On Russell Brand and tax abuse

But, not for the first time, Brand has left himself open to accusations of hypocrisy after it emerged the film company he set up is largely funded by City investors – including a former RBS banker.

Brand raised almost £1 million by issuing shares in Mayfair Film Partnership Ltd, the production company making his next film, a documentary called Brand which will explore his ideas on the redistribution of wealth.

At least 11 of the 21 main investors in the company are current or former employees of banks or other financial institutions, while a 12th is a pension fund.

They were all able to claim tax relief by offsetting the money they invested in the shares against their income tax, as part of a government scheme to attract investment in high risk start-up companies.

This is under the EIS and yes, the Lord High Tax Denouncer has indeed said that this is tax abuse.

12 thoughts on “On Russell Brand and tax abuse”

  1. So Much for Subtlety

    Come on, who is surprised?

    I often miss the Cold War. Whatever else you can say about the Communists, at least they thought about what they believe and why. We have been left with the retarded remnants who don’t have the intellect to be consistent or rigorous. Indeed Marx was right – history repeats itself, once as tragedy, and then as farce.

  2. If you can’t expect, and we don’t, the LHTD to be self-consistent within a single blog post, why should we expect any degree of mutual consistency between two narcissistic charlatans who merely share a revulsion of common sense?

    And, on Brand, what about his preening, prancing and self-justifying gobbledegook suggests that there is the slightest chance he might not be a massive hypocrite?

  3. Who’s giving or hoping to receive a copy of “Revolution” for Christmas?

    Amazon.co.uk (the bastards) currently have it as the #1 Best Seller in the category ‘Performing Arts for Young Adults’.

  4. Fucking wanker.

    Will share this with everyone I know.

    OT, and apols if known/previously posted, but this video

    http://vimeo.com/114721270

    Apparently shows “rape victim” Eleanor de Freitas buying sex toys with her “rapist” the day after the supposed rape.

    I feel very sorry for the poor girl and her family, she must have been in a hell of a state, but has this been reported in the MSM anywhere?

    It may help to explain the CPS decision certain people found so outrageous.

  5. bloke (not) in spain

    “My question is who are the idiotic bankers funding this bollocks ?”
    From what I could glean, the company they invested in was set up to produce an entirely different film. Working title, “Happiness”, of all things.

    Classic bait’n switch. What do you expect from a con man?

  6. “From what I could glean, the company they invested in was set up to produce an entirely different film. Working title, “Happiness”, of all things.

    Classic bait’n switch. What do you expect from a con man?”

    Face it, it’ll probably do OK at the box office, all the usual suspects will be frotting themselves into a frenzy over it, and ignoring the hypocrisy involved.

    I expect the investors won’t do too badly out of it. In fact it will probably make them more money than a ‘real’ film starring Russell Brand.

  7. “has this been reported in the MSM anywhere?” Only all over the place (by which I probably mean the Daily Mail website).

Leave a Reply

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