Originally posted by mangerton
View Post
Benefit claimants are, I agree, perhaps a grey area at least to the extent that many would be unable to get their benefits or sums equivalent thereto from any source other than the state although, even then, the crucial word is "many"; those in receipt of certain (though not all, of course) medical based benefit payments could choose (if they could afford to) to have them paid via private insurance and some of those who receive pensions might choose to have them rather than state retirement benefit if they don't have sufficient qualifying payments for the latter. Furthermore, state benefit claimants are at least claimants by reason of having "requested" them by applying successfully for them. Also, the recent Starbucks / Amazon et al débâcle demonstrates that, to some extent, taxation is a competitive international market in which, for some companies and individuals, tax can be a matter of choice for some companies and individuals at least in terms of the country in which they elect to pay it - and I'm not even referring specifically only to deliberate tax avoidance measures for their own sake but to individuals who divide their time between homes in more than two countries and are obliged by law to make a choice as to the country in which the elect to pay tax.
Originally posted by mangerton
View Post
Comment