FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Covid fraud - HMRC will be chasing you
Covid fraud - HMRC will be chasing you
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
 | |||
| |||
"Brilliant lets hope all these thieving bastards get caught. Next we need to see the likes of Baroness Mone and her husband brought to task and recover the hundreds of millions they need to pay back." Reading only the evidence leading up to the court case and awaiting the actual outcome. I can't see how. I probably need to refresh myself but I think there were emultiple issues with this. They claimed on 1 side they had bothing to do with a parent company that won a contract. But that company then subsequently paid out a dividend to baroness money husband? Which was against contract rules for ppe? There was another issue of phe/ dhsc approving products then when they changed what type of products they wanted. They tried cancelling the contract after multiple deliveries. And tried claiming back against good delivered that were eoriginslly to the old specifications whe tje contracts was signed . I can't see how the gov wins this one. If what I read around it was true. Dhsc/phe signed off on goods and got the goods they wanted. They then changed their minds post delivery. I just dpnt see how they get that money back. On tbe first case regarding tbe oayout/ dividend to a personal account. I think there is a valid challenge on legality. | |||
| |||
" It should be noted that Covid fraud is entirely different to the concept of awarding government contracts ( it should be obvious to the balanced and rational that during a time of crisis and in addition competing for supplies on a world market the cost will be a lot more ) . " Yes quite right, the government should always be allowed to use a national crisis to line the pockets of their friends without fear of any consequences!  | |||
"Is Sunaks mrs coughing up for her company that banked £635,000 in furlough before bankrupting it owning HMRC too https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10700239/amp/Companies-linked-Rishi-Sunaks-non-dom-wife-received-furlough-cash.html" Based on what I am reading. Why would they give this momey back sorry? | |||
"Is Sunaks mrs coughing up for her company that banked £635,000 in furlough before bankrupting it owning HMRC too https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10700239/amp/Companies-linked-Rishi-Sunaks-non-dom-wife-received-furlough-cash.html" Why would she cough up? The furlough money was paid to employees, and she received none of it. When the companies collapsed she personally lost over a £1m. Oh, and the companies didn't take £635k in furlough. The £635k figure is what they owed the tax man (combined). | |||
"Is Sunaks mrs coughing up for her company that banked £635,000 in furlough before bankrupting it owning HMRC too https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10700239/amp/Companies-linked-Rishi-Sunaks-non-dom-wife-received-furlough-cash.html Based on what I am reading. Why would they give this momey back sorry? " I think what people find distasteful is that a billionaire shareholder allowed a company they were involved with take a state handout (from taxpayers) and then let the company go to the wall owing HMRC a fortune when she (and other shareholders) could have stepped in to support the company. It’s like socialism is good when taxpayers step in to support companies but bad when it then asks companies to make a bigger contribution to the pot. This isn’t the only company she was involved with that did similar things either. | |||
"Is Sunaks mrs coughing up for her company that banked £635,000 in furlough before bankrupting it owning HMRC too https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10700239/amp/Companies-linked-Rishi-Sunaks-non-dom-wife-received-furlough-cash.html Based on what I am reading. Why would they give this momey back sorry? I think what people find distasteful is that a billionaire shareholder allowed a company they were involved with take a state handout (from taxpayers) and then let the company go to the wall owing HMRC a fortune when she (and other shareholders) could have stepped in to support the company. It’s like socialism is good when taxpayers step in to support companies but bad when it then asks companies to make a bigger contribution to the pot. This isn’t the only company she was involved with that did similar things either." Why. It was a government decision to shut down gyms. It's not for the private company to fund wages when the company can't operate. I honestly don't get the complain that private investors should subsidise governments bad decisions | |||
"Is Sunaks mrs coughing up for her company that banked £635,000 in furlough before bankrupting it owning HMRC too https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10700239/amp/Companies-linked-Rishi-Sunaks-non-dom-wife-received-furlough-cash.html Based on what I am reading. Why would they give this momey back sorry? I think what people find distasteful is that a billionaire shareholder allowed a company they were involved with take a state handout (from taxpayers) and then let the company go to the wall owing HMRC a fortune when she (and other shareholders) could have stepped in to support the company. It’s like socialism is good when taxpayers step in to support companies but bad when it then asks companies to make a bigger contribution to the pot. This isn’t the only company she was involved with that did similar things either. Why. It was a government decision to shut down gyms. It's not for the private company to fund wages when the company can't operate. I honestly don't get the complain that private investors should subsidise governments bad decisions" “Your capital is at risk. Your investment can go up or down in value” | |||
"Is Sunaks mrs coughing up for her company that banked £635,000 in furlough before bankrupting it owning HMRC too https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10700239/amp/Companies-linked-Rishi-Sunaks-non-dom-wife-received-furlough-cash.html Based on what I am reading. Why would they give this momey back sorry? I think what people find distasteful is that a billionaire shareholder allowed a company they were involved with take a state handout (from taxpayers) and then let the company go to the wall owing HMRC a fortune when she (and other shareholders) could have stepped in to support the company. It’s like socialism is good when taxpayers step in to support companies but bad when it then asks companies to make a bigger contribution to the pot. This isn’t the only company she was involved with that did similar things either." . However most rational people believe in the concept of fairness and treating everyone equally . Why should her loan be treated differently to anyone else's. In any event the loan was not to personally but to her company. As a director if she continued to trade while potentially insolvent she could have become personally liable . Had she done anything illegal HMRC would be crawling all over her as would those who engage in the policies of spite and envy . By closing the company down she has actually lost money. . Did you check the strength of the balance sheet prior to and during lockdown. Maybe you should have done that prior to suggesting that the PMs wife should plough in her own money . In any event wealth and cash flow are two entirely different concepts . Without knowing the constituent elements of her wealth you would be unable to assess her liquidity or ability to plough money into what had become a loss making company. | |||
"Is Sunaks mrs coughing up for her company that banked £635,000 in furlough before bankrupting it owning HMRC too https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10700239/amp/Companies-linked-Rishi-Sunaks-non-dom-wife-received-furlough-cash.html Based on what I am reading. Why would they give this momey back sorry? I think what people find distasteful is that a billionaire shareholder allowed a company they were involved with take a state handout (from taxpayers) and then let the company go to the wall owing HMRC a fortune when she (and other shareholders) could have stepped in to support the company. It’s like socialism is good when taxpayers step in to support companies but bad when it then asks companies to make a bigger contribution to the pot. This isn’t the only company she was involved with that did similar things either. Why. It was a government decision to shut down gyms. It's not for the private company to fund wages when the company can't operate. I honestly don't get the complain that private investors should subsidise governments bad decisions “Your capital is at risk. Your investment can go up or down in value”" . I do not think many or any people predicted Covid . Would you preferred people to have lost their jobs and been made bankrupt because of Covid . It seems that you want to treat the pms wife differently to any other member of society and blatantly discriminate against her | |||
"Is Sunaks mrs coughing up for her company that banked £635,000 in furlough before bankrupting it owning HMRC too https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10700239/amp/Companies-linked-Rishi-Sunaks-non-dom-wife-received-furlough-cash.html Based on what I am reading. Why would they give this momey back sorry? I think what people find distasteful is that a billionaire shareholder allowed a company they were involved with take a state handout (from taxpayers) and then let the company go to the wall owing HMRC a fortune when she (and other shareholders) could have stepped in to support the company. It’s like socialism is good when taxpayers step in to support companies but bad when it then asks companies to make a bigger contribution to the pot. This isn’t the only company she was involved with that did similar things either. Why. It was a government decision to shut down gyms. It's not for the private company to fund wages when the company can't operate. I honestly don't get the complain that private investors should subsidise governments bad decisions “Your capital is at risk. Your investment can go up or down in value”. I do not think many or any people predicted Covid . Would you preferred people to have lost their jobs and been made bankrupt because of Covid . It seems that you want to treat the pms wife differently to any other member of society and blatantly discriminate against her " It was the Govt that discriminated against about 3-4million self employed and small LTD company owners because they received zero support. Someone with her personal wealth could have supported the companies she was invested in. | |||
" I think what people find distasteful is that a billionaire shareholder allowed a company they were involved with take a state handout (from taxpayers) Someone with her personal wealth could have supported the companies she was invested in." And in addition an estimated £20M tax evaded by eight use of non dom She’s done pretty good out of UK plc | |||
| |||
"Is Sunaks mrs coughing up for her company that banked £635,000 in furlough before bankrupting it owning HMRC too https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10700239/amp/Companies-linked-Rishi-Sunaks-non-dom-wife-received-furlough-cash.html Based on what I am reading. Why would they give this momey back sorry? I think what people find distasteful is that a billionaire shareholder allowed a company they were involved with take a state handout (from taxpayers) and then let the company go to the wall owing HMRC a fortune when she (and other shareholders) could have stepped in to support the company. It’s like socialism is good when taxpayers step in to support companies but bad when it then asks companies to make a bigger contribution to the pot. This isn’t the only company she was involved with that did similar things either. Why. It was a government decision to shut down gyms. It's not for the private company to fund wages when the company can't operate. I honestly don't get the complain that private investors should subsidise governments bad decisions “Your capital is at risk. Your investment can go up or down in value”" That's when investing. The government takes risks by not collecting vat and income tax when it's generated. Using the same logic. They can't then complain they don't get money. Simple. | |||
" I think what people find distasteful is that a billionaire shareholder allowed a company they were involved with take a state handout (from taxpayers) Someone with her personal wealth could have supported the companies she was invested in. And in addition an estimated £20M tax evaded by eight use of non dom She’s done pretty good out of UK plc " She's never evaded tax. Non dom stops double taxation. She avoided double taxation. | |||
| |||
"She doesn’t have much luck with her own investments! Good job she had those shares from her Dad... Rishi Sunak’s wife, Akshata Murty, held shares in a firm that received nearly £300,000 in taxpayer-funded loans handed out during the PM’s time as chancellor. The New Craftsmen, a company selling up-market pieces of furniture, collapsed into liquidation in November 2022, according to Companies House filings. It shows the firm received £37,500 under the Covid bounce-back loan scheme introduced by Sunak in April 2020 and that the government also held 450,000 shares in the company via the Future Fund, also set up by Sunak to help small startups ride out the pandemic. Under the scheme, the government extended loans that would then convert into shares when the companies attracted new funding. A source familiar with the loan said the government lent The New Craftsmen £250,000, a sum that was matched by private investors. The loan was converted into equity, Company House fillings suggest, the value of which has been wiped out. Among the investors listed on the company’s shareholder register is Akshata Murty, who held 218,785 shares in the business through Catamaran Ventures UK. Murty also held shares personally in Lava Mayfair Club, a private members’ gym that buckled under the weight of Covid restrictions in 2021, with debts to HMRC of £374,000. Another Catamaran investment, the fitness chain Digme Fitness, fell into administration in 2021, owing more than £6.1 million in VAT and PAYE taxes, after having received furlough payments of up to £630,000." So what you're saying really. Is the government( her own husband) shafted her investments. | |||
"She doesn’t have much luck with her own investments! Good job she had those shares from her Dad... Rishi Sunak’s wife, Akshata Murty, held shares in a firm that received nearly £300,000 in taxpayer-funded loans handed out during the PM’s time as chancellor. The New Craftsmen, a company selling up-market pieces of furniture, collapsed into liquidation in November 2022, according to Companies House filings. It shows the firm received £37,500 under the Covid bounce-back loan scheme introduced by Sunak in April 2020 and that the government also held 450,000 shares in the company via the Future Fund, also set up by Sunak to help small startups ride out the pandemic. Under the scheme, the government extended loans that would then convert into shares when the companies attracted new funding. A source familiar with the loan said the government lent The New Craftsmen £250,000, a sum that was matched by private investors. The loan was converted into equity, Company House fillings suggest, the value of which has been wiped out. Among the investors listed on the company’s shareholder register is Akshata Murty, who held 218,785 shares in the business through Catamaran Ventures UK. Murty also held shares personally in Lava Mayfair Club, a private members’ gym that buckled under the weight of Covid restrictions in 2021, with debts to HMRC of £374,000. Another Catamaran investment, the fitness chain Digme Fitness, fell into administration in 2021, owing more than £6.1 million in VAT and PAYE taxes, after having received furlough payments of up to £630,000." . So are you saying that you would like to discriminated against her for being the pms wife. This would appear to the the politics of spite and envy. The Covid crisis was hardly her fault. She simply made the same claims as any other business did should they satisfy the qualifying criteria. The qualifying criteria has to be applied equally. It cannot be amended to exclude the pms wife just because you dislike and want to discriminate against her . | |||
"She doesn’t have much luck with her own investments! Good job she had those shares from her Dad... Rishi Sunak’s wife, Akshata Murty, held shares in a firm that received nearly £300,000 in taxpayer-funded loans handed out during the PM’s time as chancellor. The New Craftsmen, a company selling up-market pieces of furniture, collapsed into liquidation in November 2022, according to Companies House filings. It shows the firm received £37,500 under the Covid bounce-back loan scheme introduced by Sunak in April 2020 and that the government also held 450,000 shares in the company via the Future Fund, also set up by Sunak to help small startups ride out the pandemic. Under the scheme, the government extended loans that would then convert into shares when the companies attracted new funding. A source familiar with the loan said the government lent The New Craftsmen £250,000, a sum that was matched by private investors. The loan was converted into equity, Company House fillings suggest, the value of which has been wiped out. Among the investors listed on the company’s shareholder register is Akshata Murty, who held 218,785 shares in the business through Catamaran Ventures UK. Murty also held shares personally in Lava Mayfair Club, a private members’ gym that buckled under the weight of Covid restrictions in 2021, with debts to HMRC of £374,000. Another Catamaran investment, the fitness chain Digme Fitness, fell into administration in 2021, owing more than £6.1 million in VAT and PAYE taxes, after having received furlough payments of up to £630,000. So what you're saying really. Is the government( her own husband) shafted her investments." Not really saying anything just sharing some interesting info. Although good job Govt stepped in and taxpayer took the hit as minimised any exposure to the shareholders and Directors. | |||
"She doesn’t have much luck with her own investments! Good job she had those shares from her Dad... Rishi Sunak’s wife, Akshata Murty, held shares in a firm that received nearly £300,000 in taxpayer-funded loans handed out during the PM’s time as chancellor. The New Craftsmen, a company selling up-market pieces of furniture, collapsed into liquidation in November 2022, according to Companies House filings. It shows the firm received £37,500 under the Covid bounce-back loan scheme introduced by Sunak in April 2020 and that the government also held 450,000 shares in the company via the Future Fund, also set up by Sunak to help small startups ride out the pandemic. Under the scheme, the government extended loans that would then convert into shares when the companies attracted new funding. A source familiar with the loan said the government lent The New Craftsmen £250,000, a sum that was matched by private investors. The loan was converted into equity, Company House fillings suggest, the value of which has been wiped out. Among the investors listed on the company’s shareholder register is Akshata Murty, who held 218,785 shares in the business through Catamaran Ventures UK. Murty also held shares personally in Lava Mayfair Club, a private members’ gym that buckled under the weight of Covid restrictions in 2021, with debts to HMRC of £374,000. Another Catamaran investment, the fitness chain Digme Fitness, fell into administration in 2021, owing more than £6.1 million in VAT and PAYE taxes, after having received furlough payments of up to £630,000.. So are you saying that you would like to discriminated against her for being the pms wife. This would appear to the the politics of spite and envy. The Covid crisis was hardly her fault. She simply made the same claims as any other business did should they satisfy the qualifying criteria. The qualifying criteria has to be applied equally. It cannot be amended to exclude the pms wife just because you dislike and want to discriminate against her ." Sharing facts and information is hardly discrimination 
She ceased to be a private individual the moment her husband wheeled her out on stage to give a speech about him at the Tory Party Conference. | |||
"She doesn’t have much luck with her own investments! Good job she had those shares from her Dad... Rishi Sunak’s wife, Akshata Murty, held shares in a firm that received nearly £300,000 in taxpayer-funded loans handed out during the PM’s time as chancellor. The New Craftsmen, a company selling up-market pieces of furniture, collapsed into liquidation in November 2022, according to Companies House filings. It shows the firm received £37,500 under the Covid bounce-back loan scheme introduced by Sunak in April 2020 and that the government also held 450,000 shares in the company via the Future Fund, also set up by Sunak to help small startups ride out the pandemic. Under the scheme, the government extended loans that would then convert into shares when the companies attracted new funding. A source familiar with the loan said the government lent The New Craftsmen £250,000, a sum that was matched by private investors. The loan was converted into equity, Company House fillings suggest, the value of which has been wiped out. Among the investors listed on the company’s shareholder register is Akshata Murty, who held 218,785 shares in the business through Catamaran Ventures UK. Murty also held shares personally in Lava Mayfair Club, a private members’ gym that buckled under the weight of Covid restrictions in 2021, with debts to HMRC of £374,000. Another Catamaran investment, the fitness chain Digme Fitness, fell into administration in 2021, owing more than £6.1 million in VAT and PAYE taxes, after having received furlough payments of up to £630,000. So what you're saying really. Is the government( her own husband) shafted her investments. Not really saying anything just sharing some interesting info. Although good job Govt stepped in and taxpayer took the hit as minimised any exposure to the shareholders and Directors." The tax payer didn't take the hit The investors did. They lost more money. The government took control of the assets. The investors lost all the assets. | |||
"She doesn’t have much luck with her own investments! Good job she had those shares from her Dad... Rishi Sunak’s wife, Akshata Murty, held shares in a firm that received nearly £300,000 in taxpayer-funded loans handed out during the PM’s time as chancellor. The New Craftsmen, a company selling up-market pieces of furniture, collapsed into liquidation in November 2022, according to Companies House filings. It shows the firm received £37,500 under the Covid bounce-back loan scheme introduced by Sunak in April 2020 and that the government also held 450,000 shares in the company via the Future Fund, also set up by Sunak to help small startups ride out the pandemic. Under the scheme, the government extended loans that would then convert into shares when the companies attracted new funding. A source familiar with the loan said the government lent The New Craftsmen £250,000, a sum that was matched by private investors. The loan was converted into equity, Company House fillings suggest, the value of which has been wiped out. Among the investors listed on the company’s shareholder register is Akshata Murty, who held 218,785 shares in the business through Catamaran Ventures UK. Murty also held shares personally in Lava Mayfair Club, a private members’ gym that buckled under the weight of Covid restrictions in 2021, with debts to HMRC of £374,000. Another Catamaran investment, the fitness chain Digme Fitness, fell into administration in 2021, owing more than £6.1 million in VAT and PAYE taxes, after having received furlough payments of up to £630,000. So what you're saying really. Is the government( her own husband) shafted her investments. Not really saying anything just sharing some interesting info. Although good job Govt stepped in and taxpayer took the hit as minimised any exposure to the shareholders and Directors." Luckily another more rational poster has already pointed out that investors in the company have lost everything. This is very different to the scenario that you are attempting to present. Are you saying that the pms wife should have predicted the Covid crisis and its impact on the economy. ? Did the insolvency service query the liquidation of any of her companies? All transactions were fully transparent and above board . People should not attempt to make political capital out of someone's losses . | |||
"She doesn’t have much luck with her own investments! Good job she had those shares from her Dad... Rishi Sunak’s wife, Akshata Murty, held shares in a firm that received nearly £300,000 in taxpayer-funded loans handed out during the PM’s time as chancellor. The New Craftsmen, a company selling up-market pieces of furniture, collapsed into liquidation in November 2022, according to Companies House filings. It shows the firm received £37,500 under the Covid bounce-back loan scheme introduced by Sunak in April 2020 and that the government also held 450,000 shares in the company via the Future Fund, also set up by Sunak to help small startups ride out the pandemic. Under the scheme, the government extended loans that would then convert into shares when the companies attracted new funding. A source familiar with the loan said the government lent The New Craftsmen £250,000, a sum that was matched by private investors. The loan was converted into equity, Company House fillings suggest, the value of which has been wiped out. Among the investors listed on the company’s shareholder register is Akshata Murty, who held 218,785 shares in the business through Catamaran Ventures UK. Murty also held shares personally in Lava Mayfair Club, a private members’ gym that buckled under the weight of Covid restrictions in 2021, with debts to HMRC of £374,000. Another Catamaran investment, the fitness chain Digme Fitness, fell into administration in 2021, owing more than £6.1 million in VAT and PAYE taxes, after having received furlough payments of up to £630,000. So what you're saying really. Is the government( her own husband) shafted her investments. Not really saying anything just sharing some interesting info. Although good job Govt stepped in and taxpayer took the hit as minimised any exposure to the shareholders and Directors. The tax payer didn't take the hit The investors did. They lost more money. The government took control of the assets. The investors lost all the assets. " Erm... “fell into administration in 2021, owing more than £6.1 million in VAT and PAYE taxes, after having received furlough payments of up to £630,000.” So a net loss to taxpayers (the exchequer) of £6.73m | |||
"She doesn’t have much luck with her own investments! Good job she had those shares from her Dad... Rishi Sunak’s wife, Akshata Murty, held shares in a firm that received nearly £300,000 in taxpayer-funded loans handed out during the PM’s time as chancellor. The New Craftsmen, a company selling up-market pieces of furniture, collapsed into liquidation in November 2022, according to Companies House filings. It shows the firm received £37,500 under the Covid bounce-back loan scheme introduced by Sunak in April 2020 and that the government also held 450,000 shares in the company via the Future Fund, also set up by Sunak to help small startups ride out the pandemic. Under the scheme, the government extended loans that would then convert into shares when the companies attracted new funding. A source familiar with the loan said the government lent The New Craftsmen £250,000, a sum that was matched by private investors. The loan was converted into equity, Company House fillings suggest, the value of which has been wiped out. Among the investors listed on the company’s shareholder register is Akshata Murty, who held 218,785 shares in the business through Catamaran Ventures UK. Murty also held shares personally in Lava Mayfair Club, a private members’ gym that buckled under the weight of Covid restrictions in 2021, with debts to HMRC of £374,000. Another Catamaran investment, the fitness chain Digme Fitness, fell into administration in 2021, owing more than £6.1 million in VAT and PAYE taxes, after having received furlough payments of up to £630,000. So what you're saying really. Is the government( her own husband) shafted her investments. Not really saying anything just sharing some interesting info. Although good job Govt stepped in and taxpayer took the hit as minimised any exposure to the shareholders and Directors. Luckily another more rational poster has already pointed out that investors in the company have lost everything. This is very different to the scenario that you are attempting to present. Are you saying that the pms wife should have predicted the Covid crisis and its impact on the economy. ? Did the insolvency service query the liquidation of any of her companies? All transactions were fully transparent and above board . People should not attempt to make political capital out of someone's losses . " You do love extrapolating and putting words into people’s mouths don’t you Pat. I have shared info. Digest and use it as you want but stop being so defensive! | |||
"I think what people find distasteful is that a billionaire shareholder allowed a company they were involved with take a state handout (from taxpayers) and then let the company go to the wall owing HMRC a fortune when she (and other shareholders) could have stepped in to support the company." But she couldn't have stepped in to support the company. You can't just give a company money, it has to be accounted for properly. You can ask the shareholders to add capital to the company. Akshata Murthy was only a small shareholder, in the region of 5%. In order for her to add capital, she would have had to persuade the holders of the other 95% of the shares to put in proportionate amounts of money. Not a likely thing to happen when the business is shuttered due to CoViD. The other method is to loan the company money, but that creates a debt, and the other shareholders would have had to approve it. Adding capital to create a debt, and then demanding repayment is one of the tricks capitalists use to steal companies from the current owners. I doubt any of the other directors would have allowed it. Just because she has a lot of money personally, doesn't mean that she can use that money to save a failing business. | |||
"She doesn’t have much luck with her own investments! Good job she had those shares from her Dad... Rishi Sunak’s wife, Akshata Murty, held shares in a firm that received nearly £300,000 in taxpayer-funded loans handed out during the PM’s time as chancellor. The New Craftsmen, a company selling up-market pieces of furniture, collapsed into liquidation in November 2022, according to Companies House filings. It shows the firm received £37,500 under the Covid bounce-back loan scheme introduced by Sunak in April 2020 and that the government also held 450,000 shares in the company via the Future Fund, also set up by Sunak to help small startups ride out the pandemic. Under the scheme, the government extended loans that would then convert into shares when the companies attracted new funding. A source familiar with the loan said the government lent The New Craftsmen £250,000, a sum that was matched by private investors. The loan was converted into equity, Company House fillings suggest, the value of which has been wiped out. Among the investors listed on the company’s shareholder register is Akshata Murty, who held 218,785 shares in the business through Catamaran Ventures UK. Murty also held shares personally in Lava Mayfair Club, a private members’ gym that buckled under the weight of Covid restrictions in 2021, with debts to HMRC of £374,000. Another Catamaran investment, the fitness chain Digme Fitness, fell into administration in 2021, owing more than £6.1 million in VAT and PAYE taxes, after having received furlough payments of up to £630,000. So what you're saying really. Is the government( her own husband) shafted her investments. Not really saying anything just sharing some interesting info. Although good job Govt stepped in and taxpayer took the hit as minimised any exposure to the shareholders and Directors. The tax payer didn't take the hit The investors did. They lost more money. The government took control of the assets. The investors lost all the assets. Erm... “fell into administration in 2021, owing more than £6.1 million in VAT and PAYE taxes, after having received furlough payments of up to £630,000.” So a net loss to taxpayers (the exchequer) of £6.73m" . When the company fell into administration are you implying that there was no money left to pay the preferential creditors ? How much did HMRC subsequently receive from the administrators . ? Maybe we need to see a statement from the liquidators / administrators before passing judgement. That would be a more rational and impartial approach . | |||
"Brilliant lets hope all these thieving bastards get caught. Next we need to see the likes of Baroness Mone and her husband brought to task and recover the hundreds of millions they need to pay back." . Baroness Mone is a completely different scenario. She is already under investigation. Her case evolves around the quality of the PPE and supply terms and conditions . Breach of contact law is an entirely different concept to being actively engaged in fraud . Last time I checked the government were attempting to recover £120 million. As far as she/ her company were concerned she had fulfilled the terms of the contract. | |||
"She doesn’t have much luck with her own investments! Good job she had those shares from her Dad... Rishi Sunak’s wife, Akshata Murty, held shares in a firm that received nearly £300,000 in taxpayer-funded loans handed out during the PM’s time as chancellor. The New Craftsmen, a company selling up-market pieces of furniture, collapsed into liquidation in November 2022, according to Companies House filings. It shows the firm received £37,500 under the Covid bounce-back loan scheme introduced by Sunak in April 2020 and that the government also held 450,000 shares in the company via the Future Fund, also set up by Sunak to help small startups ride out the pandemic. Under the scheme, the government extended loans that would then convert into shares when the companies attracted new funding. A source familiar with the loan said the government lent The New Craftsmen £250,000, a sum that was matched by private investors. The loan was converted into equity, Company House fillings suggest, the value of which has been wiped out. Among the investors listed on the company’s shareholder register is Akshata Murty, who held 218,785 shares in the business through Catamaran Ventures UK. Murty also held shares personally in Lava Mayfair Club, a private members’ gym that buckled under the weight of Covid restrictions in 2021, with debts to HMRC of £374,000. Another Catamaran investment, the fitness chain Digme Fitness, fell into administration in 2021, owing more than £6.1 million in VAT and PAYE taxes, after having received furlough payments of up to £630,000. So what you're saying really. Is the government( her own husband) shafted her investments. Not really saying anything just sharing some interesting info. Although good job Govt stepped in and taxpayer took the hit as minimised any exposure to the shareholders and Directors. The tax payer didn't take the hit The investors did. They lost more money. The government took control of the assets. The investors lost all the assets. Erm... “fell into administration in 2021, owing more than £6.1 million in VAT and PAYE taxes, after having received furlough payments of up to £630,000.” So a net loss to taxpayers (the exchequer) of £6.73m" That's not how VAT works. So the public haven't lost out. If you buy something and pay VAT You pay the VAT and then claim it back. I've no idea how they would owe the vat. Reading different links it seems they owed 6m to creditors. Updated insolvency records show that Digme Fitness was £15.1m in the red when it went under with unsecured creditors left £3,237,538 out of pocket. Local authorities, cleaners and utility "firms are among those owed money, as are legal firms. HMRC was owed £415,000 for unpaid VAT and PAYE/NI, and employees were owed £31,886 in notice and redundancy pay." Again. If the business wasn't making a profit though. It was entitled to offset losses against corp tax. During covid it would have likely paid the extra 20% top up to employees. I'm ot e tirely sure how the tax payer was out of pocket. They lost a company all its assets. All the cash linked to the Company. There's no evidence the covid money was siphoned out the business. So what do they owe the tax payer sorry? | |||
"I think what people find distasteful is that a billionaire shareholder allowed a company they were involved with take a state handout (from taxpayers) and then let the company go to the wall owing HMRC a fortune when she (and other shareholders) could have stepped in to support the company. But she couldn't have stepped in to support the company. You can't just give a company money, it has to be accounted for properly. You can ask the shareholders to add capital to the company. Akshata Murthy was only a small shareholder, in the region of 5%. In order for her to add capital, she would have had to persuade the holders of the other 95% of the shares to put in proportionate amounts of money. Not a likely thing to happen when the business is shuttered due to CoViD. The other method is to loan the company money, but that creates a debt, and the other shareholders would have had to approve it. Adding capital to create a debt, and then demanding repayment is one of the tricks capitalists use to steal companies from the current owners. I doubt any of the other directors would have allowed it. Just because she has a lot of money personally, doesn't mean that she can use that money to save a failing business." That is a fair point well made. | |||
"She doesn’t have much luck with her own investments! Good job she had those shares from her Dad... Rishi Sunak’s wife, Akshata Murty, held shares in a firm that received nearly £300,000 in taxpayer-funded loans handed out during the PM’s time as chancellor. The New Craftsmen, a company selling up-market pieces of furniture, collapsed into liquidation in November 2022, according to Companies House filings. It shows the firm received £37,500 under the Covid bounce-back loan scheme introduced by Sunak in April 2020 and that the government also held 450,000 shares in the company via the Future Fund, also set up by Sunak to help small startups ride out the pandemic. Under the scheme, the government extended loans that would then convert into shares when the companies attracted new funding. A source familiar with the loan said the government lent The New Craftsmen £250,000, a sum that was matched by private investors. The loan was converted into equity, Company House fillings suggest, the value of which has been wiped out. Among the investors listed on the company’s shareholder register is Akshata Murty, who held 218,785 shares in the business through Catamaran Ventures UK. Murty also held shares personally in Lava Mayfair Club, a private members’ gym that buckled under the weight of Covid restrictions in 2021, with debts to HMRC of £374,000. Another Catamaran investment, the fitness chain Digme Fitness, fell into administration in 2021, owing more than £6.1 million in VAT and PAYE taxes, after having received furlough payments of up to £630,000. So what you're saying really. Is the government( her own husband) shafted her investments. Not really saying anything just sharing some interesting info. Although good job Govt stepped in and taxpayer took the hit as minimised any exposure to the shareholders and Directors. The tax payer didn't take the hit The investors did. They lost more money. The government took control of the assets. The investors lost all the assets. Erm... “fell into administration in 2021, owing more than £6.1 million in VAT and PAYE taxes, after having received furlough payments of up to £630,000.” So a net loss to taxpayers (the exchequer) of £6.73m. When the company fell into administration are you implying that there was no money left to pay the preferential creditors ? How much did HMRC subsequently receive from the administrators . ? Maybe we need to see a statement from the liquidators / administrators before passing judgement. That would be a more rational and impartial approach . " Seemingly thay tax burden upon further I vestigstion went from 6m to 450k | |||
"She doesn’t have much luck with her own investments! Good job she had those shares from her Dad... Rishi Sunak’s wife, Akshata Murty, held shares in a firm that received nearly £300,000 in taxpayer-funded loans handed out during the PM’s time as chancellor. The New Craftsmen, a company selling up-market pieces of furniture, collapsed into liquidation in November 2022, according to Companies House filings. It shows the firm received £37,500 under the Covid bounce-back loan scheme introduced by Sunak in April 2020 and that the government also held 450,000 shares in the company via the Future Fund, also set up by Sunak to help small startups ride out the pandemic. Under the scheme, the government extended loans that would then convert into shares when the companies attracted new funding. A source familiar with the loan said the government lent The New Craftsmen £250,000, a sum that was matched by private investors. The loan was converted into equity, Company House fillings suggest, the value of which has been wiped out. Among the investors listed on the company’s shareholder register is Akshata Murty, who held 218,785 shares in the business through Catamaran Ventures UK. Murty also held shares personally in Lava Mayfair Club, a private members’ gym that buckled under the weight of Covid restrictions in 2021, with debts to HMRC of £374,000. Another Catamaran investment, the fitness chain Digme Fitness, fell into administration in 2021, owing more than £6.1 million in VAT and PAYE taxes, after having received furlough payments of up to £630,000." . Surely you should have mentioned that these liabilities were at the point in time that administrators were appointed . What would matter was how much cash was available to pay off preferred creditors once amounts owing from debtors and sale of assets were collected. Is the company now liquidated and if so how much was actually owed to HMRC . You have taken a snapshot at a point in time and appear to have completely ignored assets available for distribution. | |||
| |||
"Is Sunaks mrs coughing up for her company that banked £635,000 in furlough before bankrupting it owning HMRC too https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10700239/amp/Companies-linked-Rishi-Sunaks-non-dom-wife-received-furlough-cash.html Based on what I am reading. Why would they give this momey back sorry? I think what people find distasteful is that a billionaire shareholder allowed a company they were involved with take a state handout (from taxpayers) and then let the company go to the wall owing HMRC a fortune when she (and other shareholders) could have stepped in to support the company. It’s like socialism is good when taxpayers step in to support companies but bad when it then asks companies to make a bigger contribution to the pot. This isn’t the only company she was involved with that did similar things either. Why. It was a government decision to shut down gyms. It's not for the private company to fund wages when the company can't operate. I honestly don't get the complain that private investors should subsidise governments bad decisions “Your capital is at risk. Your investment can go up or down in value”. I do not think many or any people predicted Covid . Would you preferred people to have lost their jobs and been made bankrupt because of Covid . It seems that you want to treat the pms wife differently to any other member of society and blatantly discriminate against her It was the Govt that discriminated against about 3-4million self employed and small LTD company owners because they received zero support. Someone with her personal wealth could have supported the companies she was invested in." As a small limited company I got a grant. And I know lots of self employed how got grants or/and loans. The people I know that did not get much was because, there accounts showed litte profit because it had been hidden for Corporation tax! I as a small company paid staff and bills with this grant. But she Theater industry was shut for so long I couldn't serstain the overheads so went Bankrupt lost about £300k from the Company and all grant and furlough money went in over heads and staff. So are we saying I should have put more in when there was no end in sight. At first when things shut on 21 march 2020 we had cash in the bank to last about 3 months. If I had know restrictions would not be lifted till 22 Dec 2021. I would not have taken the grant. Would have taken furlough money paid off employees and cut my loss but you hang on to try your best. Noo director losses a company with out loss and pain. The entertainment sector has not fully recovered yet and won't do for a long time. | |||
"She doesn’t have much luck with her own investments! Good job she had those shares from her Dad... Rishi Sunak’s wife, Akshata Murty, held shares in a firm that received nearly £300,000 in taxpayer-funded loans handed out during the PM’s time as chancellor. The New Craftsmen, a company selling up-market pieces of furniture, collapsed into liquidation in November 2022, according to Companies House filings. It shows the firm received £37,500 under the Covid bounce-back loan scheme introduced by Sunak in April 2020 and that the government also held 450,000 shares in the company via the Future Fund, also set up by Sunak to help small startups ride out the pandemic. Under the scheme, the government extended loans that would then convert into shares when the companies attracted new funding. A source familiar with the loan said the government lent The New Craftsmen £250,000, a sum that was matched by private investors. The loan was converted into equity, Company House fillings suggest, the value of which has been wiped out. Among the investors listed on the company’s shareholder register is Akshata Murty, who held 218,785 shares in the business through Catamaran Ventures UK. Murty also held shares personally in Lava Mayfair Club, a private members’ gym that buckled under the weight of Covid restrictions in 2021, with debts to HMRC of £374,000. Another Catamaran investment, the fitness chain Digme Fitness, fell into administration in 2021, owing more than £6.1 million in VAT and PAYE taxes, after having received furlough payments of up to £630,000. So what you're saying really. Is the government( her own husband) shafted her investments. Not really saying anything just sharing some interesting info. Although good job Govt stepped in and taxpayer took the hit as minimised any exposure to the shareholders and Directors. The tax payer didn't take the hit The investors did. They lost more money. The government took control of the assets. The investors lost all the assets. Erm... “fell into administration in 2021, owing more than £6.1 million in VAT and PAYE taxes, after having received furlough payments of up to £630,000.” So a net loss to taxpayers (the exchequer) of £6.73m" So are you saying they should not of taken the furlough money and shut up shop on day 1. When on day 30 they might have been able to open and keep and retain the staff. Furlough money is for staff as a director you can only pay you self your salary from that pot. The same as the rest of the staff. | |||
"She doesn’t have much luck with her own investments! Good job she had those shares from her Dad... Rishi Sunak’s wife, Akshata Murty, held shares in a firm that received nearly £300,000 in taxpayer-funded loans handed out during the PM’s time as chancellor. The New Craftsmen, a company selling up-market pieces of furniture, collapsed into liquidation in November 2022, according to Companies House filings. It shows the firm received £37,500 under the Covid bounce-back loan scheme introduced by Sunak in April 2020 and that the government also held 450,000 shares in the company via the Future Fund, also set up by Sunak to help small startups ride out the pandemic. Under the scheme, the government extended loans that would then convert into shares when the companies attracted new funding. A source familiar with the loan said the government lent The New Craftsmen £250,000, a sum that was matched by private investors. The loan was converted into equity, Company House fillings suggest, the value of which has been wiped out. Among the investors listed on the company’s shareholder register is Akshata Murty, who held 218,785 shares in the business through Catamaran Ventures UK. Murty also held shares personally in Lava Mayfair Club, a private members’ gym that buckled under the weight of Covid restrictions in 2021, with debts to HMRC of £374,000. Another Catamaran investment, the fitness chain Digme Fitness, fell into administration in 2021, owing more than £6.1 million in VAT and PAYE taxes, after having received furlough payments of up to £630,000. So what you're saying really. Is the government( her own husband) shafted her investments. Not really saying anything just sharing some interesting info. Although good job Govt stepped in and taxpayer took the hit as minimised any exposure to the shareholders and Directors. The tax payer didn't take the hit The investors did. They lost more money. The government took control of the assets. The investors lost all the assets. Erm... “fell into administration in 2021, owing more than £6.1 million in VAT and PAYE taxes, after having received furlough payments of up to £630,000.” So a net loss to taxpayers (the exchequer) of £6.73m. When the company fell into administration are you implying that there was no money left to pay the preferential creditors ? How much did HMRC subsequently receive from the administrators . ? Maybe we need to see a statement from the liquidators / administrators before passing judgement. That would be a more rational and impartial approach . " I can assure you the fist to get paid is the administration company. Then the liquidators the rest might have got 1p in the pound at most that would also include utility companies. I bet thay lost out. And most Gym equipment is on lease so they will have lost out. And not been able to get to there assets until released by the liquidators, and not till restrictions where lifted as venues where not allowed to open. | |||
"Is Sunaks mrs coughing up for her company that banked £635,000 in furlough before bankrupting it owning HMRC too https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10700239/amp/Companies-linked-Rishi-Sunaks-non-dom-wife-received-furlough-cash.html Based on what I am reading. Why would they give this momey back sorry? I think what people find distasteful is that a billionaire shareholder allowed a company they were involved with take a state handout (from taxpayers) and then let the company go to the wall owing HMRC a fortune when she (and other shareholders) could have stepped in to support the company. It’s like socialism is good when taxpayers step in to support companies but bad when it then asks companies to make a bigger contribution to the pot. This isn’t the only company she was involved with that did similar things either. Why. It was a government decision to shut down gyms. It's not for the private company to fund wages when the company can't operate. I honestly don't get the complain that private investors should subsidise governments bad decisions “Your capital is at risk. Your investment can go up or down in value”. I do not think many or any people predicted Covid . Would you preferred people to have lost their jobs and been made bankrupt because of Covid . It seems that you want to treat the pms wife differently to any other member of society and blatantly discriminate against her It was the Govt that discriminated against about 3-4million self employed and small LTD company owners because they received zero support. Someone with her personal wealth could have supported the companies she was invested in. As a small limited company I got a grant. And I know lots of self employed how got grants or/and loans. The people I know that did not get much was because, there accounts showed litte profit because it had been hidden for Corporation tax! I as a small company paid staff and bills with this grant. But she Theater industry was shut for so long I couldn't serstain the overheads so went Bankrupt lost about £300k from the Company and all grant and furlough money went in over heads and staff. So are we saying I should have put more in when there was no end in sight. At first when things shut on 21 march 2020 we had cash in the bank to last about 3 months. If I had know restrictions would not be lifted till 22 Dec 2021. I would not have taken the grant. Would have taken furlough money paid off employees and cut my loss but you hang on to try your best. Noo director losses a company with out loss and pain. The entertainment sector has not fully recovered yet and won't do for a long time. " I was aware of.something similar during a discussion with a taxi driver. He had declared all his income over the 3 years prior to covid never pocketed cash payments without declaration. Those who did then cried about the government not giving them their entire income, having tax ecaded for years. | |||
"Is Sunaks mrs coughing up for her company that banked £635,000 in furlough before bankrupting it owning HMRC too https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10700239/amp/Companies-linked-Rishi-Sunaks-non-dom-wife-received-furlough-cash.html Based on what I am reading. Why would they give this momey back sorry? I think what people find distasteful is that a billionaire shareholder allowed a company they were involved with take a state handout (from taxpayers) and then let the company go to the wall owing HMRC a fortune when she (and other shareholders) could have stepped in to support the company. It’s like socialism is good when taxpayers step in to support companies but bad when it then asks companies to make a bigger contribution to the pot. This isn’t the only company she was involved with that did similar things either. Why. It was a government decision to shut down gyms. It's not for the private company to fund wages when the company can't operate. I honestly don't get the complain that private investors should subsidise governments bad decisions “Your capital is at risk. Your investment can go up or down in value”. I do not think many or any people predicted Covid . Would you preferred people to have lost their jobs and been made bankrupt because of Covid . It seems that you want to treat the pms wife differently to any other member of society and blatantly discriminate against her It was the Govt that discriminated against about 3-4million self employed and small LTD company owners because they received zero support. Someone with her personal wealth could have supported the companies she was invested in. As a small limited company I got a grant. And I know lots of self employed how got grants or/and loans. The people I know that did not get much was because, there accounts showed litte profit because it had been hidden for Corporation tax! I as a small company paid staff and bills with this grant. But she Theater industry was shut for so long I couldn't serstain the overheads so went Bankrupt lost about £300k from the Company and all grant and furlough money went in over heads and staff. So are we saying I should have put more in when there was no end in sight. At first when things shut on 21 march 2020 we had cash in the bank to last about 3 months. If I had know restrictions would not be lifted till 22 Dec 2021. I would not have taken the grant. Would have taken furlough money paid off employees and cut my loss but you hang on to try your best. Noo director losses a company with out loss and pain. The entertainment sector has not fully recovered yet and won't do for a long time. I was aware of.something similar during a discussion with a taxi driver. He had declared all his income over the 3 years prior to covid never pocketed cash payments without declaration. Those who did then cried about the government not giving them their entire income, having tax ecaded for years. " Yep you can't have your cake and eat it. | |||
| |||
"Is Sunaks mrs coughing up for her company that banked £635,000 in furlough before bankrupting it owning HMRC too https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10700239/amp/Companies-linked-Rishi-Sunaks-non-dom-wife-received-furlough-cash.html Based on what I am reading. Why would they give this momey back sorry? I think what people find distasteful is that a billionaire shareholder allowed a company they were involved with take a state handout (from taxpayers) and then let the company go to the wall owing HMRC a fortune when she (and other shareholders) could have stepped in to support the company. It’s like socialism is good when taxpayers step in to support companies but bad when it then asks companies to make a bigger contribution to the pot. This isn’t the only company she was involved with that did similar things either. Why. It was a government decision to shut down gyms. It's not for the private company to fund wages when the company can't operate. I honestly don't get the complain that private investors should subsidise governments bad decisions “Your capital is at risk. Your investment can go up or down in value”. I do not think many or any people predicted Covid . Would you preferred people to have lost their jobs and been made bankrupt because of Covid . It seems that you want to treat the pms wife differently to any other member of society and blatantly discriminate against her It was the Govt that discriminated against about 3-4million self employed and small LTD company owners because they received zero support. Someone with her personal wealth could have supported the companies she was invested in. As a small limited company I got a grant. And I know lots of self employed how got grants or/and loans. The people I know that did not get much was because, there accounts showed litte profit because it had been hidden for Corporation tax! I as a small company paid staff and bills with this grant. But she Theater industry was shut for so long I couldn't serstain the overheads so went Bankrupt lost about £300k from the Company and all grant and furlough money went in over heads and staff. So are we saying I should have put more in when there was no end in sight. At first when things shut on 21 march 2020 we had cash in the bank to last about 3 months. If I had know restrictions would not be lifted till 22 Dec 2021. I would not have taken the grant. Would have taken furlough money paid off employees and cut my loss but you hang on to try your best. Noo director losses a company with out loss and pain. The entertainment sector has not fully recovered yet and won't do for a long time. " Did you have a physical premises that had to be closed? I believe that was the only way to secure a grant? Freelancers and self-employed with less than 18 months accounts were excluded. That included contractors who work out of client locations. The idea that all of these people were fiddling taxes is wrong. Some yes. All no. Unless they work for cash, then the income flows through the company bank account. | |||
"Is Sunaks mrs coughing up for her company that banked £635,000 in furlough before bankrupting it owning HMRC too https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10700239/amp/Companies-linked-Rishi-Sunaks-non-dom-wife-received-furlough-cash.html Based on what I am reading. Why would they give this momey back sorry? I think what people find distasteful is that a billionaire shareholder allowed a company they were involved with take a state handout (from taxpayers) and then let the company go to the wall owing HMRC a fortune when she (and other shareholders) could have stepped in to support the company. It’s like socialism is good when taxpayers step in to support companies but bad when it then asks companies to make a bigger contribution to the pot. This isn’t the only company she was involved with that did similar things either. Why. It was a government decision to shut down gyms. It's not for the private company to fund wages when the company can't operate. I honestly don't get the complain that private investors should subsidise governments bad decisions “Your capital is at risk. Your investment can go up or down in value”. I do not think many or any people predicted Covid . Would you preferred people to have lost their jobs and been made bankrupt because of Covid . It seems that you want to treat the pms wife differently to any other member of society and blatantly discriminate against her It was the Govt that discriminated against about 3-4million self employed and small LTD company owners because they received zero support. Someone with her personal wealth could have supported the companies she was invested in. As a small limited company I got a grant. And I know lots of self employed how got grants or/and loans. The people I know that did not get much was because, there accounts showed litte profit because it had been hidden for Corporation tax! I as a small company paid staff and bills with this grant. But she Theater industry was shut for so long I couldn't serstain the overheads so went Bankrupt lost about £300k from the Company and all grant and furlough money went in over heads and staff. So are we saying I should have put more in when there was no end in sight. At first when things shut on 21 march 2020 we had cash in the bank to last about 3 months. If I had know restrictions would not be lifted till 22 Dec 2021. I would not have taken the grant. Would have taken furlough money paid off employees and cut my loss but you hang on to try your best. Noo director losses a company with out loss and pain. The entertainment sector has not fully recovered yet and won't do for a long time. I was aware of.something similar during a discussion with a taxi driver. He had declared all his income over the 3 years prior to covid never pocketed cash payments without declaration. Those who did then cried about the government not giving them their entire income, having tax ecaded for years. " And I know a guy who was doing sports physio who worked out of other people’s gyms who put down his father’s garage as his physical premises and claimed several rounds of grants. | |||
"Is Sunaks mrs coughing up for her company that banked £635,000 in furlough before bankrupting it owning HMRC too https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10700239/amp/Companies-linked-Rishi-Sunaks-non-dom-wife-received-furlough-cash.html Based on what I am reading. Why would they give this momey back sorry? I think what people find distasteful is that a billionaire shareholder allowed a company they were involved with take a state handout (from taxpayers) and then let the company go to the wall owing HMRC a fortune when she (and other shareholders) could have stepped in to support the company. It’s like socialism is good when taxpayers step in to support companies but bad when it then asks companies to make a bigger contribution to the pot. This isn’t the only company she was involved with that did similar things either. Why. It was a government decision to shut down gyms. It's not for the private company to fund wages when the company can't operate. I honestly don't get the complain that private investors should subsidise governments bad decisions “Your capital is at risk. Your investment can go up or down in value”. I do not think many or any people predicted Covid . Would you preferred people to have lost their jobs and been made bankrupt because of Covid . It seems that you want to treat the pms wife differently to any other member of society and blatantly discriminate against her It was the Govt that discriminated against about 3-4million self employed and small LTD company owners because they received zero support. Someone with her personal wealth could have supported the companies she was invested in. As a small limited company I got a grant. And I know lots of self employed how got grants or/and loans. The people I know that did not get much was because, there accounts showed litte profit because it had been hidden for Corporation tax! I as a small company paid staff and bills with this grant. But she Theater industry was shut for so long I couldn't serstain the overheads so went Bankrupt lost about £300k from the Company and all grant and furlough money went in over heads and staff. So are we saying I should have put more in when there was no end in sight. At first when things shut on 21 march 2020 we had cash in the bank to last about 3 months. If I had know restrictions would not be lifted till 22 Dec 2021. I would not have taken the grant. Would have taken furlough money paid off employees and cut my loss but you hang on to try your best. Noo director losses a company with out loss and pain. The entertainment sector has not fully recovered yet and won't do for a long time. Did you have a physical premises that had to be closed? I believe that was the only way to secure a grant? Freelancers and self-employed with less than 18 months accounts were excluded. That included contractors who work out of client locations. The idea that all of these people were fiddling taxes is wrong. Some yes. All no. Unless they work for cash, then the income flows through the company bank account." Yes had an office and a storage unit had to let good orders go was hard but had no choice. I guess I could have re Morgage the family home but was not woth the risk and glad I did not as I think I would have lost everything then putting in more money to a bad situation. | |||
"Is Sunaks mrs coughing up for her company that banked £635,000 in furlough before bankrupting it owning HMRC too https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10700239/amp/Companies-linked-Rishi-Sunaks-non-dom-wife-received-furlough-cash.html Based on what I am reading. Why would they give this momey back sorry? I think what people find distasteful is that a billionaire shareholder allowed a company they were involved with take a state handout (from taxpayers) and then let the company go to the wall owing HMRC a fortune when she (and other shareholders) could have stepped in to support the company. It’s like socialism is good when taxpayers step in to support companies but bad when it then asks companies to make a bigger contribution to the pot. This isn’t the only company she was involved with that did similar things either. Why. It was a government decision to shut down gyms. It's not for the private company to fund wages when the company can't operate. I honestly don't get the complain that private investors should subsidise governments bad decisions “Your capital is at risk. Your investment can go up or down in value”. I do not think many or any people predicted Covid . Would you preferred people to have lost their jobs and been made bankrupt because of Covid . It seems that you want to treat the pms wife differently to any other member of society and blatantly discriminate against her It was the Govt that discriminated against about 3-4million self employed and small LTD company owners because they received zero support. Someone with her personal wealth could have supported the companies she was invested in. As a small limited company I got a grant. And I know lots of self employed how got grants or/and loans. The people I know that did not get much was because, there accounts showed litte profit because it had been hidden for Corporation tax! I as a small company paid staff and bills with this grant. But she Theater industry was shut for so long I couldn't serstain the overheads so went Bankrupt lost about £300k from the Company and all grant and furlough money went in over heads and staff. So are we saying I should have put more in when there was no end in sight. At first when things shut on 21 march 2020 we had cash in the bank to last about 3 months. If I had know restrictions would not be lifted till 22 Dec 2021. I would not have taken the grant. Would have taken furlough money paid off employees and cut my loss but you hang on to try your best. Noo director losses a company with out loss and pain. The entertainment sector has not fully recovered yet and won't do for a long time. Did you have a physical premises that had to be closed? I believe that was the only way to secure a grant? Freelancers and self-employed with less than 18 months accounts were excluded. That included contractors who work out of client locations. The idea that all of these people were fiddling taxes is wrong. Some yes. All no. Unless they work for cash, then the income flows through the company bank account. Yes had an office and a storage unit had to let good orders go was hard but had no choice. I guess I could have re Morgage the family home but was not woth the risk and glad I did not as I think I would have lost everything then putting in more money to a bad situation." BTW really sorry to hear your company went bankrupt. I think the human side to all these discussions gets missed as we focus on the “politics” side. Hope things have improved since. | |||
"Is Sunaks mrs coughing up for her company that banked £635,000 in furlough before bankrupting it owning HMRC too https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10700239/amp/Companies-linked-Rishi-Sunaks-non-dom-wife-received-furlough-cash.html Based on what I am reading. Why would they give this momey back sorry? I think what people find distasteful is that a billionaire shareholder allowed a company they were involved with take a state handout (from taxpayers) and then let the company go to the wall owing HMRC a fortune when she (and other shareholders) could have stepped in to support the company. It’s like socialism is good when taxpayers step in to support companies but bad when it then asks companies to make a bigger contribution to the pot. This isn’t the only company she was involved with that did similar things either. Why. It was a government decision to shut down gyms. It's not for the private company to fund wages when the company can't operate. I honestly don't get the complain that private investors should subsidise governments bad decisions “Your capital is at risk. Your investment can go up or down in value”. I do not think many or any people predicted Covid . Would you preferred people to have lost their jobs and been made bankrupt because of Covid . It seems that you want to treat the pms wife differently to any other member of society and blatantly discriminate against her It was the Govt that discriminated against about 3-4million self employed and small LTD company owners because they received zero support. Someone with her personal wealth could have supported the companies she was invested in. As a small limited company I got a grant. And I know lots of self employed how got grants or/and loans. The people I know that did not get much was because, there accounts showed litte profit because it had been hidden for Corporation tax! I as a small company paid staff and bills with this grant. But she Theater industry was shut for so long I couldn't serstain the overheads so went Bankrupt lost about £300k from the Company and all grant and furlough money went in over heads and staff. So are we saying I should have put more in when there was no end in sight. At first when things shut on 21 march 2020 we had cash in the bank to last about 3 months. If I had know restrictions would not be lifted till 22 Dec 2021. I would not have taken the grant. Would have taken furlough money paid off employees and cut my loss but you hang on to try your best. Noo director losses a company with out loss and pain. The entertainment sector has not fully recovered yet and won't do for a long time. I was aware of.something similar during a discussion with a taxi driver. He had declared all his income over the 3 years prior to covid never pocketed cash payments without declaration. Those who did then cried about the government not giving them their entire income, having tax ecaded for years. " Yes Uber drivers were happy because they are paid through the app into their bank accounts. So have to declare. The black cabs and the other cash handling ones were the ones that suffered. | |||
" I think what people find distasteful is that a billionaire shareholder allowed a company they were involved with take a state handout (from taxpayers) Someone with her personal wealth could have supported the companies she was invested in. And in addition an estimated £20M tax evaded by eight use of non dom She’s done pretty good out of UK plc " That's not totally true. She may have legally avoided paying £20M in tax in the UK because she wasn't legally domiciled in the UK for tax purposes. However everyone is legally tax domiciled somewhere (normally the country they've spent most time in any given tax year or more than 180 days). If she became tax domiciled here in the UK then she would owe that £20m (less any tax she may of pay in other tax jurisdictions where she may still have tax liabilities) to the UK. However she would no longer pay what ever tax she currently paid to whatever country she is currently tax domiciled in - probably India. The non-dom status does not absolve a person of all tax liabilities, only UK liabilities if they are tax domiciled somewhere else. | |||
" I think what people find distasteful is that a billionaire shareholder allowed a company they were involved with take a state handout (from taxpayers) Someone with her personal wealth could have supported the companies she was invested in. And in addition an estimated £20M tax evaded by eight use of non dom She’s done pretty good out of UK plc That's not totally true. She may have legally avoided paying £20M in tax in the UK because she wasn't legally domiciled in the UK for tax purposes. However everyone is legally tax domiciled somewhere (normally the country they've spent most time in any given tax year or more than 180 days). If she became tax domiciled here in the UK then she would owe that £20m (less any tax she may of pay in other tax jurisdictions where she may still have tax liabilities) to the UK. However she would no longer pay what ever tax she currently paid to whatever country she is currently tax domiciled in - probably India. The non-dom status does not absolve a person of all tax liabilities, only UK liabilities if they are tax domiciled somewhere else." ,, ,, Not disagreeing that it wasn't legal but it does sound dodgy | |||
"Is Sunaks mrs coughing up for her company that banked £635,000 in furlough before bankrupting it owning HMRC too https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10700239/amp/Companies-linked-Rishi-Sunaks-non-dom-wife-received-furlough-cash.html Based on what I am reading. Why would they give this momey back sorry? I think what people find distasteful is that a billionaire shareholder allowed a company they were involved with take a state handout (from taxpayers) and then let the company go to the wall owing HMRC a fortune when she (and other shareholders) could have stepped in to support the company. It’s like socialism is good when taxpayers step in to support companies but bad when it then asks companies to make a bigger contribution to the pot. This isn’t the only company she was involved with that did similar things either. Why. It was a government decision to shut down gyms. It's not for the private company to fund wages when the company can't operate. I honestly don't get the complain that private investors should subsidise governments bad decisions “Your capital is at risk. Your investment can go up or down in value”. I do not think many or any people predicted Covid . Would you preferred people to have lost their jobs and been made bankrupt because of Covid . It seems that you want to treat the pms wife differently to any other member of society and blatantly discriminate against her It was the Govt that discriminated against about 3-4million self employed and small LTD company owners because they received zero support. Someone with her personal wealth could have supported the companies she was invested in. As a small limited company I got a grant. And I know lots of self employed how got grants or/and loans. The people I know that did not get much was because, there accounts showed litte profit because it had been hidden for Corporation tax! I as a small company paid staff and bills with this grant. But she Theater industry was shut for so long I couldn't serstain the overheads so went Bankrupt lost about £300k from the Company and all grant and furlough money went in over heads and staff. So are we saying I should have put more in when there was no end in sight. At first when things shut on 21 march 2020 we had cash in the bank to last about 3 months. If I had know restrictions would not be lifted till 22 Dec 2021. I would not have taken the grant. Would have taken furlough money paid off employees and cut my loss but you hang on to try your best. Noo director losses a company with out loss and pain. The entertainment sector has not fully recovered yet and won't do for a long time. Did you have a physical premises that had to be closed? I believe that was the only way to secure a grant? Freelancers and self-employed with less than 18 months accounts were excluded. That included contractors who work out of client locations. The idea that all of these people were fiddling taxes is wrong. Some yes. All no. Unless they work for cash, then the income flows through the company bank account. Yes had an office and a storage unit had to let good orders go was hard but had no choice. I guess I could have re Morgage the family home but was not woth the risk and glad I did not as I think I would have lost everything then putting in more money to a bad situation. BTW really sorry to hear your company went bankrupt. I think the human side to all these discussions gets missed as we focus on the “politics” side. Hope things have improved since." Will never get back to where I was. Should be retired now but just got to keep working. | |||
"Contrary to popular belief it looks like Covid fraud does not pay . HMRC and fraud investigators will be chasing you . Anyone taking advantage of a scheme designed to help those in financial crisis deserves the full weight of the law . One example from the Yorkshire Post as below . It should be noted that Covid fraud is entirely different to the concept of awarding government contracts ( it should be obvious to the balanced and rational that during a time of crisis and in addition competing for supplies on a world market the cost will be a lot more ) . The government were extremely successful in their management of the crisis and saved man lives . They prioritised saving lives and helping those in financial difficulty . Those who made fraudulent claims are now being pursued . Boris Johnson and his government saved many lives in addition to protecting the public from financial ruin . We now all have to pay the price for many years to come A former Yorkshire town councillor who tried to swindle more than £440,000 out of the Government’s Eat Out to Help Out scheme in the summer of 2020 has been told he must repay almost £110,000 in the next three months. Mr Jacobs said the other six businesses which were either fictitious or Ikram had no connection with them at all. Ikram was eventually paid out nearly £190,000 relating to eight claims, but after an investigation was launched His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs were able to “freeze” and subsequently recover just over £96,000 from bank accounts held by his wife. When Ikram was jailed in March the judge set down a timetable under the Proceeds of Crime Act and today Ikram was brought from prison for the financial hearing. Ikram, who it is understood could be released from his sentence in a few weeks time, was said to have benefitted from criminal conduct to the tune of £109,939.64. Mr Jacobs said the defendant had available assets of £86,000, which was a 50 per cent equity share in an address at Springfield Court, Keighley, and a “tainted gift” of £60,000 which was already subject to a restraint order. " Start with mates rates PPI investigation.. Tories who steal from poor alone | |||
| |||
