Does The Guardian’s offshore investigation cover the Guardian’s offshore activities?

?

8 thoughts on “Does The Guardian’s offshore investigation cover the Guardian’s offshore activities?”

  1. No, nor did they ever – it’s a silly made-up right-wing meme.

    GMG was co-owner with Apax Partners of EMAP Magazines. Apax used various offshore shell companies for its stake, being a P/E firm. GMG didn’t, because as a non-profit trust it didn’t need to avoid tax anyway.

  2. Jim,

    Thanks for the link. This seems to be a case of ‘we did it the right way’ legally. Perhaps a paper with a record of examining these in a biased way should take another look.

  3. “This seems to be a case of ‘we did it the right way’ ”

    Very probably, in fact almost certainly, legally speaking.

    But the point is that the Guardian, the BBC and the likes of RM et al take anyone who even has any overseas company involvement as proof that they are involved in shady dealing, tax avoidance and almost (but not quite) implying tax evasion. The fact that David Camerons father was on the board of a Panamanian company is taken to mean he was involved in avoiding or evading taxes. Whether there is any evidence of that is irrelevant, they don’t care.

    So by the same yardstick the Guardian is guilty too.

  4. Jim

    Well said – the groups you mention are the Witchfinder Generals of the modern day era – and whilst not holding any particular sympathy for those in the ‘Panama Files’ – has anyone stopped to examine the relentless rise in Govrnment expenditure which is now deemed as ‘necessary’ by these people? If the likes of Murphy get in with tax rates of 90% base and 99% top rate they still would be pleading poverty….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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