Comments on: J.K. Rowling on welfare and patriotism

By: Danielle Day

Danielle Day — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 22:08:20 +0000

Completely off-topic, but, agree or disagree with the comments posted, it is a pleasure to read posts wherein the authors know how to spell (or at least pay attention to the spell-check) and are aware of the basic rules of grammar, syntax, and punctuation. Americans stop paying attention in school around 7th grade. No wonder Rowling wanted her kids to grow up in Britain.

By: Tim Worstall

Tim Worstall — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 16:10:49 +0000

91: True, but then he went off and asked Treasury (I think) what they actually meant he had to do. And the answer came back “residence”.

By: ajay

ajay — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 10:34:42 +0000

90: well, that’s what not what the scrutiny committee thought he had said.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/mar/22/lord-ashcroft-papers-key-correspondence

By: Tim Worstall

Tim Worstall — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 10:12:43 +0000

“The difference, which Worst is carefully not pointing out, is that Lord Ashcroft said he would move his domicile to the UK if he got a peerage, and then didn’t, ”

Not quite. He said he’d become resident for tax purposes. Residence and domicile are not the same thing.

By: Salient

Salient — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 14:50:09 +0000

a study of why the internet is full of angry cranks

Because the bars aren’t open yet, and even when they are, a beer’s what, four bucks? Being an angry crank at home is more economical

By: ajay

ajay — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 14:18:03 +0000

The same way that a Lord, member of the ruling party and Privy Councillor could be non-domiciled for tax purposes. Lord Paul.
There’s no actual requirement that a Peer be either domiciled nor even resident for tax. Just as there’s no requirement for an MP to even be a UK citizen (which obviously means that they don’t have to be domiciled).

The difference, which Worst is carefully not pointing out, is that Lord Ashcroft said he would move his domicile to the UK if he got a peerage, and then didn’t, while his mates in the Conservative Party (who have since said that they will force all MPs and Peers to be UK domiciled if they get into government) lied and/or obfuscated about whether he was a non-dom or not. I’m not aware of any such conditions attaching to Lord Paul.

By: JoB

JoB — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 09:52:07 +0000

85- keep it silent but it is my plan to lure all of them behind a PC - and then electrocute them, in one sweeping move; the problem I’m having is that too many of them are involved in Tea Party physical gatherings (the last national rally had a total of 2000 attendants; we can’t miss those!)

By: Tim Worstall

Tim Worstall — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 08:23:40 +0000

“Tim, are you actually domiciled in the UK for tax purposes?”

Yes.

By: engels

engels — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 00:34:58 +0000

‘Somebody needs to do a study on why newspaper comments threads are universally filled with angry cranks’

It could be part of a wider study of why the internet is full of angry cranks.

By: hix

hix — Sun, 18 Apr 2010 15:58:50 +0000

Many municipalities lost money with sale lease back in the end during the financial crisis.
There were requirments to guarantee the contract by someone with an AAA rateing. All kind of stupid since the municipalities involved were de facto AAA rate themself, but well they signed the stupid hundreds of pages long contract. There was no real risk involved, so AIG etc would do the guarantee for a very small fee. But after all those guarentee givers lost their AAA rateing, it was the municipalities risk to find a new guarantee giver, which was almost impossible. In the end, many bought US bonds as coleteral )-:.

Looks like the attac types were not so wrong after all with their doubts about the sale back contracts. Those hundreds of pages long contracts based on New York law didnt just look scary, in the end some of them turned out to be scary. Not a good idear to do business when such a huge information asymetry is involved.

By: David

David — Sun, 18 Apr 2010 02:14:57 +0000

@David Moles and Neil. I should have been clearer that it was underage that was the issue, complexion and gender being matters of preference. However, he did mask his actual compelling legal problems with the tax dodge excuse.

By: Bloix

Bloix — Sat, 17 Apr 2010 21:25:27 +0000

Mrs Tilton – the sale-lease back arrangements you’re referring to are not allowed any more and many of the older ones have been successfully challenged. See, e.g.,
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/banking/2010-01-11-wells-fargo-tax-lawsuit_N.htm

By: Alex

Alex — Sat, 17 Apr 2010 16:09:02 +0000

Having been actively involved in UK politics recently, as a prospective MEP (it’s like standing in a local election but without all the canvassing!), Tim, are you actually domiciled in the UK for tax purposes?

By: hix

hix — Sat, 17 Apr 2010 08:29:15 +0000

“MEPs, since the last euro election, don’t even pay UK taxes on their Parliamentary salaries. They pay the special EU rate.”

Erm, they work in Belgium and should therefore pay their taxes in Belgium…..

By: marcel

marcel — Fri, 16 Apr 2010 20:22:57 +0000

Lian @ 76:

Oops. Unless you are outdoing me in snark…

I realize that snark is often hard to convey on the internet, but I had hoped that the long list of self-attributed high-minded characteristics was sufficiently silly to make my attitude clear. Next time I’ll use emoticons;)