The bulk of the executives and directors were sham appointments (including a part-time Bishop) for the sole purpose of creating the illusion that it was not a UK company and that the investment decisions were not being made in the UK. The undeniable fact is that the investment decisions were being made by people based in the UK and therefore the company should have been treated as a UK company for tax purposes.
I admit I don't know why I like this post but I do.
The problem is there is a factual error in both the first and last sentence of that post, which have been addressed by myself and cafcfan.
That is a bit of a mystery. But interesting I thought that the aforementioned James Quarmby, a tax lawyer said on BBC Breakfast this am that the type of fund in question would be the last thing he would recommend if clients wanted efficient tax management. I'm beginning to get the impression that Cameron's Dad was just not very good at his job. I don't know what the law was at the time in the Bahamas but I'm reminded of the "Sark Lark". In that case residents of the tiny Channel Island were directors of hundreds, sometimes thousands of companies. But this was primarily to avoid the tax regime in Guernsey rather than the UK. I'm guessing but maybe (to boost the local economy) it was a requirement of Bahamian law to have local directors? Otherwise, I'm still struggling to understand what tax benefits such an arrangement would have in the UK. If the fund was properly structured as has been said countless times no UK tax would become payable until gains were drawn down or dividends paid, so it matters not where it was based. (Save regarding the position in the UK back in the 1980s - it may just have been the most efficient way to access overseas markets as exchange controls would have severely affected the ability to invest in countries other than the UK. And it was well-known that had he won the 1983 election, Foot intended to reintroduce those controls. The relevant documents/forms, etc had been printed ready to go and were scrapped as soon as Foot lost.)
The issue being discussed over the last few pages is not personal tax liabilities that, as you say, only become payable when a profit is crystallised. Ian Cameron's company was not a charity. It earned fees for administering and managing the underlying investments. Those fees contribute to the company's annual profit and loss. It is the tax on those fees that was denied to the UK taxman by the appointment of sham executives and directors.
Well no. What tiny, and this fund was tiny, offshore fund would structure itself so that it made much of a taxable profit anyway? The nominee directors would have got a very small retainer. What would have happened to said profit? What would be the point of building up the value of the shareholders' funds in the company's accounts? Any monies paid to Cameron Snr. by way of fees, dividends, salary, commission, etc would still have been liable to the UK taxation regime as he was a UK resident for tax purposes. More likely that his expenses account was very generous indeed. Hence the main reason to fly out for meetings and take in a nice holiday at the same time I suspect.
This is the street in the Bahamas which Ian Cameron claimed was his normal residential address.
Being somewhat selective with the facts there; that photo comes from this article and it makes it clear that it was listed as a c/o address to the Bahamas authorities, not the UK. Again it is perfectly normal for directors to list c/o addresses, particularly if they are based overseas. I also imagine that it was this Panama firm that listed it, not Ian given they are the ones with the paperwork and were being paid to set up the venture.
The bulk of the executives and directors were sham appointments (including a part-time Bishop) for the sole purpose of creating the illusion that it was not a UK company and that the investment decisions were not being made in the UK. The undeniable fact is that the investment decisions were being made by people based in the UK and therefore the company should have been treated as a UK company for tax purposes.
I admit I don't know why I like this post but I do.
The problem is there is a factual error in both the first and last sentence of that post, which have been addressed by myself and cafcfan.
In your dreams maybe.
No, your posts are full of factual errors but it is not your fault, you don't really appear to know what you're talking about and you are relying on articles which themselves riddled with factual errors and inconsistencies.
You may both know the answer to the following, I don't, and I would be interested, especially after listening to an inconclusive argument on R4 Today just now between John Humphrey and James Quarmby, a tax planning specialist:
I have a regular personal private pension pot, like many ordinary UK citizens. It invests in ordinary unit trust funds. I also invest in such funds outside the pension pot. Am I "investing offshore"?? Dippenhall suggested that all the fund managers are running them from Ireland if I recall. It seems to me that most of them are not, but some are. I keep a record of the funds in Trustnet. So for example I have some of the Invesco Perpetual High Income, a popular fund. But I also have a fund called Lindsell Train Global Equity. I picked it based on a press recommendation. When I entered it into TrustNet, the website automatically designated it as an Offshore Fund (implying that all my others are not).
James Quarmby seemed to suggest we all know, when we invest in funds, that they are 'run offshore'. In my case, clearly, that isn't true. Most of us have a only a hazy understanding of how these things work, even though we 'invest' in them.
Bu I do have a feeling that the answer might make some of us think twice before hounding Cameron too much. I'd much rather concentrate on Google Facebook, et al.
Looking forward to learning something.
Do you know if the senior executives and directors of the companies that run these funds are genuine or just names to give the illusion that they are being run outside the UK and EU?
Well the type of funds I am talking about (which are not the same as Cameron's case, I think you would call mine "retail" funds", all have named fund managers, and indeed you are encouraged to take an interest in their performance, and worry if one of them leaves for some reason. A bit like a football manager. Neil Woodford is a well known example. I think I'm right in saying that some of the funds have onshore and offshore variants.
It's quite important because we are all encouraged to invest in these things as part of the drive to make us less dependent on a State pension.
A fund manager decides which stocks and shares to but and an entirely separate bank custodian business actually does the trade and holds legal title to the assets. I am involved with investing UK pension assets and as an example, for one manager, all contributions are remitted to an American bank in Ireland for a UK unit trust managed by Barclays in the UK. You would have no idea whatsoever where you investments are physically located and what taxes it is incurring or avoiding just because you have a UK unit trust investment.
An overseas fund is still a UK fund, it just doesn't hold assets of UK companies. You would not know, but some of your overseas investments might be held by a sub custodian in Singapore on behalf of the US bank based in Ireland. A true overseas fund is marketed and sold outside the UK but a UK investor can still invest in it and he will pay tax on what he receives from it.
As for Cameron's dad's company being really a UK company avoiding tax, the company was overseas and managed overseas because he would fly to Panama for meetings is nonsense. Cameron's dad was not the company, he was a director and beneficial shareholder and the company was, like it or not, legally established as a Panamanian company and all that needs to be shown is that it was managed from Panama. The evidence you should be looking for is that of Cameron's dad not having board meetings in Panama.
As for an adviser not recommending it, I doubt he advises on £multi million investments, but it's like an adviser saying to an investor with £100 to invest in property to buy property shares rather than buy a property. If you had a £100m you would buy a property or set up your own property portfolio.
I guess Chelsea football club is not really an English company because its owned by a Russian who flies in for board meetings. Putin should demand Chelsea relocates to Moscow and stop this contrived situation to avoid Chelsea paying Russian corporation tax.
Cameron has been asked a lot of honest questions by Corbyn that he wriggles out of without answering. He's very good at it. The last few days has been an extension of his PMQs. He has simply not been honest.
It was Cameron who described Jimmy Carr's legal tax avoidance as 'morally repugnant'. He can hardly complain that his hypocrisy is pointed out when he trousered £30k in a similar manner. Did he think his Dad was morally repugnant?
Having said that the problem is that all this is legal and HMRC simply haven't done enough to close loopholes. Cameron reckons Britain are at the forefront of efforts to tackle tax avoidance (another whopper) yet much of that offshore money goes through the British Virgin Islands.
With Cameron's relationship to truth he could be our CEO.
So we know Cameron’s dad was a tax dodger – from what I have seen he was quite an aggressive one. Cameron isn’t his dad though. The problem is, of course he will have benefitted in some way, but that is his dad’s fault not his. It would have been better to come out with it – the press or opponents aren’t going to let go when you clarify your statements by adding 'in the future' – as why add it if you haven’t benefitted in the past?
Cameron is one of the few Conservatives I have time for. But I think the big scoundrels need to be identified as a priority, not the big name ones. That isn’t to say this info shouldn’t be used, but we have more important things to worry about over the next few months, like the future of our children if the Brexiters get their way!
I agree. I don't want and I don't think he needs to resign. He is performing the most important task he has had to since becoming PM in arguing the case for the UK to remain in the EU. Probably as an important task faced by any PM over the last 30 years. I have been impressed by how vigorously and effectively he has been making the argument. I really hope he is not distracted too much longer by all this. It just irritates me to read Tory apologists try and argue that his father was not using the exact same aggressive tax avoidance practices that they condemned in the run up to the previous election.
Strangely I find myself drawn to the arguments of dippenhall a uk pensions asset investor and fiiish an overseas settlement agent (whilst acknowledging his sometimes abrasive tone) rather than those who are just anti Tory or anti Cameron.
That is a bit of a mystery. But interesting I thought that the aforementioned James Quarmby, a tax lawyer said on BBC Breakfast this am that the type of fund in question would be the last thing he would recommend if clients wanted efficient tax management. I'm beginning to get the impression that Cameron's Dad was just not very good at his job. I don't know what the law was at the time in the Bahamas but I'm reminded of the "Sark Lark". In that case residents of the tiny Channel Island were directors of hundreds, sometimes thousands of companies. But this was primarily to avoid the tax regime in Guernsey rather than the UK. I'm guessing but maybe (to boost the local economy) it was a requirement of Bahamian law to have local directors? Otherwise, I'm still struggling to understand what tax benefits such an arrangement would have in the UK. If the fund was properly structured as has been said countless times no UK tax would become payable until gains were drawn down or dividends paid, so it matters not where it was based. (Save regarding the position in the UK back in the 1980s - it may just have been the most efficient way to access overseas markets as exchange controls would have severely affected the ability to invest in countries other than the UK. And it was well-known that had he won the 1983 election, Foot intended to reintroduce those controls. The relevant documents/forms, etc had been printed ready to go and were scrapped as soon as Foot lost.)
The issue being discussed over the last few pages is not personal tax liabilities that, as you say, only become payable when a profit is crystallised. Ian Cameron's company was not a charity. It earned fees for administering and managing the underlying investments. Those fees contribute to the company's annual profit and loss. It is the tax on those fees that was denied to the UK taxman by the appointment of sham executives and directors.
Well no. What tiny, and this fund was tiny, offshore fund would structure itself so that it made much of a taxable profit anyway? The nominee directors would have got a very small retainer. What would have happened to said profit? What would be the point of building up the value of the shareholders' funds in the company's accounts? Any monies paid to Cameron Snr. by way of fees, dividends, salary, commission, etc would still have been liable to the UK taxation regime as he was a UK resident for tax purposes. More likely that his expenses account was very generous indeed. Hence the main reason to fly out for meetings and take in a nice holiday at the same time I suspect.
I think you and Fiish should actually read the prospectus. Particularly the bit about the residential address of all the directors and the bit that explicitly states the company is being structured so as to avoid paying any tax in the UK. And I am not talking about the tax that was payable whenever an investor in the funds being run by the company crystallised a profit. If that investor was resident in the UK it would have been liable to UK tax. I am talking about the profits the company made in fees from running the fund. And you are being very naive if you think these companies are set up to generate a minimal profit.
You and Fiish can waffle as much as you like and claim you are the only people who understand such matters but it does not change the fact that whilst he did not do anything illegal at the time Ian Cameron was engaged in aggressive tax avoidance.
That is a bit of a mystery. But interesting I thought that the aforementioned James Quarmby, a tax lawyer said on BBC Breakfast this am that the type of fund in question would be the last thing he would recommend if clients wanted efficient tax management. I'm beginning to get the impression that Cameron's Dad was just not very good at his job. I don't know what the law was at the time in the Bahamas but I'm reminded of the "Sark Lark". In that case residents of the tiny Channel Island were directors of hundreds, sometimes thousands of companies. But this was primarily to avoid the tax regime in Guernsey rather than the UK. I'm guessing but maybe (to boost the local economy) it was a requirement of Bahamian law to have local directors? Otherwise, I'm still struggling to understand what tax benefits such an arrangement would have in the UK. If the fund was properly structured as has been said countless times no UK tax would become payable until gains were drawn down or dividends paid, so it matters not where it was based. (Save regarding the position in the UK back in the 1980s - it may just have been the most efficient way to access overseas markets as exchange controls would have severely affected the ability to invest in countries other than the UK. And it was well-known that had he won the 1983 election, Foot intended to reintroduce those controls. The relevant documents/forms, etc had been printed ready to go and were scrapped as soon as Foot lost.)
The issue being discussed over the last few pages is not personal tax liabilities that, as you say, only become payable when a profit is crystallised. Ian Cameron's company was not a charity. It earned fees for administering and managing the underlying investments. Those fees contribute to the company's annual profit and loss. It is the tax on those fees that was denied to the UK taxman by the appointment of sham executives and directors.
Well no. What tiny, and this fund was tiny, offshore fund would structure itself so that it made much of a taxable profit anyway? The nominee directors would have got a very small retainer. What would have happened to said profit? What would be the point of building up the value of the shareholders' funds in the company's accounts? Any monies paid to Cameron Snr. by way of fees, dividends, salary, commission, etc would still have been liable to the UK taxation regime as he was a UK resident for tax purposes. More likely that his expenses account was very generous indeed. Hence the main reason to fly out for meetings and take in a nice holiday at the same time I suspect.
I think you and Fiish should actually read the prospectus. Particularly the bit about the residential address of all the directors and the bit that explicitly states the company is being structured so as to avoid paying any tax in the UK. And I am not talking about the tax that was payable whenever an investor in the funds being run by the company crystallised a profit. If that investor was resident in the UK it would have being liable to UK tax. I am talking about the profits the company made in fees from running the fund. And you are being very naive if you think these companies are set up to generate a minimal profit.
You and Fiish can waffle as much as you like and claim you are the only people who understand such matters but it does not change the fact that whilst he did not do anything illegal at the time Ian Cameron was engaged in aggressive tax avoidance.
Except it is currently operating within EU and HMRC guidelines and the structure of the company was and is still perfectly normal according to what experts generally class as acceptable rather than aggressive/abusive.
What you call waffling, most other people call reasoned and factual discussion. You continue to make basic factual errors that even cursory research in this area would rectify.
So we know Cameron’s dad was a tax dodger – from what I have seen he was quite an aggressive one. Cameron isn’t his dad though. The problem is, of course he will have benefitted in some way, but that is his dad’s fault not his. It would have been better to come out with it – the press or opponents aren’t going to let go when you clarify your statements by adding 'in the future' – as why add it if you haven’t benefitted in the past?
Cameron is one of the few Conservatives I have time for. But I think the big scoundrels need to be identified as a priority, not the big name ones. That isn’t to say this info shouldn’t be used, but we have more important things to worry about over the next few months, like the future of our children if the Brexiters get their way!
I agree. I don't want and I don't think he needs to resign. He is performing the most important task he has had to since becoming PM in arguing the case for the UK to remain in the EU. Probably as an important task faced by any PM over the last 30 years. I have been impressed by how vigorously and effectively he has been making the argument. I really hope he is not distracted too much longer by all this. It just irritates me to read Tory apologists try and argue that reasonable explanations that I need to ignore why his father was not using the exact same aggressive tax avoidance practices that they condemned in the run up to the previous election.
The aggressive tax avoidance schemes involved comedians and pop singers creating a fictional investment business with artificial contrived transactions to circumvent tax rules. When there is evidence of a similar arrangement for the Camerons you can wail about aggressive tax avoidance. Until then it looks like tax planning no different to what ordinary individuals and UK fund managers do except its larger scale allows legitimate options not available unless there is scale.
I can join you to ridicule the "all in it together" bit but aggressive tax avoidance is likely to be wishful thinking.
That is a bit of a mystery. But interesting I thought that the aforementioned James Quarmby, a tax lawyer said on BBC Breakfast this am that the type of fund in question would be the last thing he would recommend if clients wanted efficient tax management. I'm beginning to get the impression that Cameron's Dad was just not very good at his job. I don't know what the law was at the time in the Bahamas but I'm reminded of the "Sark Lark". In that case residents of the tiny Channel Island were directors of hundreds, sometimes thousands of companies. But this was primarily to avoid the tax regime in Guernsey rather than the UK. I'm guessing but maybe (to boost the local economy) it was a requirement of Bahamian law to have local directors? Otherwise, I'm still struggling to understand what tax benefits such an arrangement would have in the UK. If the fund was properly structured as has been said countless times no UK tax would become payable until gains were drawn down or dividends paid, so it matters not where it was based. (Save regarding the position in the UK back in the 1980s - it may just have been the most efficient way to access overseas markets as exchange controls would have severely affected the ability to invest in countries other than the UK. And it was well-known that had he won the 1983 election, Foot intended to reintroduce those controls. The relevant documents/forms, etc had been printed ready to go and were scrapped as soon as Foot lost.)
The issue being discussed over the last few pages is not personal tax liabilities that, as you say, only become payable when a profit is crystallised. Ian Cameron's company was not a charity. It earned fees for administering and managing the underlying investments. Those fees contribute to the company's annual profit and loss. It is the tax on those fees that was denied to the UK taxman by the appointment of sham executives and directors.
Well no. What tiny, and this fund was tiny, offshore fund would structure itself so that it made much of a taxable profit anyway? The nominee directors would have got a very small retainer. What would have happened to said profit? What would be the point of building up the value of the shareholders' funds in the company's accounts? Any monies paid to Cameron Snr. by way of fees, dividends, salary, commission, etc would still have been liable to the UK taxation regime as he was a UK resident for tax purposes. More likely that his expenses account was very generous indeed. Hence the main reason to fly out for meetings and take in a nice holiday at the same time I suspect.
I think you and Fiish should actually read the prospectus. Particularly the bit about the residential address of all the directors and the bit that explicitly states the company is being structured so as to avoid paying any tax in the UK. And I am not talking about the tax that was payable whenever an investor in the funds being run by the company crystallised a profit. If that investor was resident in the UK it would have being liable to UK tax. I am talking about the profits the company made in fees from running the fund. And you are being very naive if you think these companies are set up to generate a minimal profit.
You and Fiish can waffle as much as you like and claim you are the only people who understand such matters but it does not change the fact that whilst he did not do anything illegal at the time Ian Cameron was engaged in aggressive tax avoidance.
Except it is currently operating within EU and HMRC guidelines and the structure of the company was and is still perfectly normal according to what experts generally class as acceptable rather than aggressive/abusive.
What you call waffling, most other people call reasoned and factual discussion. You continue to make basic factual errors that even cursory research in this area would rectify.
Where it operates now is irrelevant. The issue is where and how the fund was run for the first 20 years.
You continue to make pompous judgements about people who reject or disagree with your arguments.
That is a bit of a mystery. But interesting I thought that the aforementioned James Quarmby, a tax lawyer said on BBC Breakfast this am that the type of fund in question would be the last thing he would recommend if clients wanted efficient tax management. I'm beginning to get the impression that Cameron's Dad was just not very good at his job. I don't know what the law was at the time in the Bahamas but I'm reminded of the "Sark Lark". In that case residents of the tiny Channel Island were directors of hundreds, sometimes thousands of companies. But this was primarily to avoid the tax regime in Guernsey rather than the UK. I'm guessing but maybe (to boost the local economy) it was a requirement of Bahamian law to have local directors? Otherwise, I'm still struggling to understand what tax benefits such an arrangement would have in the UK. If the fund was properly structured as has been said countless times no UK tax would become payable until gains were drawn down or dividends paid, so it matters not where it was based. (Save regarding the position in the UK back in the 1980s - it may just have been the most efficient way to access overseas markets as exchange controls would have severely affected the ability to invest in countries other than the UK. And it was well-known that had he won the 1983 election, Foot intended to reintroduce those controls. The relevant documents/forms, etc had been printed ready to go and were scrapped as soon as Foot lost.)
The issue being discussed over the last few pages is not personal tax liabilities that, as you say, only become payable when a profit is crystallised. Ian Cameron's company was not a charity. It earned fees for administering and managing the underlying investments. Those fees contribute to the company's annual profit and loss. It is the tax on those fees that was denied to the UK taxman by the appointment of sham executives and directors.
Well no. What tiny, and this fund was tiny, offshore fund would structure itself so that it made much of a taxable profit anyway? The nominee directors would have got a very small retainer. What would have happened to said profit? What would be the point of building up the value of the shareholders' funds in the company's accounts? Any monies paid to Cameron Snr. by way of fees, dividends, salary, commission, etc would still have been liable to the UK taxation regime as he was a UK resident for tax purposes. More likely that his expenses account was very generous indeed. Hence the main reason to fly out for meetings and take in a nice holiday at the same time I suspect.
I think you and Fiish should actually read the prospectus. Particularly the bit about the residential address of all the directors and the bit that explicitly states the company is being structured so as to avoid paying any tax in the UK. And I am not talking about the tax that was payable whenever an investor in the funds being run by the company crystallised a profit. If that investor was resident in the UK it would have being liable to UK tax. I am talking about the profits the company made in fees from running the fund. And you are being very naive if you think these companies are set up to generate a minimal profit.
You and Fiish can waffle as much as you like and claim you are the only people who understand such matters but it does not change the fact that whilst he did not do anything illegal at the time Ian Cameron was engaged in aggressive tax avoidance.
Except it is currently operating within EU and HMRC guidelines and the structure of the company was and is still perfectly normal according to what experts generally class as acceptable rather than aggressive/abusive.
What you call waffling, most other people call reasoned and factual discussion. You continue to make basic factual errors that even cursory research in this area would rectify.
Where it operates now is irrelevant. The issue is where and how the fund was run for the first 20 years.
You continue to make pompous judgements about people who reject or disagree with your arguments.
No I'm just good recognising when people have little idea about an area of expertise. I also said it 'was' (that's called the past tense) perfectly normal and that tax experts classed it as non-abusive before the death of Cameron Sr and the move to Ireland.
John Anderson. Mr Anderson is a director of J O Hambro Investment Management Limited (“JOHIM”) in London. He is a British citizen and was born in 1940. A qualified Chartered Accountant, he joined Panmure Gordon & Co. Ltd. in 1966, becoming both Finance and International Partner. He left in 1983 and was instrumental in establishing Schroder Securities Ltd where he was a Managing Director. He was also a director of J Henry Schroder & Wagg & Co Ltd. A specialist in natural resources and the emerging markets, he joined JOHIM in 1988 where he manages a number of portfolios for a predominantly international client base. He is a non-executive director of a private investor relations company. He is also a member of the Advisory Board to the Foreign and Colonial Latin American Yield Fund.
Jeroen Bos. Mr Bos is a director of Church House Investments (Bahamas) Limited and was previously, a director of Panmure Gordon & Co Ltd. He has a post-graduate diploma in Economics from Sussex University and is a member of the London Stock Exchange. Mr Bos has been involved in the UK securities industry since 1984 in stockbroking and investment management. He is a Dutch citizen and was born in 1959.
Ian Cameron. Mr Cameron is a consultant to Smith & Williamson Investment Management Limited. He is a British citizen and was born in 1932. He trained as an accountant at Brown, Fleming & Murray. Having worked at Robert Fleming Securities, he joined Panmure Gordon in 1955 and became a partner in 1957. He headed up the bond desk until 1973 and subsequently managed equity portfolios for both institutional and private clients. He was joint senior partner of Panmure Gordon between 1977 and 1987. He was instrumental in the formation of Blairmore Holdings Inc. in the early 1980s.
Brent Haines. Mr Haines is Senior Manager, Fiduciary and Client Services of SG Hambros Bank & Trust (Bahamas) Limited. He is a member of the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants and of the Association for Investment Management and Research. He is a Canadian citizen and was born in 1963.
James Hoar. Mr Hoar is Director, Marketing for SG Hambros Bank & Trust (Bahamas) Limited, and holds an MBA from Cranfield School of Management, England and Esade in Barcelona, Spain, and a LLB from the University of East Anglia, Norwich, England. He has been in the private banking industry in the Bahamas for over 10 years. He is a British citizen and was born in 1965.
Andrew Hunziker. Mr Hunziker is a partner at a private independent investment management company in Geneva and has worked in private banking in Geneva since 1993. He is dual Swiss and British citizen and was born in 1962. He qualified as a chartered accountant in the UK with Deloitte Haskins & Sells and subsequently worked as a management consultant in London and Paris prior to obtaining a MBA from INSEAD in France.
Daniel Martineau. Mr Martineau is Managing Director of Close Trustees (Switzerland) SA, a principal operating subsidiary of Close Brothers Group plc. Mr Martineau is a French and a Canadian citizen. He was born in Ontario, Canada in 1956. He holds a degree in political science from the University of Western Ontario and a MBA from the University of Miami. He also qualified as an investment broker under the Ontario Securities Commission. Mr Martineau has considerable experience in the field of wealth management for high net worth individuals and their families having held senior management positions with international private banks in the Caribbean and in Europe.
Nicholas Peppiatt. Mr Peppiatt is a Director at Smith & Williamson Investment Management Limited in London where he has worked since 2001. He is a British citizen and was born in 1971. He graduated from Exeter University (BA Honours) in 1993 and joined Panmure Gordon Investments Limited where he worked for 8 years prior to joining Smith & Williamson. At Smith & Williamson he manages both institutional and private client funds. He is also a member of the Investment Committee of the Close Finsbury International Equity Growth Fund.
Betty Roberts. Mrs Roberts was until August 2004 Managing Director of SG Hambros Bank & Trust (Bahamas) Limited. She is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Bankers, London and a member of The Society of Trust and Estate Practitioners (STEP). She has considerable experience in the trust, private banking and offshore mutual funds industry She is a Bahamian citizen and was born in 1956.
Patrick Smiley. Mr Smiley is a Director of Smith & Williamson Investment Management Limited in London. He graduated from Durham University in 1988 with BA (Honours). He is a British citizen and was born in 1965. After training at Greg Middleton in Glasgow, he spent six years with Panmure Gordon, the London stockbrokers. He has worked for Leopold Joseph & Sons Ltd (now Butterfield Bank (UK) Limited) from 1996 until 2006 and was responsible for asset allocation and international stock selection for the bank’s managed portfolios.
Andrew Weight. Mr Weight is Financial Director of Close Trustees (Switzerland) SA, a principal operating subsidiary of Close Brothers Group plc. He is a British citizen and was born in England in 1962. He holds a degree in social sciences from the University of Reading and is an Associate of the Chartered Institute of Taxation in the UK. He was formerly a tax manager with BDO Stoy Hayward, chartered accountants, in London. He has considerable experience of tax, accounting and investment issues for international investors.
For the purposes of this Prospectus, the registered address of each of the Directors is the registered office of the Fund.
So, the directors were required by the terms of the prospectus to have a Bahamas c/o address and as far as I can tell they were all investment professionals rather than local fishermen religious ne'er-do-wells or knick-knack sellers.
That is a bit of a mystery. But interesting I thought that the aforementioned James Quarmby, a tax lawyer said on BBC Breakfast this am that the type of fund in question would be the last thing he would recommend if clients wanted efficient tax management. I'm beginning to get the impression that Cameron's Dad was just not very good at his job. I don't know what the law was at the time in the Bahamas but I'm reminded of the "Sark Lark". In that case residents of the tiny Channel Island were directors of hundreds, sometimes thousands of companies. But this was primarily to avoid the tax regime in Guernsey rather than the UK. I'm guessing but maybe (to boost the local economy) it was a requirement of Bahamian law to have local directors? Otherwise, I'm still struggling to understand what tax benefits such an arrangement would have in the UK. If the fund was properly structured as has been said countless times no UK tax would become payable until gains were drawn down or dividends paid, so it matters not where it was based. (Save regarding the position in the UK back in the 1980s - it may just have been the most efficient way to access overseas markets as exchange controls would have severely affected the ability to invest in countries other than the UK. And it was well-known that had he won the 1983 election, Foot intended to reintroduce those controls. The relevant documents/forms, etc had been printed ready to go and were scrapped as soon as Foot lost.)
The issue being discussed over the last few pages is not personal tax liabilities that, as you say, only become payable when a profit is crystallised. Ian Cameron's company was not a charity. It earned fees for administering and managing the underlying investments. Those fees contribute to the company's annual profit and loss. It is the tax on those fees that was denied to the UK taxman by the appointment of sham executives and directors.
Well no. What tiny, and this fund was tiny, offshore fund would structure itself so that it made much of a taxable profit anyway? The nominee directors would have got a very small retainer. What would have happened to said profit? What would be the point of building up the value of the shareholders' funds in the company's accounts? Any monies paid to Cameron Snr. by way of fees, dividends, salary, commission, etc would still have been liable to the UK taxation regime as he was a UK resident for tax purposes. More likely that his expenses account was very generous indeed. Hence the main reason to fly out for meetings and take in a nice holiday at the same time I suspect.
I think you and Fiish should actually read the prospectus. Particularly the bit about the residential address of all the directors and the bit that explicitly states the company is being structured so as to avoid paying any tax in the UK. And I am not talking about the tax that was payable whenever an investor in the funds being run by the company crystallised a profit. If that investor was resident in the UK it would have being liable to UK tax. I am talking about the profits the company made in fees from running the fund. And you are being very naive if you think these companies are set up to generate a minimal profit.
You and Fiish can waffle as much as you like and claim you are the only people who understand such matters but it does not change the fact that whilst he did not do anything illegal at the time Ian Cameron was engaged in aggressive tax avoidance.
Except it is currently operating within EU and HMRC guidelines and the structure of the company was and is still perfectly normal according to what experts generally class as acceptable rather than aggressive/abusive.
What you call waffling, most other people call reasoned and factual discussion. You continue to make basic factual errors that even cursory research in this area would rectify.
Where it operates now is irrelevant. The issue is where and how the fund was run for the first 20 years.
You continue to make pompous judgements about people who reject or disagree with your arguments.
No I'm just good recognising when people have little idea about an area of expertise. I also said it 'was' (that's called the past tense) perfectly normal and that tax experts classed it as non-abusive before the death of Cameron Sr and the move to Ireland.
I worked for companies supplying IT services to organisations such as SG Warburg, Panmure Gordon, Quilter Goodison, Brewin Dolphin and AXA Investment Managers in the city for the best part of 30 years. I don't claim to be an expert but I know more than a little about investment management firms, unit trusts, mutual funds, off shore funds etc. And while all the pompous waffle you come out with on threads like this might intimidate others it certainly does not lead me to think for one second that your knowledge is any greater than mine in these matters.
John Anderson. Mr Anderson is a director of J O Hambro Investment Management Limited (“JOHIM”) in London. He is a British citizen and was born in 1940. A qualified Chartered Accountant, he joined Panmure Gordon & Co. Ltd. in 1966, becoming both Finance and International Partner. He left in 1983 and was instrumental in establishing Schroder Securities Ltd where he was a Managing Director. He was also a director of J Henry Schroder & Wagg & Co Ltd. A specialist in natural resources and the emerging markets, he joined JOHIM in 1988 where he manages a number of portfolios for a predominantly international client base. He is a non-executive director of a private investor relations company. He is also a member of the Advisory Board to the Foreign and Colonial Latin American Yield Fund.
Jeroen Bos. Mr Bos is a director of Church House Investments (Bahamas) Limited and was previously, a director of Panmure Gordon & Co Ltd. He has a post-graduate diploma in Economics from Sussex University and is a member of the London Stock Exchange. Mr Bos has been involved in the UK securities industry since 1984 in stockbroking and investment management. He is a Dutch citizen and was born in 1959.
Ian Cameron. Mr Cameron is a consultant to Smith & Williamson Investment Management Limited. He is a British citizen and was born in 1932. He trained as an accountant at Brown, Fleming & Murray. Having worked at Robert Fleming Securities, he joined Panmure Gordon in 1955 and became a partner in 1957. He headed up the bond desk until 1973 and subsequently managed equity portfolios for both institutional and private clients. He was joint senior partner of Panmure Gordon between 1977 and 1987. He was instrumental in the formation of Blairmore Holdings Inc. in the early 1980s.
Brent Haines. Mr Haines is Senior Manager, Fiduciary and Client Services of SG Hambros Bank & Trust (Bahamas) Limited. He is a member of the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants and of the Association for Investment Management and Research. He is a Canadian citizen and was born in 1963.
James Hoar. Mr Hoar is Director, Marketing for SG Hambros Bank & Trust (Bahamas) Limited, and holds an MBA from Cranfield School of Management, England and Esade in Barcelona, Spain, and a LLB from the University of East Anglia, Norwich, England. He has been in the private banking industry in the Bahamas for over 10 years. He is a British citizen and was born in 1965.
Andrew Hunziker. Mr Hunziker is a partner at a private independent investment management company in Geneva and has worked in private banking in Geneva since 1993. He is dual Swiss and British citizen and was born in 1962. He qualified as a chartered accountant in the UK with Deloitte Haskins & Sells and subsequently worked as a management consultant in London and Paris prior to obtaining a MBA from INSEAD in France.
Daniel Martineau. Mr Martineau is Managing Director of Close Trustees (Switzerland) SA, a principal operating subsidiary of Close Brothers Group plc. Mr Martineau is a French and a Canadian citizen. He was born in Ontario, Canada in 1956. He holds a degree in political science from the University of Western Ontario and a MBA from the University of Miami. He also qualified as an investment broker under the Ontario Securities Commission. Mr Martineau has considerable experience in the field of wealth management for high net worth individuals and their families having held senior management positions with international private banks in the Caribbean and in Europe.
Nicholas Peppiatt. Mr Peppiatt is a Director at Smith & Williamson Investment Management Limited in London where he has worked since 2001. He is a British citizen and was born in 1971. He graduated from Exeter University (BA Honours) in 1993 and joined Panmure Gordon Investments Limited where he worked for 8 years prior to joining Smith & Williamson. At Smith & Williamson he manages both institutional and private client funds. He is also a member of the Investment Committee of the Close Finsbury International Equity Growth Fund.
Betty Roberts. Mrs Roberts was until August 2004 Managing Director of SG Hambros Bank & Trust (Bahamas) Limited. She is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Bankers, London and a member of The Society of Trust and Estate Practitioners (STEP). She has considerable experience in the trust, private banking and offshore mutual funds industry She is a Bahamian citizen and was born in 1956.
Patrick Smiley. Mr Smiley is a Director of Smith & Williamson Investment Management Limited in London. He graduated from Durham University in 1988 with BA (Honours). He is a British citizen and was born in 1965. After training at Greg Middleton in Glasgow, he spent six years with Panmure Gordon, the London stockbrokers. He has worked for Leopold Joseph & Sons Ltd (now Butterfield Bank (UK) Limited) from 1996 until 2006 and was responsible for asset allocation and international stock selection for the bank’s managed portfolios.
Andrew Weight. Mr Weight is Financial Director of Close Trustees (Switzerland) SA, a principal operating subsidiary of Close Brothers Group plc. He is a British citizen and was born in England in 1962. He holds a degree in social sciences from the University of Reading and is an Associate of the Chartered Institute of Taxation in the UK. He was formerly a tax manager with BDO Stoy Hayward, chartered accountants, in London. He has considerable experience of tax, accounting and investment issues for international investors.
For the purposes of this Prospectus, the registered address of each of the Directors is the registered office of the Fund.
So, the directors were required by the terms of the prospectus to have a Bahamas c/o address and as far as I can tell they were all investment professionals rather than local fishermen religious ne'er-do-wells or knick-knack sellers.
The bit where it states the company will avoid paying UK tax by pretending all the real directors (those making the investment decisions) were not resident in the UK is on page 36.
Cameron should have been honest from the start, but he's actually done nothing wrong, paid his taxes, the cover up is worse then what he's done. I agree with Fraser Nelson here, the idea he goes for this, is utterly bollocks, lose the referendum and he's toast, but this is a minor fault.
John Anderson. Mr Anderson is a director of J O Hambro Investment Management Limited (“JOHIM”) in London. He is a British citizen and was born in 1940. A qualified Chartered Accountant, he joined Panmure Gordon & Co. Ltd. in 1966, becoming both Finance and International Partner. He left in 1983 and was instrumental in establishing Schroder Securities Ltd where he was a Managing Director. He was also a director of J Henry Schroder & Wagg & Co Ltd. A specialist in natural resources and the emerging markets, he joined JOHIM in 1988 where he manages a number of portfolios for a predominantly international client base. He is a non-executive director of a private investor relations company. He is also a member of the Advisory Board to the Foreign and Colonial Latin American Yield Fund.
Jeroen Bos. Mr Bos is a director of Church House Investments (Bahamas) Limited and was previously, a director of Panmure Gordon & Co Ltd. He has a post-graduate diploma in Economics from Sussex University and is a member of the London Stock Exchange. Mr Bos has been involved in the UK securities industry since 1984 in stockbroking and investment management. He is a Dutch citizen and was born in 1959.
Ian Cameron. Mr Cameron is a consultant to Smith & Williamson Investment Management Limited. He is a British citizen and was born in 1932. He trained as an accountant at Brown, Fleming & Murray. Having worked at Robert Fleming Securities, he joined Panmure Gordon in 1955 and became a partner in 1957. He headed up the bond desk until 1973 and subsequently managed equity portfolios for both institutional and private clients. He was joint senior partner of Panmure Gordon between 1977 and 1987. He was instrumental in the formation of Blairmore Holdings Inc. in the early 1980s.
Brent Haines. Mr Haines is Senior Manager, Fiduciary and Client Services of SG Hambros Bank & Trust (Bahamas) Limited. He is a member of the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants and of the Association for Investment Management and Research. He is a Canadian citizen and was born in 1963.
James Hoar. Mr Hoar is Director, Marketing for SG Hambros Bank & Trust (Bahamas) Limited, and holds an MBA from Cranfield School of Management, England and Esade in Barcelona, Spain, and a LLB from the University of East Anglia, Norwich, England. He has been in the private banking industry in the Bahamas for over 10 years. He is a British citizen and was born in 1965.
Andrew Hunziker. Mr Hunziker is a partner at a private independent investment management company in Geneva and has worked in private banking in Geneva since 1993. He is dual Swiss and British citizen and was born in 1962. He qualified as a chartered accountant in the UK with Deloitte Haskins & Sells and subsequently worked as a management consultant in London and Paris prior to obtaining a MBA from INSEAD in France.
Daniel Martineau. Mr Martineau is Managing Director of Close Trustees (Switzerland) SA, a principal operating subsidiary of Close Brothers Group plc. Mr Martineau is a French and a Canadian citizen. He was born in Ontario, Canada in 1956. He holds a degree in political science from the University of Western Ontario and a MBA from the University of Miami. He also qualified as an investment broker under the Ontario Securities Commission. Mr Martineau has considerable experience in the field of wealth management for high net worth individuals and their families having held senior management positions with international private banks in the Caribbean and in Europe.
Nicholas Peppiatt. Mr Peppiatt is a Director at Smith & Williamson Investment Management Limited in London where he has worked since 2001. He is a British citizen and was born in 1971. He graduated from Exeter University (BA Honours) in 1993 and joined Panmure Gordon Investments Limited where he worked for 8 years prior to joining Smith & Williamson. At Smith & Williamson he manages both institutional and private client funds. He is also a member of the Investment Committee of the Close Finsbury International Equity Growth Fund.
Betty Roberts. Mrs Roberts was until August 2004 Managing Director of SG Hambros Bank & Trust (Bahamas) Limited. She is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Bankers, London and a member of The Society of Trust and Estate Practitioners (STEP). She has considerable experience in the trust, private banking and offshore mutual funds industry She is a Bahamian citizen and was born in 1956.
Patrick Smiley. Mr Smiley is a Director of Smith & Williamson Investment Management Limited in London. He graduated from Durham University in 1988 with BA (Honours). He is a British citizen and was born in 1965. After training at Greg Middleton in Glasgow, he spent six years with Panmure Gordon, the London stockbrokers. He has worked for Leopold Joseph & Sons Ltd (now Butterfield Bank (UK) Limited) from 1996 until 2006 and was responsible for asset allocation and international stock selection for the bank’s managed portfolios.
Andrew Weight. Mr Weight is Financial Director of Close Trustees (Switzerland) SA, a principal operating subsidiary of Close Brothers Group plc. He is a British citizen and was born in England in 1962. He holds a degree in social sciences from the University of Reading and is an Associate of the Chartered Institute of Taxation in the UK. He was formerly a tax manager with BDO Stoy Hayward, chartered accountants, in London. He has considerable experience of tax, accounting and investment issues for international investors.
For the purposes of this Prospectus, the registered address of each of the Directors is the registered office of the Fund.
So, the directors were required by the terms of the prospectus to have a Bahamas c/o address and as far as I can tell they were all investment professionals rather than local fishermen religious ne'er-do-wells or knick-knack sellers.
The bit where it states the company will avoid paying UK tax by pretending all the real directors (those making the investment decisions) were not resident in the UK is on page 36.
A 'care of' address is not "pretending all the real directors were not resident in the UK".
John Anderson. Mr Anderson is a director of J O Hambro Investment Management Limited (“JOHIM”) in London. He is a British citizen and was born in 1940. A qualified Chartered Accountant, he joined Panmure Gordon & Co. Ltd. in 1966, becoming both Finance and International Partner. He left in 1983 and was instrumental in establishing Schroder Securities Ltd where he was a Managing Director. He was also a director of J Henry Schroder & Wagg & Co Ltd. A specialist in natural resources and the emerging markets, he joined JOHIM in 1988 where he manages a number of portfolios for a predominantly international client base. He is a non-executive director of a private investor relations company. He is also a member of the Advisory Board to the Foreign and Colonial Latin American Yield Fund.
Jeroen Bos. Mr Bos is a director of Church House Investments (Bahamas) Limited and was previously, a director of Panmure Gordon & Co Ltd. He has a post-graduate diploma in Economics from Sussex University and is a member of the London Stock Exchange. Mr Bos has been involved in the UK securities industry since 1984 in stockbroking and investment management. He is a Dutch citizen and was born in 1959.
Ian Cameron. Mr Cameron is a consultant to Smith & Williamson Investment Management Limited. He is a British citizen and was born in 1932. He trained as an accountant at Brown, Fleming & Murray. Having worked at Robert Fleming Securities, he joined Panmure Gordon in 1955 and became a partner in 1957. He headed up the bond desk until 1973 and subsequently managed equity portfolios for both institutional and private clients. He was joint senior partner of Panmure Gordon between 1977 and 1987. He was instrumental in the formation of Blairmore Holdings Inc. in the early 1980s.
Brent Haines. Mr Haines is Senior Manager, Fiduciary and Client Services of SG Hambros Bank & Trust (Bahamas) Limited. He is a member of the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants and of the Association for Investment Management and Research. He is a Canadian citizen and was born in 1963.
James Hoar. Mr Hoar is Director, Marketing for SG Hambros Bank & Trust (Bahamas) Limited, and holds an MBA from Cranfield School of Management, England and Esade in Barcelona, Spain, and a LLB from the University of East Anglia, Norwich, England. He has been in the private banking industry in the Bahamas for over 10 years. He is a British citizen and was born in 1965.
Andrew Hunziker. Mr Hunziker is a partner at a private independent investment management company in Geneva and has worked in private banking in Geneva since 1993. He is dual Swiss and British citizen and was born in 1962. He qualified as a chartered accountant in the UK with Deloitte Haskins & Sells and subsequently worked as a management consultant in London and Paris prior to obtaining a MBA from INSEAD in France.
Daniel Martineau. Mr Martineau is Managing Director of Close Trustees (Switzerland) SA, a principal operating subsidiary of Close Brothers Group plc. Mr Martineau is a French and a Canadian citizen. He was born in Ontario, Canada in 1956. He holds a degree in political science from the University of Western Ontario and a MBA from the University of Miami. He also qualified as an investment broker under the Ontario Securities Commission. Mr Martineau has considerable experience in the field of wealth management for high net worth individuals and their families having held senior management positions with international private banks in the Caribbean and in Europe.
Nicholas Peppiatt. Mr Peppiatt is a Director at Smith & Williamson Investment Management Limited in London where he has worked since 2001. He is a British citizen and was born in 1971. He graduated from Exeter University (BA Honours) in 1993 and joined Panmure Gordon Investments Limited where he worked for 8 years prior to joining Smith & Williamson. At Smith & Williamson he manages both institutional and private client funds. He is also a member of the Investment Committee of the Close Finsbury International Equity Growth Fund.
Betty Roberts. Mrs Roberts was until August 2004 Managing Director of SG Hambros Bank & Trust (Bahamas) Limited. She is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Bankers, London and a member of The Society of Trust and Estate Practitioners (STEP). She has considerable experience in the trust, private banking and offshore mutual funds industry She is a Bahamian citizen and was born in 1956.
Patrick Smiley. Mr Smiley is a Director of Smith & Williamson Investment Management Limited in London. He graduated from Durham University in 1988 with BA (Honours). He is a British citizen and was born in 1965. After training at Greg Middleton in Glasgow, he spent six years with Panmure Gordon, the London stockbrokers. He has worked for Leopold Joseph & Sons Ltd (now Butterfield Bank (UK) Limited) from 1996 until 2006 and was responsible for asset allocation and international stock selection for the bank’s managed portfolios.
Andrew Weight. Mr Weight is Financial Director of Close Trustees (Switzerland) SA, a principal operating subsidiary of Close Brothers Group plc. He is a British citizen and was born in England in 1962. He holds a degree in social sciences from the University of Reading and is an Associate of the Chartered Institute of Taxation in the UK. He was formerly a tax manager with BDO Stoy Hayward, chartered accountants, in London. He has considerable experience of tax, accounting and investment issues for international investors.
For the purposes of this Prospectus, the registered address of each of the Directors is the registered office of the Fund.
So, the directors were required by the terms of the prospectus to have a Bahamas c/o address and as far as I can tell they were all investment professionals rather than local fishermen religious ne'er-do-wells or knick-knack sellers.
The bit where it states the company will avoid paying UK tax by pretending all the real directors (those making the investment decisions) were not resident in the UK is on page 36.
A 'care of' address is not "pretending all the real directors were not resident in the UK".
'I will not benefit from any offshore investments in the future'
when further pressed then,
'I did have investments in an offshore trust but I sold them in 2010'
The apologists and arguments supporting Call me Dave (Fiiish in particular of course) are probably correct in that he has done nothing illegal. His indictment however is on two counts - i) he has invested in a (probably legal) tax avoidance scheme when he has been on record condemning them, and ii) it took him three attempts to actually admit to this after attempting to cloud it in indignation that his father's name was being dragged through the mud and how much he loved him etc...
There is a third issue as well which may or may not be pertinent, but interesting nonetheless - he spoke against proposed EU reform of offshore activity in 2013.
At best he's a hypocrite, at worst he's been deliberately avoiding exposure.
None of us are experts, well I'm not. But it may be that some would benefit from reading up on the Dunning–Kruger effect.
It's just that we are getting all these pronouncements about aggressive tax avoidance when none of us know the actual facts. I've tried to make some heroic assumptions on what seems likely. Other will only accept what puts individuals in the outmost bad light.
Can't see Cameron lasting the year to be honest. The referendum was always going to be choppy waters for him and the Tory party but this has made a hole in the boat before the storm hits.
If a man condemns others for the legal act of tax avoidance he should not be surprised to be challenged when he benefits from a legal act of tax avoidance.
Nothing to do with Cameron's political party or beliefs. I condemn champagne socialists like Margaret Hodge, to name but one, too.
It's the hypocrisy of these people that annoys me.
Can't see Cameron lasting the year to be honest. The referendum was always going to be choppy waters for him and the Tory party but this has made a hole in the boat before the storm hits.
'All political careers end in failure' - Enoch Powell
Can't see Cameron lasting the year to be honest. The referendum was always going to be choppy waters for him and the Tory party but this has made a hole in the boat before the storm hits.
Agree but I think he (DC) has pretty much planned his exit to roughly coincide with the referendum result. Bremain and he leaves passing on the baton and Brexit and regardless of what he says he's toast.
Fwiw. I don't think Cameron has acted illegally in this latest scandal but it does to me at least highlight just how much money is being kept secret and away from open public scrutiny.
I hope this "Panama Papers" revelation opens the eyes of the vast majority of the public as to the goings on the wealthy.
If Ian Cameron wanted to hide the fact he lived in the UK why did he name the fund after his own UK home and then continue to live in and pay tax in the UK and made no attempt to cover up the fact he was managing a fund overseas?
'I will not benefit from any offshore investments in the future'
when further pressed then,
'I did have investments in an offshore trust but I sold them in 2010'
The apologists and arguments supporting Call me Dave (Fiiish in particular of course) are probably correct in that he has done nothing illegal. His indictment however is on two counts - i) he has invested in a (probably legal) tax avoidance scheme when he has been on record condemning them, and ii) it took him three attempts to actually admit to this after attempting to cloud it in indignation that his father's name was being dragged through the mud and how much he loved him etc...
There is a third issue as well which may or may not be pertinent, but interesting nonetheless - he spoke against proposed EU reform of offshore activity in 2013.
At best he's a hypocrite, at worst he's been deliberately avoiding exposure.
I'm hardly an apologist for Dave and I have criticised him recently for various things including his actions regarding the EU referendum, even though I'm voting Remain. The only thing I am doing, along with Dippenhall and cafcfan is dispelling myths regarding tax avoidance and correcting lies or incorrect statements being used to attack a dead man and his son.
The other fact, which I have stated before but some people still keep missing the point, is that the Icebreaker and K2 schemes that Cameron admonished were accurately described by experts and HMRC as abusive and not in the spirit of the law. The Blairmore scheme has been defended by tax experts as a legitimate and widely used model and continues to be considered acceptable by HMRC and the EU. Yes, the prospectus states that it has been set up so that it will not expose its profits to UK tax liability, but so will most other overseas funds that can be found in any punter's pension fund. Why would you set up an overseas fund and have it liable to both the country it is set up in as well as the UK? Why double the amount of tax you pay?
Boring witch hunt by anti Tories. DC has done nothing illegal and I see no reason why he should have his personal tax record investigated or opened up to the public. It really is nothing to do with us IMO. I would be pissed if people started demanding my personal tax details are released to the public too.
Comments
What tiny, and this fund was tiny, offshore fund would structure itself so that it made much of a taxable profit anyway?
The nominee directors would have got a very small retainer. What would have happened to said profit? What would be the point of building up the value of the shareholders' funds in the company's accounts?
Any monies paid to Cameron Snr. by way of fees, dividends, salary, commission, etc would still have been liable to the UK taxation regime as he was a UK resident for tax purposes.
More likely that his expenses account was very generous indeed. Hence the main reason to fly out for meetings and take in a nice holiday at the same time I suspect.
An overseas fund is still a UK fund, it just doesn't hold assets of UK companies. You would not know, but some of your overseas investments might be held by a sub custodian in Singapore on behalf of the US bank based in Ireland. A true overseas fund is marketed and sold outside the UK but a UK investor can still invest in it and he will pay tax on what he receives from it.
As for Cameron's dad's company being really a UK company avoiding tax, the company was overseas and managed overseas because he would fly to Panama for meetings is nonsense. Cameron's dad was not the company, he was a director and beneficial shareholder and the company was, like it or not, legally established as a Panamanian company and all that needs to be shown is that it was managed from Panama. The evidence you should be looking for is that of Cameron's dad not having board meetings in Panama.
As for an adviser not recommending it, I doubt he advises on £multi million investments, but it's like an adviser saying to an investor with £100 to invest in property to buy property shares rather than buy a property. If you had a £100m you would buy a property or set up your own property portfolio.
I guess Chelsea football club is not really an English company because its owned by a Russian who flies in for board meetings. Putin should demand Chelsea relocates to Moscow and stop this contrived situation to avoid Chelsea paying Russian corporation tax.
It was Cameron who described Jimmy Carr's legal tax avoidance as 'morally repugnant'. He can hardly complain that his hypocrisy is pointed out when he trousered £30k in a similar manner. Did he think his Dad was morally repugnant?
Having said that the problem is that all this is legal and HMRC simply haven't done enough to close loopholes. Cameron reckons Britain are at the forefront of efforts to tackle tax avoidance (another whopper) yet much of that offshore money goes through the British Virgin Islands.
With Cameron's relationship to truth he could be our CEO.
Strangely I find myself drawn to the arguments of dippenhall a uk pensions asset investor and fiiish an overseas settlement agent (whilst acknowledging his sometimes abrasive tone) rather than those who are just anti Tory or anti Cameron.
You and Fiish can waffle as much as you like and claim you are the only people who understand such matters but it does not change the fact that whilst he did not do anything illegal at the time Ian Cameron was engaged in aggressive tax avoidance.
What you call waffling, most other people call reasoned and factual discussion. You continue to make basic factual errors that even cursory research in this area would rectify.
I can join you to ridicule the "all in it together" bit but aggressive tax avoidance is likely to be wishful thinking.
You continue to make pompous judgements about people who reject or disagree with your arguments.
John Anderson. Mr Anderson is a director of J O Hambro Investment Management Limited
(“JOHIM”) in London. He is a British citizen and was born in 1940. A qualified Chartered
Accountant, he joined Panmure Gordon & Co. Ltd. in 1966, becoming both Finance and
International Partner. He left in 1983 and was instrumental in establishing Schroder Securities
Ltd where he was a Managing Director. He was also a director of J Henry Schroder & Wagg &
Co Ltd. A specialist in natural resources and the emerging markets, he joined JOHIM in 1988
where he manages a number of portfolios for a predominantly international client base. He is a
non-executive director of a private investor relations company. He is also a member of the
Advisory Board to the Foreign and Colonial Latin American Yield Fund.
Jeroen Bos. Mr Bos is a director of Church House Investments (Bahamas) Limited and was
previously, a director of Panmure Gordon & Co Ltd. He has a post-graduate diploma in
Economics from Sussex University and is a member of the London Stock Exchange. Mr Bos has
been involved in the UK securities industry since 1984 in stockbroking and investment
management. He is a Dutch citizen and was born in 1959.
Ian Cameron. Mr Cameron is a consultant to Smith & Williamson Investment Management
Limited. He is a British citizen and was born in 1932. He trained as an accountant at Brown,
Fleming & Murray. Having worked at Robert Fleming Securities, he joined Panmure Gordon in
1955 and became a partner in 1957. He headed up the bond desk until 1973 and subsequently
managed equity portfolios for both institutional and private clients. He was joint senior partner of
Panmure Gordon between 1977 and 1987. He was instrumental in the formation of Blairmore
Holdings Inc. in the early 1980s.
Brent Haines. Mr Haines is Senior Manager, Fiduciary and Client Services of SG Hambros Bank
& Trust (Bahamas) Limited. He is a member of the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants
and of the Association for Investment Management and Research. He is a Canadian citizen and
was born in 1963.
James Hoar. Mr Hoar is Director, Marketing for SG Hambros Bank & Trust (Bahamas) Limited,
and holds an MBA from Cranfield School of Management, England and Esade in Barcelona,
Spain, and a LLB from the University of East Anglia, Norwich, England. He has been in the
private banking industry in the Bahamas for over 10 years. He is a British citizen and was born in
1965.
Andrew Hunziker. Mr Hunziker is a partner at a private independent investment management
company in Geneva and has worked in private banking in Geneva since 1993. He is dual Swiss
and British citizen and was born in 1962. He qualified as a chartered accountant in the UK with
Deloitte Haskins & Sells and subsequently worked as a management consultant in London and
Paris prior to obtaining a MBA from INSEAD in France.
Daniel Martineau. Mr Martineau is Managing Director of Close Trustees (Switzerland) SA, a
principal operating subsidiary of Close Brothers Group plc. Mr Martineau is a French and a
Canadian citizen. He was born in Ontario, Canada in 1956. He holds a degree in political
science from the University of Western Ontario and a MBA from the University of Miami. He also
qualified as an investment broker under the Ontario Securities Commission. Mr Martineau has
considerable experience in the field of wealth management for high net worth individuals and their
families having held senior management positions with international private banks in the
Caribbean and in Europe.
Nicholas Peppiatt. Mr Peppiatt is a Director at Smith & Williamson Investment Management
Limited in London where he has worked since 2001. He is a British citizen and was born in 1971.
He graduated from Exeter University (BA Honours) in 1993 and joined Panmure Gordon
Investments Limited where he worked for 8 years prior to joining Smith & Williamson. At Smith &
Williamson he manages both institutional and private client funds. He is also a member of the
Investment Committee of the Close Finsbury International Equity Growth Fund.
Betty Roberts. Mrs Roberts was until August 2004 Managing Director of SG Hambros Bank &
Trust (Bahamas) Limited. She is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Bankers, London and a
member of The Society of Trust and Estate Practitioners (STEP). She has considerable
experience in the trust, private banking and offshore mutual funds industry She is a Bahamian
citizen and was born in 1956.
Patrick Smiley. Mr Smiley is a Director of Smith & Williamson Investment Management Limited
in London. He graduated from Durham University in 1988 with BA (Honours). He is a British
citizen and was born in 1965. After training at Greg Middleton in Glasgow, he spent six years
with Panmure Gordon, the London stockbrokers. He has worked for Leopold Joseph & Sons Ltd
(now Butterfield Bank (UK) Limited) from 1996 until 2006 and was responsible for asset allocation
and international stock selection for the bank’s managed portfolios.
Andrew Weight. Mr Weight is Financial Director of Close Trustees (Switzerland) SA, a principal
operating subsidiary of Close Brothers Group plc. He is a British citizen and was born in England
in 1962. He holds a degree in social sciences from the University of Reading and is an Associate
of the Chartered Institute of Taxation in the UK. He was formerly a tax manager with BDO Stoy
Hayward, chartered accountants, in London. He has considerable experience of tax, accounting
and investment issues for international investors.
For the purposes of this Prospectus, the registered address of each of the Directors is the
registered office of the Fund.
So, the directors were required by the terms of the prospectus to have a Bahamas c/o address and as far as I can tell they were all investment professionals rather than local fishermen religious ne'er-do-wells or knick-knack sellers.
Here is the prospectus if anyone is so inclined globaldocuments.morningstar.com/documentlibrary/Document/ec3dcb9ffb02c630042fa1ac2c7d56de.msdoc/original
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/04/david-cameron-is-guilty-of-bad-spin-and-nothing-more/
when pressed then,
'I will not benefit from any offshore investments in the future'
when further pressed then,
'I did have investments in an offshore trust but I sold them in 2010'
The apologists and arguments supporting Call me Dave (Fiiish in particular of course) are probably correct in that he has done nothing illegal. His indictment however is on two counts - i) he has invested in a (probably legal) tax avoidance scheme when he has been on record condemning them, and ii) it took him three attempts to actually admit to this after attempting to cloud it in indignation that his father's name was being dragged through the mud and how much he loved him etc...
There is a third issue as well which may or may not be pertinent, but interesting nonetheless - he spoke against proposed EU reform of offshore activity in 2013.
At best he's a hypocrite, at worst he's been deliberately avoiding exposure.
It's just that we are getting all these pronouncements about aggressive tax avoidance when none of us know the actual facts. I've tried to make some heroic assumptions on what seems likely. Other will only accept what puts individuals in the outmost bad light.
Nothing to do with Cameron's political party or beliefs. I condemn champagne socialists like Margaret Hodge, to name but one, too.
It's the hypocrisy of these people that annoys me.
Fwiw. I don't think Cameron has acted illegally in this latest scandal but it does to me at least highlight just how much money is being kept secret and away from open public scrutiny.
I hope this "Panama Papers" revelation opens the eyes of the vast majority of the public as to the goings on the wealthy.
The other fact, which I have stated before but some people still keep missing the point, is that the Icebreaker and K2 schemes that Cameron admonished were accurately described by experts and HMRC as abusive and not in the spirit of the law. The Blairmore scheme has been defended by tax experts as a legitimate and widely used model and continues to be considered acceptable by HMRC and the EU. Yes, the prospectus states that it has been set up so that it will not expose its profits to UK tax liability, but so will most other overseas funds that can be found in any punter's pension fund. Why would you set up an overseas fund and have it liable to both the country it is set up in as well as the UK? Why double the amount of tax you pay?