You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Akshata Murty tax affairs
May 26 2022 3.33am

Akshata Murty tax affairs

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 3 of 23 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >

 

View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 10 Apr 22 10.59pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

The biggest problem I see with this is not whether Mrs Sunak broke any laws. She clearly didn't. She is a very lucky and ridiculously wealthy lady, who is an Indian citizen being paid dividends on investments in India. Why should she pay tax here, just because she is married to a Brit and is currently resident here?

The problem I see is having a very wealthy man as Chancellor at this time, when wealth taxes ought to be part of the upcoming new measures I see on the horizon. On the basis that Turkeys don't vote for Christmas, I see this as a difficulty.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Mapletree's Profile Mapletree Flag Croydon 10 Apr 22 11.18pm Send a Private Message to Mapletree Add Mapletree as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

The biggest problem I see with this is not whether Mrs Sunak broke any laws. She clearly didn't. She is a very lucky and ridiculously wealthy lady, who is an Indian citizen being paid dividends on investments in India. Why should she pay tax here, just because she is married to a Brit and is currently resident here?

The problem I see is having a very wealthy man as Chancellor at this time, when wealth taxes ought to be part of the upcoming new measures I see on the horizon. On the basis that Turkeys don't vote for Christmas, I see this as a difficulty.

‘She is currently resident here’. That’s bull. This is without doubt her base for family life. She is resident here but benefits from rules designed for the rich to avoid tax.

Now consider the system in the USA

The United States taxes all U.S. persons on their worldwide income. A U.S. person is a citizen, green card holder (who is a legal resident but not necessarily present in the United States), and residents. A resident is anyone who spends more than 183 days a year in the United States.

If you’re living and working outside the United States, and qualify for the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion, you can earn up to $102,100 in salary during 2017 free of Federal income tax. If your salary is more than the FEIE, you will pay US tax on the excess.

Also, the FEIE only applies to your salary. You will pay US tax on capital gains, dividends, rents, royalties, and passive income no matter where you live.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Rudi Hedman's Profile Rudi Hedman Flag Caterham 11 Apr 22 12.07am Send a Private Message to Rudi Hedman Add Rudi Hedman as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

The biggest problem I see with this is not whether Mrs Sunak broke any laws. She clearly didn't. She is a very lucky and ridiculously wealthy lady, who is an Indian citizen being paid dividends on investments in India. Why should she pay tax here, just because she is married to a Brit and is currently resident here?

The problem I see is having a very wealthy man as Chancellor at this time, when wealth taxes ought to be part of the upcoming new measures I see on the horizon. On the basis that Turkeys don't vote for Christmas, I see this as a difficulty.

Inheritance tax is going to rocket. Just watch. Could backfire of course. Lots of avoidance.

 


COYP

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View BlueJay's Profile BlueJay Flag UK 11 Apr 22 12.12am Send a Private Message to BlueJay Add BlueJay as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

The biggest problem I see with this is not whether Mrs Sunak broke any laws. She clearly didn't. She is a very lucky and ridiculously wealthy lady, who is an Indian citizen being paid dividends on investments in India. Why should she pay tax here, just because she is married to a Brit and is currently resident here?

The problem I see is having a very wealthy man as Chancellor at this time, when wealth taxes ought to be part of the upcoming new measures I see on the horizon. On the basis that Turkeys don't vote for Christmas, I see this as a difficulty.

Her company gained lucrative government contracts worth 50 million. Something tells me that isn't a co-incidence. Once that money is out of the country it's outside of scrutiny. MPs and their cronies use techniques such as this to kick their misdeeds and backhanders into the long grass and out of sight. They are stealing the life blood of this country and making us look like mugs. It's grotesque and makes a mockery of the working man.

Edited by BlueJay (11 Apr 2022 12.12am)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Tim Gypsy Hill '64's Profile Tim Gypsy Hill '64 Flag Stoke sub normal 11 Apr 22 1.03am Send a Private Message to Tim Gypsy Hill '64 Add Tim Gypsy Hill '64 as a friend

Is she not likely to be paying remittance? In which case that would amount to at least £30k pa, and maybe as much as £60k pa. Not the millions that everyone expects her to pay of course, but far more than Joe Public pays individually.

Edited by Tim Gypsy Hill '64 (11 Apr 2022 1.04am)

 


Systematically dragged down by the lawmakers

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View BlueJay's Profile BlueJay Flag UK 11 Apr 22 1.14am Send a Private Message to BlueJay Add BlueJay as a friend

Originally posted by Tim Gypsy Hill '64

Is she not likely to be paying remittance? In which case that would amount to at least £30k pa, and maybe as much as £60k pa. Not the millions that everyone expects her to pay of course, but far more than Joe Public pays individually.

Edited by Tim Gypsy Hill '64 (11 Apr 2022 1.04am)

Her net worth is several hundred million. It's reported that she may have saved up to £20 million on her UK tax bill by being a non dom, which costs her £30,000 a year (non dom status). I'm not sure why we should be thanking her for picking our pocket to the tune of millions by paying the least amount possible, or comparing her favorably to normal people paying their taxes (which will be a radically higher percentage of their earnings than she has paid here).


Edited by BlueJay (11 Apr 2022 1.37am)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Tim Gypsy Hill '64's Profile Tim Gypsy Hill '64 Flag Stoke sub normal 11 Apr 22 1.42am Send a Private Message to Tim Gypsy Hill '64 Add Tim Gypsy Hill '64 as a friend

Originally posted by BlueJay

Her net worth is several hundred million. It's reported that she may have saved up to £20 million on her UK tax bill by being a non dom, which ironically also costs her £30,000 a year (non dom status). I'm not sure why we should be thanking her for picking our pocket to the tune of millions by paying the least amount possible, or comparing her favorably to normal people saying their taxes (which will be a radically higher percentage of their earnings than she has paid here).


Edited by BlueJay (11 Apr 2022 1.26am)

She hasn't picked your pocket. That is just you, as usual, twisting the truth. She may have been avoiding tax by using legal methods, but she has not been stolen single penny from you. Any remittance that she pays is likely more than the average outraged idiot pays. Nobody else really cares. It is irrelevant how much she earns if she is obeying the rules. If the tax laws are offensive, take it up with Parliament, not the chancellor of the Exchequer's wife.

 


Systematically dragged down by the lawmakers

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View BlueJay's Profile BlueJay Flag UK 11 Apr 22 1.44am Send a Private Message to BlueJay Add BlueJay as a friend

Originally posted by Tim Gypsy Hill '64

She hasn't picked your pocket. That is just you, as usual, twisting the truth. She may have been avoiding tax by using legal methods, but she has not been stolen single penny from you. Any remittance that she pays is likely more than the average outraged idiot pays. Nobody else really cares. It is irrelevant how much she earns if she is obeying the rules. If the tax laws are offensive, take it up with Parliament, not the chancellor of the Exchequer's wife.

How respectful of the average hardworking British taxpayer.

Unfortunately the very people creating these loopholes for the wealthy are those in power. I'm not sure me firing off an email or casting a vote is really going to change a great deal at this point in the political game.

Edited by BlueJay (11 Apr 2022 1.59am)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Tim Gypsy Hill '64's Profile Tim Gypsy Hill '64 Flag Stoke sub normal 11 Apr 22 1.53am Send a Private Message to Tim Gypsy Hill '64 Add Tim Gypsy Hill '64 as a friend

Originally posted by BlueJay

How respectful of the average hardworking British taxpayer.

Edited by BlueJay (11 Apr 2022 1.46am)

No, "not the average hardworking British taxpayer", "the average outraged idiot".

If you're going to quote me, try to get it right. Idiot.

 


Systematically dragged down by the lawmakers

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View BlueJay's Profile BlueJay Flag UK 11 Apr 22 1.56am Send a Private Message to BlueJay Add BlueJay as a friend

Originally posted by Tim Gypsy Hill '64

No, "not the average hardworking British taxpayer", "the average outraged idiot".

If you're going to quote me, try to get it right. Idiot.

Point being that many decent tax payers will be outraged by this. You are declaring them as idiots for doing so. That's for you. I'm calling them hard working Brits making ends meet (because they are), who understandably aren't happy about such unethical behaviour.

His wife was happy to use the furlough scheme too of course to the tune of several hundred thousand. Happy to take advantage of the hand outs, not so forthcoming about paying in.


Edited by BlueJay (11 Apr 2022 2.25am)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Dubai Eagle's Profile Dubai Eagle Flag 11 Apr 22 7.28am Send a Private Message to Dubai Eagle Add Dubai Eagle as a friend

My tuppence FWIW -
I tend to take the view that anyone who pays more tax than they legally have to is daft - especially as some of these tax rules have been around for a considerable period of time - ( if Rishi Sunak & his family aren't in a position to know the rules then I shudder to think who is)

If the government has not amended the rules to ensure that they are fit for purpose / consider the modern world then they are the ones that should take a look at what they are doing & cant complain if people take advantage of them -

Those that earn(t) their money outside of the country should pay the tax arrangement in the country that it was earnt -

I do have 2 pet hates in this though - People who set up offshore companies that are little more than letterboxes just for the sole purpose of avoiding or severely diminishing their tax liabilities.

& The internet giants, relatively new on the scene, making fortunes but paying miniscule amounts of tax because of grey areas about where they operate from / where the money was made / who is responsible for the profits.

As I say - Just my tuppence worth.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Eaglecoops's Profile Eaglecoops Flag CR3 11 Apr 22 7.49am Send a Private Message to Eaglecoops Add Eaglecoops as a friend

Surely this is not so much a case of whether rules for tax avoidance have been broken, but whether she is properly permitted to have non dom status in this country. There is a strong argument that anyone who spends the vast majority of their time in this country should be paying their taxes here. This will be what is under investigation.

Whatever the outcome it paints a poor picture of the Sunak family’s affiliation with the country where he portrays himself as the next PM.

I genuinely think the conservatives are in for a shock pretty soon as even those on the right of centre are now being critical of what they are up to.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 3 of 23 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Akshata Murty tax affairs