.
Is that news?

Its bloody silly.

We'll see...

[rest of Wodney snipped]

Presumably you actually are that stupid.

"Nemo" wrote in message
...
Quote
Paying a plumber cash in hand is "morally wrong" because it denies the
revenue vital funds, a Treasury minister said as the government outlined
new ways of cutting down on £5bn in tax avoidance.

David Gauke, the exchequer secretary to the Treasury, risked shining a
spotlight on whether any of his government colleagues have ever made cash
in hand payments to plumbers when he described the practice as a large
part of Britain's "hidden economy".
Unquote

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...dspending-hmrc

Trades poeple operate to current moral norms, as displayed by bankers,
politicians, journalists, entertainers, pro footballers etc. Is that news?

Paying cash is not necessarily 'bent' - AFAIK unlike consumer bank accounts,
business bank accounts charge per transaction so there is a cost in putting
a cheque through the bank.
As long as you get a valid receipt (VAT receipt where applicable) then
paying some of the bills with cash which is then recycled by the
tradesperson on every day expenditure is in no way wrong.

Obviously the suggestion by the consumer to the tradesperson that they "Pay
cash, nudge, nudge, wink, wink, no names no pack drill no VAT and no income
tax" is encouraging the tradesperson to contrave the taxation laws.
At least we are not as paranoid as some Nordic countries where tax is/was so
high that people went to a cashless economy and traded skills; "You mend my
car and I'll paint your house" and similar. Whereupon they changed the law
so that you had to declare all services done for other people regardless of
if you were paid or not.
Makes casual sex a finacially risky proposition.
A charity f*ck should now appear on your income tax form.
Please, not in this country!

Cheers

Dave R
--
No plan survives contact with the enemy.
[Not even bunny]

Helmuth von Moltke the Elder

(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

On 24/07/2012 10:05, Nemo wrote:
Quote
Paying a plumber cash in hand is "morally wrong" because it denies the
revenue vital funds, a Treasury minister said as the government outlined
new ways of cutting down on £5bn in tax avoidance.

David Gauke, the exchequer secretary to the Treasury, risked shining a
spotlight on whether any of his government colleagues have ever made
cash in hand payments to plumbers when he described the practice as a
large part of Britain's "hidden economy".
Unquote

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...dspending-hmrc

Trades poeple operate to current moral norms, as displayed by bankers,
politicians, journalists, entertainers, pro footballers etc. Is that news?

It implies that the use of cash for any transaction is potentially a tax
fiddle. Shops, bars, buses, taxis, newspaper sellers, milkmen etc. are
all probably immoral.

And the payers are equally immoral for using cash which enables the
fiddlers.

Is this politician trying to win votes?

The obvious answer is to abolish cash and make all transactions
electronic, executed via a government cloud that tracks and logs
everything. With some clever cloud-side coding the taxes could be
collected automatically - PAYP not PAYE.

On Tue, 24 Jul 2012 10:57:23 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:

Nemo wrote:


Trades poeple operate to current moral norms, as displayed by bankers,
politicians, journalists, entertainers, pro footballers etc. Is that
news?

I used to feel bad about the odd fiddle. Now I do not, because I see the
government wasting my money on wars based on lies, bankers being bailed
out of their own self inflicted failure, and big fat contracts worth
billions being awarded to the incompetant like G4S for no good reason.

You forgot to mention the massive expenses fiddles perpetrated by more
politicians than we have yet found out about...



--
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org

*lightning protection* - a w_tom conductor

Nemo :
Quote
Paying a plumber cash in hand is "morally wrong" because it denies the
revenue vital funds, a Treasury minister said as the government
outlined new ways of cutting down on £5bn in tax avoidance.

********. It's perfectly unremarkable. Whether the plumber declares it
as income is quite another matter.

The speaker is clearly maximising the scope of his mud-slinging to
include the innocent general public, with complete disregard for the
facts.

--
Mike Barnes

On 2012-07-24, Nemo wrote:

On 24/07/2012 10:05, Nemo wrote:
Quote
Paying a plumber cash in hand is "morally wrong" because it denies the
revenue vital funds, a Treasury minister said as the government outlined
new ways of cutting down on £5bn in tax avoidance.

David Gauke, the exchequer secretary to the Treasury, risked shining a
spotlight on whether any of his government colleagues have ever made
cash in hand payments to plumbers when he described the practice as a
large part of Britain's "hidden economy".
Unquote

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...dspending-hmrc

Trades poeple operate to current moral norms, as displayed by bankers,
politicians, journalists, entertainers, pro footballers etc. Is that news?

It implies that the use of cash for any transaction is potentially a tax
fiddle. Shops, bars, buses, taxis, newspaper sellers, milkmen etc. are
all probably immoral.


Well, exactly. This is a nasty slur against tradesmen. At least they
do work that's beneficial to people (unlike bankers, footballers, &
most politicians & journalists).

If I pay a tradesman in cash, it's for convenience, & I don't have the
right to assume he's doing anything dishonest without a good reason.

On 24/07/2012 10:05, Nemo wrote:
Quote
Paying a plumber cash in hand is "morally wrong" because it denies the
revenue vital funds, a Treasury minister said as the government outlined
new ways of cutting down on £5bn in tax avoidance.

What he actually said was that paying a plumber cash in hand *in order
to get a discount* was morally wrong. However, that does not make such a
good story for the newspapers; most people would probably already have a
fairly good idea that the plumber was probably not going to declare such
a payment.

Colin Bignell

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
We should not tax the things we want to happen, like working. We should
tax the things we need to reduce, like fuel, smoking, and importing
materials and finished goods.

Notice you've left out alcohol. Freudian slip?

--
*Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere may be happy.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Nemo wrote:
Paying a plumber cash in hand is "morally wrong" because it denies the
revenue vital funds, a Treasury minister said as the government outlined
new ways of cutting down on £5bn in tax avoidance.

It is no more wrong than paying by any means. What is wrong is if the
plumber fails to declare it as part of his income.

--
*Everybody lies, but it doesn't matter since nobody listens*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Nemo wrote:
Paying a plumber cash in hand is "morally wrong" because it denies the
revenue vital funds, a Treasury minister said as the government outlined
new ways of cutting down on £5bn in tax avoidance.

It is no more wrong than paying by any means. What is wrong is if the
plumber fails to declare it as part of his income.

we hae an itinerant hairdresser. Very fast very cheap. She is self
employed, but the scope for offsetting every single thing, all the car,
or most of it, all the tools, even a set of working
clothes..phonecalls..even before a few quid a week may or may not slip
into the purse for the tescos shop.


--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

On Tuesday, July 24, 2012 10:05:30 AM UTC+1, Nemo wrote:
Quote
Paying a plumber cash in hand is "morally wrong" because it denies the
revenue vital funds, a Treasury minister said as the government outlined
new ways of cutting down on £5bn in tax avoidance.

David Gauke, the exchequer secretary to the Treasury, risked shining a
spotlight on whether any of his government colleagues have ever made
cash in hand payments to plumbers

I doubt they have, as cash would be their own money why use their own when they can get the tax payer to pay via expenses ?

when he described the practice as a
large part of Britain's "hidden economy".
Unquote

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...dspending-hmrc

Trades poeple operate to current moral norms, as displayed by bankers,
politicians, journalists, entertainers, pro footballers etc. Is that news?

Hearing that this morning has actually encouraged me to offer jobs cash in hand, I think of it as equality, everyone should be able to "avoid" paying tax until they are caught, or is "avoid" the wrong word.

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
It is no more wrong than paying by any means. What is wrong is if the
plumber fails to declare it as part of his income.

we hae an itinerant hairdresser. Very fast very cheap. She is self
employed, but the scope for offsetting every single thing, all the car,
or most of it, all the tools, even a set of working
clothes..phonecalls..even before a few quid a week may or may not slip
into the purse for the tescos shop.

She is perfectly entitled to claim for all these things, being self
employed. But then only gets paid when actually working - no such thing as
holiday or sick pay.

However, if her accounts don't show a reasonable income after expenses,
the IR may look more closely.

--
*If tennis elbow is painful, imagine suffering with tennis balls *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
It is no more wrong than paying by any means. What is wrong is if the
plumber fails to declare it as part of his income.

Quite right but that doesn't appear to be *quite* what he said -
judiciously edited by the media to hype the story up.

Of course. But if the plumber isn't paying the VAT owed, can you be sure
he's paying income tax?

--
*If I throw a stick, will you leave?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
[snip]

we hae an itinerant hairdresser. Very fast very cheap. She is self
employed, but the scope for offsetting every single thing, all the car,
or most of it, all the tools, even a set of working
clothes..phonecalls..even before a few quid a week may or may not slip
into the purse for the tescos shop.

That's complete and utter ******** as you would know had you ever run your
own business. You cannot "offset" every single thing and the rules relating
to cars are complex and require the maintenance of a log if the car is used
for mixed personal/business purposes. Much of the expense related to
running a car cannot be offset against tax.

A set of working clothes hardly amounts to much and only a few trades,
including lawyers can claim for working clothes. Tools yes of course why
should one not be able to offset tax against these? Note that if at end of
life any of these items are sold then VAT, income tax and possibly CGT must
be paid on the sale value.

The picture you are painting of the self employed on the fiddle is a
fantasy. Ask Dave TMH for example.

whisky-dave wrote:

On Tuesday, July 24, 2012 10:05:30 AM UTC+1, Nemo wrote:
Quote
Paying a plumber cash in hand is "morally wrong" because it
denies the revenue vital funds, a Treasury minister said as the
government outlined new ways of cutting down on £5bn in tax avoidance.

David Gauke, the exchequer secretary to the Treasury, risked shining a
spotlight on whether any of his government colleagues have ever made
cash in hand payments to plumbers

I doubt they have, as cash would be their own money why use their own when
they can get the tax payer to pay via expenses ?

when he described the practice as a
large part of Britain's "hidden economy".
Unquote

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...dspending-hmrc

Trades poeple operate to current moral norms, as displayed by bankers,
politicians, journalists, entertainers, pro footballers etc. Is that
news?

Hearing that this morning has actually encouraged me to offer jobs cash in
hand, I think of it as equality, everyone should be able to "avoid" paying
tax until they are caught, or is "avoid" the wrong word.

The word you are looking for is "optimise"...
--
Tim Watts

On Tue, 24 Jul 2012 10:05:30 +0100, Nemo
wrote:

Quote
Paying a plumber cash in hand is "morally wrong" because it denies the
revenue vital funds, a Treasury minister said as the government outlined
new ways of cutting down on £5bn in tax avoidance.

David Gauke, the exchequer secretary to the Treasury, risked shining a
spotlight on whether any of his government colleagues have ever made
cash in hand payments to plumbers when he described the practice as a
large part of Britain's "hidden economy".
Unquote

He's an utter **** and needs a good kicking - purely for trying to put
the wind up people by this blatant and transparent piece of PR
bull****e - and having a child's grasp of economics, if nothing else.

FFS, even if some plumbers don't declare all their wodge (and for
sure, some don't, as we know) the money is still spent in the economy
and the UK Exchequer gets most of the tax take on it anyway.

****wit Gauke.

"Huge" wrote in message
...
On 2012-07-24, Nemo wrote:
Quote
Paying a plumber cash in hand is "morally wrong" because it denies the
revenue vital funds, a Treasury minister said as the government outlined
new ways of cutting down on £5bn in tax avoidance.

David Gauke, the exchequer secretary to the Treasury, risked shining a
spotlight on whether any of his government colleagues have ever made
cash in hand payments to plumbers when he described the practice as a
large part of Britain's "hidden economy".
Unquote

Dear Mr. Gauke,

**** you. **** your 10 grand in fiddled expenses, **** your tax avoidance
consultant wife, **** your lying hypocrisy, **** the State stealing 50% of
my income, **** your interfering hooter being poked in where it doesn't
belong,
**** your implicit assumption that all the money belongs to the State and
**** the noise that paying extra taxes will somehow stop the State from
****ing money away.

Yours,

A taxpayer.

+1

On 24/07/2012 11:45, David WE Roberts wrote:

"Nemo" wrote in message
...
Quote
Paying a plumber cash in hand is "morally wrong" because it denies the
revenue vital funds, a Treasury minister said as the government
outlined new ways of cutting down on £5bn in tax avoidance.

David Gauke, the exchequer secretary to the Treasury, risked shining a
spotlight on whether any of his government colleagues have ever made
cash in hand payments to plumbers when he described the practice as a
large part of Britain's "hidden economy".
Unquote

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...dspending-hmrc

Trades poeple operate to current moral norms, as displayed by
bankers, politicians, journalists, entertainers, pro footballers etc.
Is that news?

Paying cash is not necessarily 'bent' - AFAIK unlike consumer bank
accounts, business bank accounts charge per transaction so there is a
cost in putting a cheque through the bank.

Indeed... also what has how has the recipients tax affairs got anything
to do with the person paying the bill?

As long as you get a valid receipt (VAT receipt where applicable) then
paying some of the bills with cash which is then recycled by the
tradesperson on every day expenditure is in no way wrong.

Not only that, what are the alternatives? They can either take a cheque
at a huge risk of not getting paid, or they can shell out hundreds a
quarter to their bank for card payment facilities and a merchant account.

Obviously the suggestion by the consumer to the tradesperson that they
"Pay cash, nudge, nudge, wink, wink, no names no pack drill no VAT and
no income tax" is encouraging the tradesperson to contrave the taxation
laws.
At least we are not as paranoid as some Nordic countries where tax
is/was so high that people went to a cashless economy and traded skills;
"You mend my car and I'll paint your house" and similar. Whereupon they
changed the law so that you had to declare all services done for other
people regardless of if you were paid or not.

That is already the case here... or at least HMRC would have you
believe. If you "give away" a service that you would normally derive
income from, they still expect you to pay the tax on the notional value!

Makes casual sex a finacially risky proposition.
A charity f*ck should now appear on your income tax form.
Please, not in this country!

Cheers

Dave R


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 24/07/2012 14:31, Nightjar wrote:

What he actually said was that paying a plumber cash in hand *in order
to get a discount* was morally wrong.

"A huner' an' fifty quid with an invoice, a huner' cash."

On Jul 24, 10:05*am, Nemo wrote:
Quote
Paying a plumber cash in hand is "morally wrong" because it denies the
revenue vital funds, a Treasury minister said as the government outlined
new ways of cutting down on £5bn in tax avoidance.

David Gauke, the exchequer secretary to the Treasury, risked shining a
spotlight on whether any of his government colleagues have ever made
cash in hand payments to plumbers when he described the practice as a
large part of Britain's "hidden economy".
Unquote

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...dspending-hmrc

Trades poeple operate to current moral norms, as displayed by *bankers,
politicians, journalists, entertainers, pro footballers etc. Is that news?

Putting aside the bit about "in order to avoid tax", how does Gauke
think most tradesmen are paid? Cheques are dying on their feet,
tradesmen don't carry card readers... presumably Gauke's butler gives
the plumber a brace of pheasants and the bounder better be jolly
pleased.

On 24/07/12 11:21, Huge wrote:
On 2012-07-24, Nemo wrote:
Quote
Paying a plumber cash in hand is "morally wrong" because it denies the
revenue vital funds, a Treasury minister said as the government outlined
new ways of cutting down on £5bn in tax avoidance.

David Gauke, the exchequer secretary to the Treasury, risked shining a
spotlight on whether any of his government colleagues have ever made
cash in hand payments to plumbers when he described the practice as a
large part of Britain's "hidden economy".
Unquote

Dear Mr. Gauke,

**** you. **** your 10 grand in fiddled expenses, **** your tax avoidance
consultant wife, **** your lying hypocrisy, **** the State stealing 50% of
my income, **** your interfering hooter being poked in where it doesn't belong,
**** your implicit assumption that all the money belongs to the State and
**** the noise that paying extra taxes will somehow stop the State from
****ing money away.

+1,000


--
djc

"mike" wrote in message
...

On Jul 24, 10:05 am, Nemo wrote:
Quote
Paying a plumber cash in hand is "morally wrong" because it denies the
revenue vital funds, a Treasury minister said as the government outlined
new ways of cutting down on £5bn in tax avoidance.

David Gauke, the exchequer secretary to the Treasury, risked shining a
spotlight on whether any of his government colleagues have ever made
cash in hand payments to plumbers when he described the practice as a
large part of Britain's "hidden economy".
Unquote

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...dspending-hmrc

Trades poeple operate to current moral norms, as displayed by bankers,
politicians, journalists, entertainers, pro footballers etc. Is that news?

Putting aside the bit about "in order to avoid tax", how does Gauke
think most tradesmen are paid? Cheques are dying on their feet,
tradesmen don't carry card readers... presumably Gauke's butler gives
the plumber a brace of pheasants and the bounder better be jolly
pleased.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I understand that it's quite common for window cleaners to leave you the
bill and expect you to pay it using internet banking.

Of course, with a regular customer the most you are going to lose is 10-20
quid before "not" working for them again.

I can see that this is not going to work if the bill is hundreds (or
thousands - but then most aren't going to he using cash!).

tim

Steve Firth wrote:

A set of working clothes hardly amounts to much and only a few trades,
including lawyers can claim for working clothes. Tools yes of course
why should one not be able to offset tax against these? Note that if
at end of life any of these items are sold then VAT, income tax and
possibly CGT must be paid on the sale value.

Sold?

Surely they just broke and you threw them away into the correct recyle bin
as repair was uneconomical:-)

Possibly not that easy with a tractor:-(.

--
Adam

On 24/07/2012 18:32, John Rumm wrote:
On 24/07/2012 11:45, David WE Roberts wrote:
....
As long as you get a valid receipt (VAT receipt where applicable) then
paying some of the bills with cash which is then recycled by the
tradesperson on every day expenditure is in no way wrong.

Not only that, what are the alternatives? They can either take a cheque
at a huge risk of not getting paid, or they can shell out hundreds a
quarter to their bank for card payment facilities and a merchant account....

Same day credit transfer, which is how I pay my window cleaner and my
gardener. Not that he actually said that paying in cash was morally
wrong, only paying in cash in order to get a discount.

Colin Bignell

"ARWadsworth" wrote:
Steve Firth wrote:

A set of working clothes hardly amounts to much and only a few trades,
including lawyers can claim for working clothes. Tools yes of course
why should one not be able to offset tax against these? Note that if
at end of life any of these items are sold then VAT, income tax and
possibly CGT must be paid on the sale value.

Sold?

Surely they just broke and you threw them away into the correct recyle bin
as repair was uneconomical:-)

That is indeed what happens to the majority of office equipment in my
business. If the government wants to encourage recycling they can start by
muzzling the VAT man and his desire to charge VAT on goods given away.

Possibly not that easy with a tractor:-(.

Nor with any vehicle.

Steve Firth wrote:
"ARWadsworth" wrote:
Steve Firth wrote:

A set of working clothes hardly amounts to much and only a few
trades, including lawyers can claim for working clothes. Tools
yes of course why should one not be able to offset tax against
these? Note that if at end of life any of these items are sold
then VAT, income tax and possibly CGT must be paid on the sale
value.

Sold?

Surely they just broke and you threw them away into the correct
recyle bin as repair was uneconomical:-)

That is indeed what happens to the majority of office equipment in my
business. If the government wants to encourage recycling they can
start by muzzling the VAT man and his desire to charge VAT on goods
given away.

Possibly not that easy with a tractor:-(.

Nor with any vehicle.

I was quite surprised that the charity shop took my old work clothes:-)

Thank god they went straight to the ragman and were not put up for sale.

--
Adam

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Rod Speed" wrote:

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
...
In article , "78u77"
wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote
Nemo wrote

Quote
Paying a plumber cash in hand is "morally wrong" because it denies
the revenue vital funds, a Treasury minister said as the government
outlined new ways of cutting down on £5bn in tax avoidance.

David Gauke, the exchequer secretary to the Treasury, risked
shining a spotlight on whether any of his government colleagues
have ever made cash in hand payments to plumbers when he described
the practice as a large part of Britain's "hidden economy".
Unquote

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...dspending-hmrc

Trades poeple operate to current moral norms, as displayed by
bankers, politicians, journalists, entertainers, pro footballers
etc. Is that news?

Its bloody silly.

We'll see...

[rest of Wodney snipped]

Presumably you actually are that stupid.

You gave it away, sap, with your usual inability to spell some plurals
properly.

It was never meant to not be obvious it was me, cretin.

Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you actually are that
stupid.

In message , Nemo
writes
Quote
Paying a plumber cash in hand is "morally wrong" because it denies the
revenue vital funds, a Treasury minister said

while keeping very quiet on

http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...lTf_4J:www.bbc
..co.uk

"A global super-rich elite had at least $21 trillion (£13tn) hidden in
secret tax havens by the end of 2010, according to a major study.

The figure is equivalent to the size of the US and Japanese economies
combined. ..."


--
geoff

In message , Rod Speed
writes
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...dspending-hmrc

Trades poeple operate to current moral norms, as displayed by
bankers, politicians, journalists, entertainers, pro
footballers etc. Is that news?

Its bloody silly.

We'll see...

[rest of Wodney snipped]

Presumably you actually are that stupid.

You gave it away, sap, with your usual inability to spell some
plurals properly.

It was never meant to not be obvious it was me, cretin.

So why did you do it?

--
geoff

On 24/07/2012 11:02, 78u77 wrote:


god almighty..........................
none of you use hospitals, you all pay for your medical aid ?
any of you ever had a receipt of a chinese or any take away, do they pay
their taxes based on what they take? people are fiddling their tax and
they still expect to get everything for nothing.don't complain about
people getting benefits while most of you don't even contribute to the
tax and N.I. that pays for it.

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Rod Speed" wrote:

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Rod Speed" wrote:

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
...
In article , "78u77"
wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote
Nemo wrote

Quote
Paying a plumber cash in hand is "morally wrong" because it
denies the revenue vital funds, a Treasury minister said as the
government outlined new ways of cutting down on £5bn in tax
avoidance.

David Gauke, the exchequer secretary to the Treasury, risked
shining a spotlight on whether any of his government colleagues
have ever made cash in hand payments to plumbers when he
described the practice as a large part of Britain's "hidden
economy".
Unquote

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...dspending-hmrc

Trades poeple operate to current moral norms, as displayed by
bankers, politicians, journalists, entertainers, pro footballers
etc. Is that news?

Its bloody silly.

We'll see...

[rest of Wodney snipped]

Presumably you actually are that stupid.

You gave it away, sap, with your usual inability to spell some plurals
properly.

It was never meant to not be obvious it was me, cretin.

Christ - and a split infinitive too! You *are* doing well.

Nice attempt at a shimmy, Wodders.

Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you actually are that
stupid.

I wouldnt have formatted it in my usual unusual style if
I didnt want anyone to notice it wasnt me, ****wit.

"geoff" wrote in message
...
In message , Rod Speed
writes
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...dspending-hmrc

Trades poeple operate to current moral norms, as displayed by
bankers, politicians, journalists, entertainers, pro footballers
etc. Is that news?

Its bloody silly.

We'll see...

[rest of Wodney snipped]

Presumably you actually are that stupid.

You gave it away, sap, with your usual inability to spell some plurals
properly.

It was never meant to not be obvious it was me, cretin.

So why did you do it?

To get around the TurNiP's killfile, ****wit.

In message , Rod Speed
writes

[rest of Wodney snipped]

Presumably you actually are that stupid.

You gave it away, sap, with your usual inability to spell some
plurals properly.

It was never meant to not be obvious it was me, cretin.

So why did you do it?

To get around the TurNiP's killfile, ****wit.

Don't call me a ****wit, you dingo's placenta

You really are a sad case, aren't you

--
geoff