MUFC 1,503 Posted October 3, 2021 Share Posted October 3, 2021 Anybody seen this? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-58780465 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subscriber nudge+ 15,325 Posted October 3, 2021 Subscriber Share Posted October 3, 2021 And yet again, nothing will be done about it, and nothing will change. Except a few journalists will probably be murdered again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MUFC 1,503 Posted October 3, 2021 Author Share Posted October 3, 2021 11 minutes ago, nudge said: And yet again, nothing will be done about it, and nothing will change. Except a few journalists will probably be murdered again. Putin is on it lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subscriber nudge+ 15,325 Posted October 3, 2021 Subscriber Share Posted October 3, 2021 1 minute ago, MUFC said: Putin is on it lol. More than 330 politicians and people in public office (90 of them European), 15 heads of state in Latin America among current and retired figures, 46 Russian oligarchs, and 133 multi-millionaires from Forbes magazine’s rich list. Also, Claudia Schiffer, Julio Iglesias and Shakira, Carlo Ancelotti, Pep Guardiola, and Jacques Villeneuve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beelzebub 2,508 Posted October 3, 2021 Share Posted October 3, 2021 33 minutes ago, MUFC said: Anybody seen this? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-58780465 Literally everyone from opposition to people in office are in it. Imran Khan's name not in it despite whores/journalists circulating it is. This is why he is popular, not because of Cricket as people have made it out to be the guy is a real improvement on many things. He can become immortal if he dismisses anyone accused, his own party or opposition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MUFC 1,503 Posted October 5, 2021 Author Share Posted October 5, 2021 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58792393 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honey Honey 3,767 Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 As the article says it is legal. So much about accountancy is how to lower your tax "burden" legally. Move money here and there, spend this, spend that, declare as this, declare as that. All within the rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6666 1,310 Posted October 6, 2021 Share Posted October 6, 2021 If it's legal, I can't really blame them. Close the loophole if you don't want people taking advantage of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Gonzo 8,186 Posted October 6, 2021 Share Posted October 6, 2021 It's not all legal though, is it? Like should a sanctioned oligarch be able to have cash parked up in expensive equity in London under the law? I genuinely have no idea how that particular law works... but that doesn't sound legal to me? There's also instances of heads of state using absurd amounts of money, that probably belong to those nations' treasuries that's being improperly spent. And in those instances, those are probably people partially responsible for that not being illegal (if it isn't already in those countries) and then going ahead and taking advantage of those loopholes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devil-Dick Willie 3,253 Posted October 6, 2021 Share Posted October 6, 2021 On 05/10/2021 at 19:53, The Premier Steve's said: As the article says it is legal. So much about accountancy is how to lower your tax "burden" legally. Move money here and there, spend this, spend that, declare as this, declare as that. All within the rules. Negative gearing is a huge issue over here. If you earn 180k, you've gotta pay 52k in tax, plus 45c on the dollar for every dollar after 180k To avoid this 45% tax rate, the current tactic is as follows. Lets say in our example, you earn $200,000, meaning you'd pay $61,000 tax. Buy a house, rent it out at a cost equal to or lower than the cost of mortgage repayments and yearly repairs. Lets say you're making a 10k net loss per year. Deduct 5% of the houses value every year as 'depreciation of the asset'. The value of the land doesn't depreciate, so we'll say its an 800k house (average price of one) and the land is valued at 400k, the house at 400k. So you lose 20k of value every year. Even though you're under no lawful obligation to actually knock the house down when it's depreciated to 0 . So you've made a 30k 'loss', even though the actual value of houses goes up 7% per year on average (20% last year) The end result? Income = $200,000 Appreciation of asset = $56,000 (7%) Total gains = $256,000 Taxable income = $170,000 Tax paid = $48,000 ( $29,500 + 37c on the dollar for the remaining 50k) Once you can't deduct value off the home in 20 years, sell the cunt at a huge profit. It's fucking criminal, even though it's legal. Houses aren't homes in Australia, they're assets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beelzebub 2,508 Posted October 7, 2021 Share Posted October 7, 2021 If you know the Ins and Outs of law in any country or hire someone who does you can get away with anything. Specially if there are different sets of rule within regions in a country Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.