And now Ritchie contradicts himself rather than just reality

This really is quite lovely:

I will state the obvious fact that this should not give rise to a right to preferential tax treatment – but it does. Discrimination on the basis of national origin in this way is wrong. So why does the government do it?

So, today, discrimination in taxation on the basis of national origin is wrong and naughty.

Ritchie in a report for the TUC some time ago:

First we propose that everyone who has a UK passport should be tax resident in the UK, automatically, wherever they live in the world. That means they would always have liability to pay tax in the UK on their worldwide income, gains and wealth, just as all US citizens do in the USA.

So discrimination in taxation on the basis of national origin is just fine and dandy apparently.

20 thoughts on “And now Ritchie contradicts himself rather than just reality”

  1. In a person with quite so many flaws, why are you now expecting self-consistency?

    Especially as it’s not as if he applies the same ‘rules’ to his personal tax affairs (or did to those of his clients) as he expects us to agree to live by.

  2. Okay, since I am a UK citizen resident in the Isle of Man (as are about 44% of the population based upon the 2006 census).

    So according to Ritchie I should have to pay taxes to HMRC rather than Yn Tashtey (the Isle of Man Treasury).

    The reason I currently pay my taxes to Yn Tashtey is that I am required to do so by the law as laid down by the ruling authority of the island, the Manx Parliament of the Tynwald.

    So in order for this dreadful little collectivist to get his hands on more of our dosh than the vast billions that him and his friends already take, he also intends to ride roughshod over the rights of other sovereign people?

    Not really surprized about this, but basically Ritchie can just fuck off.

    He’s already been directly responsible for the loss of about 12% of the islands revenue due to changes in the common purse arrangements with the UK (some of which is justified, but not all).

  3. Richie does love his mouth breathing knee-jerk reactions without thinking things through, doesn’t he?

    Principal of territoriality? We know the IRS and Congress ride roughshod over this with the tax law for US expats, but really… is he proposing that UK expats pay UK tax in addition to local tax (potentially leading to marginal tax rates of over 80%, and possibly even over 100%)? Instead of (which would of course not fly with the host country)?

    Given that diplomacy is based on reciprocity, how would he feel if other countries reciprocated and started beggaring their expats living in the UK? Or demanding that they pay income tax to their country of origin rather than to the UK? I think that he would suddenly find that he has always been strongly committed to paying income tax in the country of residence if that were the case.

    In fact, he is presumably arguing that my children, who are UK/US citizens resident on the continent be subject to triple taxation once they are earning — local income tax, plus US income tax over 80,000 dollars, plus UK income tax, leading in the worst-case interpretation to marginal rates exceeding 100%, despite never having lived in the UK or the US…

    As usual, he’s not thought this through really, has he…

  4. I know I’m giving this too much thought, because he certainly hasn’t, but let’s think for a minute if what he actually means is that UK citizens should pay the difference between what they would be paying in the UK and what they’re paying locally, if what they are paying locally is less.

    For reasons of equality, if we are going to do this, shouldn’t we also be refunding UK expats the difference if they are paying more locally, e.g. if they live in Scandinavia? Oh wait, he’s presumably only seeing this as a one-way flow… ( yes, I know this one is a bit silly, but it’s fun…)

  5. There is something marvellously inconsistent in wanting to tax people on the basis of their passport (as opposed to where they actually earn money) and complaining that businesses only pay tax where their brass plate is (as opposed to where they actually earn money).

  6. Oh, and by the way the US 80,000 dollar exemption now represents an extremely modest income of 63,200 Swiss francs, due to the current exchange rate, which is only about 60% of Swiss average household income… (if I got my figures correct)

  7. Ah but Tim (Newman), the tax-avoiding crook wants us to pay tax on the basis of our passports AND where we actually earn the money. I’m with John Galt on this: Richie can just fuck off.

  8. Unimportant Quibbler

    Another interesting result if Richie’s scheme was implemented on a global scale: it would result in global discrimination against immigrants.

    Immigrants who do not renounce their original nationality (or do not claim citizenship in their new abode) would always pay the higher of their local and original rates, hence they would be guaranteed to pay at at least as much tax as the locals and possibly quite a lot more.

    How right-on does a Global Immigrant Discrimination Tax sound?

  9. I would love to hear him try to rationalise the idea of someone potentially paying income tax to a country in which they have never lived, never intend to live, may never have even visited, and are not eligible for benefits in, purely due to accident of parentage.

    I know the US tries to do this, but it’s morally reprehensible and it appears to be unique in that regard.

    Is he so blinded by his hatred of what he sees as plutocrats off-shoring that he can’t see the real-life consequences of this?

    He’s also would probably be an off the cuff “renounce your citizenship then”. Not so easy — most other countries don’t just give citizenship away, and some have rather strenuous requirements (Netherlands 5 years, Switzerland 12, US 6, for instance — live in NL for 4, then Switzerland for 11, then US for 5 and you’ve gone 20 years without being eligible for naturalisation anywhere)

  10. Let’s for a moment assume that the idiot Ritchie is serious and lets assume that he will allow tax relief on tax paid in the other jurisdiction.

    The published rates between the UK and the Isle of Man are:

    UK Standard Rate: 20%
    IoM Standard Rate: 10%

    UK Higher Rate: 40%
    IoM Higher Rate: 20%

    So roughly, I would end up paying something close to double the tax I currently pay, first to cover my Isle of Man taxes and then to cover the difference between the UK tax rates and Isle of Man tax rates.

    However, I receive no services from the UK for the taxes I am expected to pay for having a UK passport (Actually a British Islands: Isle of Man passport).

    Even the weak argument made by the United States that this covers expats for things like defence and repatriation is bogus as this is already included in my Isle of Man taxes*

    That seems a high price to pay for a UK passport. Fortunately, I am also a citizen of the Republic of Ireland and my wife is a non-EU citizen.

    In the event of any of this piss poor collectivist garbage being enacted I would immediately renounce my UK citizenship.

    …and Ritchie can still Go Fuck Himself!

    * = The Isle of Man pays a %-age of GDP for defence directly to the UK government, this is paid for out of general taxation.

  11. Ah, Tim, I think you’ve misread the Murphster a bit. I think he’s using ‘discriminate’ in the pedestrian sense of ‘screwing someone over based on some unrelated attribute like race/nationality’, rather than the dictionary version.

    And since he believes that there’s no such thing as bad/too much tax, it’s impossible to screw anyone on tax, and therefore it’s not discrimination.

    QED, of a sort….

  12. Tim’s reading assumes a dictionary definition of discriminate.
    Niels’ reading assumes a random definition.

    Niels wins.

  13. Come on guys!!! you should have realised that Murphy believes in the imperial rule of British tax rule.

    He says he believes in democracy and that the right is anti-democratic. As I have said before, he is a self serving hypocrite. His ignorance used to make me angry until I realised he was unfortunately not very clever, in fact, not even slightly. If he actually stopped for a minute and shut the hole that never stops spewing crap (which is his mouth) he would realise that he seeks to impose his rule of law on another country, against the democratic choice of those citizens. It is a past that I thought Britain had moved on from. Murphy however believes the world should impose his rules regardless of whether citizens have elected for it. Hence the reason I call him a self serving hypocrite. Why a hypocrite? He advised on how to avoid tax, then retrospectively says he did this to highlight the issues, that he was somehow doing us a service. Murphy…rubbish, we both know it. You increasingly sound like a floundering George Bush trying to justify his invasion of Iraq. Not only this but your beloved Tax Justice Network (which is no such thing) hosts it servers in Switzerland. You have diverted the VAT on those service to the jurisdiction you constantly have a go at…hence hypocrite. Self Serving? Murphy’s actions are consistent with someone suffering from messiah complex. Why? He directs all of his arguments about his achievements, his position, every post he makes has his picture on it, every video of his has only him in it. His views on issues, his reaction to issues. When challenged he responds with childish insults, and then says that he is in a battle against the right, that he takes pleasure in resisting the “anti-democratic right”. Hence, messiah complex. He believes he is the savoir of the socialist state.

  14. Well, at least he now just thinks discriminating on the basis of national origin is just wrong as a matter of unsubstantiated opinion.

    This is an improvement on his views here

    where using the expertise of an unnamed pro bono lawyer (what lawyer likes remaining unnamed?) he though doing so was illegal – when it is pretty clear from the legislation that Parliament is not bound by it.

    And on the passport issue he is all at sea – ignorant of the fact the UK gives passports to 1st and 2nd generation emigrants in the Commonwealth – there will be 80 year olds in Oz or NZ entitled to a British passport by descent who have never set foot here. He wants to be able to tax them!

    He told me they have different UK passports. Bollocks. Just shows – he will blurt out just about anything that comes into his empty head.

  15. Richie is very easy to understand once you get his world view. Richie is of that breed of lefty for whom there is only the state. All good things come from the state. All bad things happen when evil people try to trick others into rejecting its benevolent embrace. All money belongs to the state. Anything people produce is owned by the state. Even the bodies that they live in are owned by the state. Should a serf, oops … I means citizen, try to escape giving his tithe to his rightful master (the state) then he should be brought home in chains to send a message to the others. Its like fuedalism but with Richie and his guardianista cohorts as the lords and masters, and the pope issuing his papal bull from Whitehall.

  16. He told me they have different UK passports. Bollocks. Just shows – he will blurt out just about anything that comes into his empty head.

    my daughter is British by descent from me(British born and bred), born abroad. Her passport is identical in every way to mine.

    Her grandchildren may not be eligible for a British passport, but that doesn’t mean that her passport or citizenship is any different from mine.

  17. Fred,

    You don’t expect him to understand the quite complicated rules about nationality, not his subject of expertise, when he clearly doesn’t understand the rules about his supposed field(s) of such utter brilliance we shouldn’t dare question him?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *