Nice to see Prince Charles pays his tax.

[cHodAX]

£4.5 million tax on £18.3 million income, good man! Before anyone says he gets £2 million back from the taxpayer, the bloke works bloody hard for the nation and travels all over the place on our behalf. He is worth every penny we pay and he more than covers the costs with his own tax outlay regardless, the man has now set the example that all public officials should be following.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18645331

 

[rynnor]

His total income was over 20 mill - he paid about 20% tax - more than some of the super rich but not much compared to what ordinary tax payers pay - I wonder what schemes his accountant uses?

 

[DaGaffer]

£4.5 million tax on £18.3 million income, good man! Before anyone says he gets £2 million back from the taxpayer, the bloke works bloody hard for the nation and travels all over the place on our behalf. He is worth every penny we pay and he more than covers the costs with his own tax outlay regardless, the man has now set the example that all public officials should be following.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18645331

Yeah, good on him for paying half the marginal rate of tax that the rest of us do! Yaay....er, what?

 

[old.Tohtori]

Nice that he pays at all, shame he doesn't go by the regular taxes.

 

[rynnor]

At least he pays a higher % than Scouse

 

[Litmus]

Fucks me off when everyone patts the rich on the back for paying 20% tax, when he should be paying 50% no questions asked.

 

[Gwadien]

Difference is though the rich are producing their money on a mass scale, whereas the aristocracy have inherited wealth and don't really produce that much money;

Is it a insult on the nations heritage to tax these people that much, or is it time to move on, fuck the heritage & history and they pay tax as a 'normal' person who has their amount of money?

Would be nice for our aristocracy to 'regain' their place in society, whereas the dicks should lose their privileges , that's how I see it.

I like this guy; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peregrine_Cavendish,_12th_Duke_of_Devonshire who owns Chatsworth.

 

[DaGaffer]

Difference is though the rich are producing their money on a mass scale, whereas the aristocracy have inherited wealth and don't really produce that much money;

Is it a insult on the nations heritage to tax these people that much, or is it time to move on, fuck the heritage & history and they pay tax as a 'normal' person who has their amount of money?

Would be nice for our aristocracy to 'regain' their place in society, whereas the dicks should lose their privileges , that's how I see it.

I like this guy; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peregrine_Cavendish,_12th_Duke_of_Devonshire who owns Chatsworth.

What? So...much...contradictory...what?

 

[rynnor]

What? So...much...contradictory...what?

Dunno - Gwad agreed with the first post so I think thats a clearer guide.

 

[Raven]

Fucks me off when everyone patts the rich on the back for paying 20% tax, when he should be paying 50% no questions asked.

Seeing as a lot of his work is for charities and generates no income for him, I would say 20% is about right.

 

[Chilly]

20% will be corp tax, I doubt he himself makes much income. It's his job to maintain the dutchy so he can give it to William when he moves up a notch and becomes the King.

/edit - was completely wrong:

After deducting business expenditure the prince paid £4,496,000 in tax at the 50% rate.

So what's the problem? £20m revenue - expenses and pay 50% on the rest. Looks like a model citizen to me.

 

[DaGaffer]

Seeing as a lot of his work is for charities and generates no income for him, I would say 20% is about right.

I'm a bit dubious about that. He's loading charitable costs (nearly 10m, of which nearly 7m is staff costs) to offset the tax payable on his Duchy of Cornwall income, which has nothing to do with official business, and getting a couple of mill thrown in tax free for offical business as well. I'm sure the accountants say its kosher, but it doesn't sit right. His "official costs" and personal costs should be separate.

 

[Chilly]

I'm a bit dubious about that. He's loading charitable costs (nearly 10m, of which nearly 7m is staff costs) to offset the tax payable on his Duchy of Cornwall income, which has nothing to do with official business, and getting a couple of mill thrown in tax free for offical business as well. I'm sure the accountants say its kosher, but it doesn't sit right. His "official costs" and personal costs should be separate.

He's using the dutchy to fund his charitable works - sounds completely fine to me. The whole point of the dutchy is to give the prince financial freedom from the monarch.

 

[rynnor]

Hmm - but charities have existence in their own right and so do businesses - its a bit like one person offsetting his mates charitable donations against his own income.

 

[Vae]

It makes no difference because he could just donate the portion of his income that he is using to pay the charitable costs to the charity which will then pay those costs! Tax will then end up the same.

 

[Gwadien]

What? So...much...contradictory...what?

I was trying to put it into different perspectives initially, then I gave my opinion, that the aristocracy should keep their positions and lessened tax if they do something beneficial to society, rather than having they're lardy-dah hunting estates.

I'd much rather see a bloke who opens his house to the public, and gives loads to charity in such a posistion, than Donald Trump who will rip out the gardens and put up wind turbines for profits.

I'd also much rather see Charles give money to charities, rather than the Government, so they can fund their elite middle management schemes.

 

[rynnor]

It makes no difference because he could just donate the portion of his income that he is using to pay the charitable costs to the charity which will then pay those costs! Tax will then end up the same.

Isn't the Charity a legal entity in its own right though? Its costs are its own - its not part of his expenditure.

 

[Vae]

Isn't the Charity a legal entity in its own right though? Its costs are its own - its not part of his expenditure.

To cimplify it, at the moment he's putting £10m of charitable costs against his £20m income and paying tax on the rest. If those costs were the costs of a separate charity rather than him then he coudl donate £10m to the charity to cover it's costs and then pay tax on the remainder. Same either way.

 

[rynnor]

To cimplify it, at the moment he's putting £10m of charitable costs against his £20m income and paying tax on the rest. If those costs were the costs of a separate charity rather than him then he coudl donate £10m to the charity to cover it's costs and then pay tax on the remainder. Same either way.

But he didnt give away 10 Mill to charity - he spent 7 mill on staff costs for his official duties and is getting a form of tax relief on it which is odd - the Prince himself is not a registered charity?

Edit - hes effectively getting tax relief on his gardeners...

 

[DaGaffer]

I was trying to put it into different perspectives initially, then I gave my opinion, that the aristocracy should keep their positions and lessened tax if they do something beneficial to society, rather than having they're lardy-dah hunting estates.

I'd much rather see a bloke who opens his house to the public, and gives loads to charity in such a posistion, than Donald Trump who will rip out the gardens and put up wind turbines for profits.

I'd also much rather see Charles give money to charities, rather than the Government, so they can fund their elite middle management schemes.

Members of the aristocracy opening their houses to the public has nothing to do with the public good and everything to do with making a bit of cash to keep the places maintained!

"Old money" should receive no special deference simply because someone's ancestor was a mate of William The Conqueror. I certainly see no justification for them paying taxes any differently from the rest of us, and that includes the Royal Family. And Prince Charles is just as much of a government quango as the government itself; hence the 7m wage bill, which, lest we forget comes from the Duchy of Cornwall which Prince Charles only "owns" because the state says so! Its a pretty circuitous bit of logic tbh.

 

[rynnor]

Members of the aristocracy opening their houses to the public has nothing to do with the public good and everything to do with making a bit of cash to keep the places maintained!

Actually most of it is down to a little known scandal whereby the aristocracy avoid paying inheritance taxes by opening their properties for half an hour once a year to the public if the public can find out about it and as long as they apply in writing months before

 

[rynnor]

Still its definately a democracy here - oh yes

 

[Raven]

That it is. It's just a shame a democracy isn't particularly democratic

I actually think inheritance tax is a scam in itself. For example, when my mum kicks the bucket we will probably have to sell the house that she lives in to cover the tax, I wouldn't mind if it was some shitty new build but it is a 400 year old cottage that has been in the family for 100 odd years and has a lot of family history to it. It will always be home to everyone in the family, including my sisters kids and my kids (when we have some) It's not a mansion by any stretch of the imagination, just a few labourers cottages turned into a single house but its value is much bigger than its financial value. I don't see why we should have to give the government money to pass it down the family, the government have never paid a single penny towards it.

 

[rynnor]

That it is. It's just a shame a democracy isn't particularly democratic

Strictly speaking its not a democracy because we cant vote on actual decisions - we can only vote to elect a proxy who we somehow hope will act on our behalf.

 

[Litmus]

How the fuck does he run up a 7m wage bill? You could staff a medium sized company on that budget.

 

[rynnor]

161 full time equivalent staff (ie more actual staff but some are part time).

 

[Litmus]

Ahh right, last company i worked for had about the same number of employees and turned over 300m a year, what are these people doing as jobs?

 

[cHodAX]

20% will be corp tax, I doubt he himself makes much income. It's his job to maintain the dutchy so he can give it to William when he moves up a notch and becomes the King.

/edit - was completely wrong:

After deducting business expenditure the prince paid £4,496,000 in tax at the 50% rate.

So what's the problem? £20m revenue - expenses and pay 50% on the rest. Looks like a model citizen to me.

Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[soze]

That it is. It's just a shame a democracy isn't particularly democratic

I actually think inheritance tax is a scam in itself. For example, when my mum kicks the bucket we will probably have to sell the house that she lives in to cover the tax, I wouldn't mind if it was some shitty new build but it is a 400 year old cottage that has been in the family for 100 odd years and has a lot of family history to it. It will always be home to everyone in the family, including my sisters kids and my kids (when we have some) It's not a mansion by any stretch of the imagination, just a few labourers cottages turned into a single house but its value is much bigger than its financial value. I don't see why we should have to give the government money to pass it down the family, the government have never paid a single penny towards it.

If the House means that much to the family your Mum can hand it over before her death can't she? I though if it was a year or two before her death it is exempt? I have a friend whose Dad gave him his farm in this manner and now pays him £10 a month rent just to avoid Death Tax. If your Mum gave an equal share to all her Children it will keep the property in the family.

 

[rynnor]

Thanks for clearing that up.

Try claiming your gardener as an expwnse and see how that goes