| mooghead 06.11.2017 19:34 |
It has been admitted that 'Jazz' and other subsequent albums were tax dodges (due to being recorded in tax havens). Is it still going on? Where are Queen's company's based these days? I could do my own research but I am very lazy. |
| maths15 06.11.2017 20:20 |
Principality of Sealand |
| mooghead 06.11.2017 21:58 |
New Sealand? |
| stevelondon20 06.11.2017 22:55 |
Haha! |
| Jimmy Dean 07.11.2017 04:37 |
I imagine the royalties are taxed in the UK, can't hide that... and the funds moved to tax havens for investing purposes... Caymens is a popular place... The royalties are generally earned by the company that owns the recordings. So if that is QPL, and QPL is domiciled in the UK. Royalties are taxed in the UK. so called "tax havens" are not illegal if used correctly. The cash can be moved to an offshore account, as long as you report your income in your country of residence. The main benefit, if used legally, is that the funds in which the cash is invested in can generally grow at a faster pace since the country in which the cash is invested has a very favorable taxation rate (ie. Caymen = 0). Your country of residence will then dictate how the income on that cash is taxed. If you report and pay tax in your country of residence, it is completely legal. Unfortunately, the news blows these things out of proportion. Just because someone has cash invested in a so-called tax haven - does not mean they are not paying their fair share. i imagine this question comes as a result of the paradise papers in which case, funds were growing in Malta - a notorious tax haven. KPMG used the Isle of Mann which was recently found out. And of course the Panama Papers which was the result of very stupid people who blew the lid wide open! What queen did back in the 70s was probably very different. I don't think it had to do with royalties. It's been a while since i've last seen how the entertainment business handles their finances - so i can't comment on that. Also, taxation in the 70s and 80s is nowhere near as complicated as it is today. The rules were simpler back then. When people cheat, more rules are added to the great book of rules. |
| Togg 07.11.2017 12:00 |
Let's not forget that both ends of the spectrum when it comes to wealth play the tax evasion game, your window cleaner, builder, plumber, etc that ask to get paid in cash.... same thing and percentage of your income wise it is much the same as sticking your fortune in the Cayman Islands.... Actually it tends to be the middle classes that prop up the tax system and pay by far the most into it. |
| Vocal harmony 07.11.2017 12:26 |
Togg wrote: Let's not forget that both ends of the spectrum when it comes to wealth play the tax evasion game, your window cleaner, builder, plumber, etc that ask to get paid in cash.... same thing and percentage of your income wise it is much the same as sticking your fortune in the Cayman Islands.... Actually it tends to be the middle classes that prop up the tax system and pay by far the most into it.Absolutely true. What drove a lot of high earners away in the late 70's (Queen included) was the 90% tax status. It really wasn't worth earning/banking huge incomes in the UK. I believe that,if not QP, certainly some of the companies owned by it are based in Switzerland. |
| Holly2003 07.11.2017 13:19 |
Vocal harmony wrote:Yeah they benefited from free education and health care, and used infrastructure and services paid for collectively, then fucked off abroad when it was their turn to pay a bit back.Togg wrote: Let's not forget that both ends of the spectrum when it comes to wealth play the tax evasion game, your window cleaner, builder, plumber, etc that ask to get paid in cash.... same thing and percentage of your income wise it is much the same as sticking your fortune in the Cayman Islands.... Actually it tends to be the middle classes that prop up the tax system and pay by far the most into it.Absolutely true. What drove a lot of high earners away in the late 70's (Queen included) was the 90% tax status. It really wasn't worth earning/banking huge incomes in the UK. I believe that,if not QP, certainly some of the companies owned by it are based in Switzerland. |
| Vocal harmony 07.11.2017 15:51 |
Being hammered for 90% of what you've earned is a good reason to take your business and earnings elsewhere. What would you do In that situation. |
| Holly2003 07.11.2017 16:20 |
90% of a proportion of their earnings above a certain amount. The Queen PR machine never mentions that. What would I do in that situation? I would like to think I would pay my taxes and if I chose to be an immoral slug and move my income abroad I would like to think someone would call me on that if I started spouting off, for example, about "everything is broken" -- if the wealthy paid what they should in taxes, everything might not be broken. |
| master marathon runner 07.11.2017 17:29 |
Well, my wife has paid income tax and N.I. contributions for 43 years on the understanding she would get her state pension at 60, then the goalposts were shifted and she now has to work 6 more years, something like 30 odd grand snatched away from her, now that's hard to take. Tax avoidance? - wouldn't hesitate given the chance, |
| oligneisti 07.11.2017 18:49 |
master marathon runner wrote: Well, my wife has paid income tax and N.I. contributions for 43 years on the understanding she would get her state pension at 60, then the goalposts were shifted and she now has to work 6 more years, something like 30 odd grand snatched away from her, now that's hard to take. Tax avoidance? - wouldn't hesitate given the chance,Aren't the tax avoiders at least somewhat to blame for this shifting of the goalposts? |
| TRS-Romania 07.11.2017 20:55 |
it's all public information Queen production company filings at Company House: link Annual Record (Ending Sept 2016, last data filed): link |
| TRS-Romania 07.11.2017 21:05 |
And John Deacon's May 2017 signature .... link |
| matt z 07.11.2017 21:37 |
Good points Holly ...also. .. I'd like to fuck off a broad again. It's been a long minute |
| Togg 08.11.2017 08:49 |
The tax system in the UK is deliberately designed to have holes in it, it could be very simple, live in the UK then you pay X depending on your earnings.... but they make it hugely complicated for a reason and that is so that the wealthy can stay here and contribute to the economy without losing 60% of everything In the 70's 80's I don't blame Queen Pink Floyd etc all vanishing 90% tax was crazy, it was a stupid idea by the government that backfired spectacularly and saw the wealthy run to the hills draining the country of vast amounts of income. Lets face it EVERYONE trys to avoid paying tax if they can, if you own a business you hire an accountant to keep your tax exposure to a minimum, you take dividens instead of salary etc etc keeping your tax low, if you are someone that can get paid in cash you do so and don't tell me it's all declared to HMRC, and the weathly stick it in off shore investments... Fact is we simply can't fund the NHS much longer or expect pensions to fund us forever, unless 100% of us pay everything we owe, it will never happen, so we have to take what comes, a private version of the NHS, personal pensions and working longer, there's simply not enough money to go round |
| thomasquinn 32989 08.11.2017 11:25 |
Togg wrote: Let's not forget that both ends of the spectrum when it comes to wealth play the tax evasion game, your window cleaner, builder, plumber, etc that ask to get paid in cash.... same thing and percentage of your income wise it is much the same as sticking your fortune in the Cayman Islands.... Actually it tends to be the middle classes that prop up the tax system and pay by far the most into it.Historically (which is all I can speak of with some authority), the middle classes, especially retailers, have been the most numerous representatives of financial frauds of various kinds. Many countries have made (comparably) fraud-proof cash registers mandatory for just that reason. In the 19th century, it was a common British aphorism that each social class had its characteristic vice: the lower classes, alcoholism. The upper classes, gambling. The middle classes, fraud. |
| thomasquinn 32989 08.11.2017 11:27 |
Togg wrote: there's simply not enough money to go roundThat is factually incorrect. The trouble is, many countries don't have a tax on accumulated capital, which is where most wealth is concentrated, focusing instead on income tax and sales tax. |
| Vocal harmony 08.11.2017 13:14 |
thomasquinn 32989 wrote:That is fact, but the result (of that) as Togg says is that there is not enough money to go round because it is often channelled in one directionTogg wrote: there's simply not enough money to go roundThat is factually incorrect. The trouble is, many countries don't have a tax on accumulated capital, which is where most wealth is concentrated, focusing instead on income tax and sales tax. Off Shore banking does results in paying tax, that's how places like the Channel Islands survive, it's just a much lower threshold and therefore a better economic prospect for those putting money there. In the UK the problem was largely triggered by the 90% tax situation. As Holly pointed out it was on earnings above a certain amount, but what Holly didn't point out was that if your earning crept into that bracket, if you paid the tax owing under that system your net income could fall below that of people earning less! The system was and still is far more complex then it needs to be, and that is what has resulted in this legal loop hole being taken advantage of. |
| Togg 09.11.2017 12:06 |
thomasquinn 32989 wrote:Of course they are they are the easy pickings and the the ones that don't have the power to hide as well, the low paid aren't worth chasing and the top end of the spectrum is very well insulated against getting caught. Actually fraud is far more rampant in the upper class with the likes of investment banking and CEO's, but it;s the middle class that get targeted because they are the ones the governement wishes to stop. My wife is a financial crime expert and works with teh regulators in the financial service sector, the top end of fraud is running out of places to hide and you will soon see bankers going to jail, but the middle class folk who run businesses up and down the country have very few places to hide, their accountants have to be much more open to the HMRC than ever before and so they are the ones that tend to get caught the most, but fact we all do it when we get the chance, who doesn't like a discount for cash??Togg wrote: Let's not forget that both ends of the spectrum when it comes to wealth play the tax evasion game, your window cleaner, builder, plumber, etc that ask to get paid in cash.... same thing and percentage of your income wise it is much the same as sticking your fortune in the Cayman Islands.... Actually it tends to be the middle classes that prop up the tax system and pay by far the most into it.Historically (which is all I can speak of with some authority), the middle classes, especially retailers, have been the most numerous representatives of financial frauds of various kinds. Many countries have made (comparably) fraud-proof cash registers mandatory for just that reason. In the 19th century, it was a common British aphorism that each social class had its characteristic vice: the lower classes, alcoholism. The upper classes, gambling. The middle classes, fraud. |
| Togg 09.11.2017 12:10 |
thomasquinn 32989 wrote:There's money in the system yes, but not enough tax revenue, we in the UK fall WAY short of funding pensions and the NHS.Togg wrote: there's simply not enough money to go roundThat is factually incorrect. The trouble is, many countries don't have a tax on accumulated capital, which is where most wealth is concentrated, focusing instead on income tax and sales tax. Scotland thinks it can go it alone.... ha, well nobody has mentioned the fact it has a £16 billion shortfall in tax now that the rest of the Uk pays to keep them afloat, with less people in Scotland than there are in London, how are they ever going to pay for NHS, Pensions, Military, Police, Firemen.... it;s impossible with 6 million people. But teh UK as a whole simply doesn't have the tax reveune to pay for everything, we'd all have to be at the 90% mark to evern get close. |