IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Richard Benyon will not reveal his own tax returns, I have got absolutely nothing to hide!
Andy Capp
post Apr 20 2016, 11:39 AM
Post #1


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



An oxymoron?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Biker1
post Apr 20 2016, 03:05 PM
Post #2


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 5,064
Joined: 26-May 09
Member No.: 103



Post deleted.
Not that funny or clever really just involved a bit of strikethrough.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Apr 20 2016, 06:17 PM
Post #3


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



I think I can guess.


I don't necessarily blame Mr Benyon, but on one hand to say 'I have absolutely nothing to hide', then refuse to publish his tax returns is contradictory; he clearly has something to hide.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Exhausted
post Apr 20 2016, 07:29 PM
Post #4


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,722
Joined: 4-September 09
Member No.: 320



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Apr 20 2016, 07:17 PM) *
I think I can guess. I don't necessarily blame Mr Benyon, but on one hand to say 'I have absolutely nothing to hide', then refuse to publish his tax returns is contradictory; he clearly has something to hide.


Why should he, do you publish yours even though you have nothing to hide ?. Or do you.




Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
spartacus
post Apr 20 2016, 07:46 PM
Post #5


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,840
Joined: 24-July 09
Member No.: 221



And whilst he may be a public servant paid through public funds and so 'should open up his tax return for public scrutiny' according to some folk, why shouldn't the same be true of headteachers? (who are in the £130k bracket) NHS Consultants? The Chief Constable? The local lollipop lady? (while we still have one)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Apr 20 2016, 08:02 PM
Post #6


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (Exhausted @ Apr 20 2016, 08:29 PM) *
Why should he, do you publish yours even though you have nothing to hide ?. Or do you.


QUOTE (spartacus @ Apr 20 2016, 08:46 PM) *
And whilst he may be a public servant paid through public funds and so 'should open up his tax return for public scrutiny' according to some folk, why shouldn't the same be true of headteachers? (who are in the £130k bracket) NHS Consultants? The Chief Constable? The local lollipop lady? (while we still have one)

Because they (I) am not in government presiding over cuts to the easy to cut. However, that wasn't my argument. I just simply challenge his statement; he clearly has something to hide even if it is not illegal.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
x2lls
post Apr 20 2016, 09:38 PM
Post #7


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,605
Joined: 25-November 09
Member No.: 511



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Apr 20 2016, 09:02 PM) *
Because they (I) am not in government presiding over cuts to the easy to cut. However, that wasn't my argument. I just simply challenge his statement; he clearly has something to hide even if it is not illegal.



By what criteria do you make the accusation that he has 'something to hide'?



--------------------
There their, loose loser!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Apr 20 2016, 10:18 PM
Post #8


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (x2lls @ Apr 20 2016, 10:38 PM) *
By what criteria do you make the accusation that he has 'something to hide'?

Because he's hiding it! huh.gif

Like I said, I don't blame him: he has nothing to gain and everything to lose. I would imagine his tax affairs could be politically awkward.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Turin Machine
post Apr 20 2016, 10:35 PM
Post #9


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,682
Joined: 23-September 10
From: In the lower 40
Member No.: 1,104



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Apr 20 2016, 11:18 PM) *
Because he's hiding it! huh.gif

Small point, choosing not to disclose is not the same as 'hiding'.


--------------------
Gammon. And proud!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Apr 20 2016, 10:42 PM
Post #10


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (Turin Machine @ Apr 20 2016, 11:35 PM) *
Small point, choosing not to disclose is not the same as 'hiding'.

I think it is.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
x2lls
post Apr 21 2016, 12:51 AM
Post #11


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,605
Joined: 25-November 09
Member No.: 511



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Apr 20 2016, 11:42 PM) *
I think it is.



It most definitely is not.


--------------------
There their, loose loser!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Apr 21 2016, 06:59 AM
Post #12


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (x2lls @ Apr 21 2016, 01:51 AM) *
It most definitely is not.

Unfortunately in this instance and by definition I think you're wrong. Failing to disclose isn't always hiding something, but in Mr Benyon's case I'm sure it is. It might not be something shady, but withholding information is hiding even if the reasons are valid. He said he has absolutely nothing to hide, well he evidently has.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Apr 21 2016, 09:14 AM
Post #13


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



I suspect that there is absolutely nothing wrong with Richard B's tax return apart from the fact that it would look remarkably similar to ours. We could then squeak our heads off because 'he's the richest MP in the Country'. Err, yes, simply because he's running the family firm; so in reality, it ain't his money. Unlike the avaricious individuals who effectively own the 'public companies' and leech out millions for so doing on the backs of us suckers who work for them. At least the family firms have some incentive to invest in the future. Anyway, all this 'show me yours' bit is very clever tactics, no one has noticed the debate has moved well away from the real issues with tax!


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Turin Machine
post Apr 21 2016, 10:03 AM
Post #14


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,682
Joined: 23-September 10
From: In the lower 40
Member No.: 1,104



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Apr 21 2016, 07:59 AM) *
Unfortunately in this instance and by definition I think you're wrong. Failing to disclose isn't always hiding something, but in Mr Benyon's case I'm sure it is. It might not be something shady, but withholding information is hiding even if the reasons are valid. He said he has absolutely nothing to hide, well he evidently has.

OK, let's see yours then, you haven't disclosed your earnings yet. You must be hiding something!


--------------------
Gammon. And proud!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Apr 21 2016, 11:44 AM
Post #15


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (Turin Machine @ Apr 21 2016, 11:03 AM) *
OK, let's see yours then, you haven't disclosed your earnings yet. You must be hiding something!

Correct I am, of course I have something to hide, which includes a contractual obligation not to disclose, but yet again, the right to withhold is not my argument.

Please get this point: I am not saying he's no right to withhold or hide information, only that he is ill advised to make statements he cannot fulfill, i.e. "I have absolutely nothing to hide"; he has.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Turin Machine
post Apr 21 2016, 12:08 PM
Post #16


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,682
Joined: 23-September 10
From: In the lower 40
Member No.: 1,104



Care to tell us what?


--------------------
Gammon. And proud!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
scott
post Apr 21 2016, 12:13 PM
Post #17


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 72
Joined: 23-June 09
From: Newbury Village
Member No.: 151



RB's problem here is that he is one of the richest politicians in Downing Street. While thats not his fault, do the public and his peers need to see he is worth multi millions? As long as he has been given the green light by HMRC in private, i am happy. Why should he reveal his personal information if he is squeaky clean?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Apr 21 2016, 02:36 PM
Post #18


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



The Tax office believe Google, Starbucks, etc, pay all the right tax and they are squeaky clean too.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Apr 21 2016, 02:38 PM
Post #19


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (Turin Machine @ Apr 21 2016, 01:08 PM) *
Care to tell us what?

I'm sorry, but are you actually reading my posts? huh.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Turin Machine
post Apr 21 2016, 02:44 PM
Post #20


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,682
Joined: 23-September 10
From: In the lower 40
Member No.: 1,104



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Apr 21 2016, 12:44 PM) *
Please get this point: I am not saying he's no right to withhold or hide information, only that he is ill advised to make statements he cannot fulfill, i.e. "I have absolutely nothing to hide"; he has.

And I'd like to know what.


--------------------
Gammon. And proud!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 29th March 2024 - 12:28 PM