Https:// That’s what I wanted to say at April 5, …

Comment on Look Back to Look Forward by woodstein.

That’s what I wanted to say at April 5, 2016 at 10:16

5 stars to The Clumpany  *****

woodstein Also Commented

Look Back to Look Forward
motor red
April 5, 2016 at 23:37
“ If they want to comply in the big charade”
“What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence”

(Hitchens Razor.)  04

Look Back to Look Forward
The  “Newspaper of The Year” has arisen from slumber today!
Shock horror,
In a story on the Mossack  Fonseca leak it opines interalia

Newspaper Of The Year View
“They robbed the tax from the poor to pay the rich and we all let it happen”
“But this blatent , immoral self-interest lies on our own doorstep”
“Semantics have been key in perpetuating the myth that there has been “no wrong doing”” *
“Tax evasion is illegal tax avoidance is not – but there is a fag paper  of difference in their dishonesty and nothing between their immorality”
That last one is the best of all.

*No mention of  “phantom” tax bills this time. 12

Look Back to Look Forward
“I said I thought Article 7 related to criminality.”
  It does, the link below confirms this, or if anybody would rather read the salient
Points  here they are.
I thought the last line was the icing on the cake?

A clash of moral imperatives

Since ethics seem to be pervading the world of tax, let us conclude that retrospective legislation is nothing other than a clash of moral imperatives. Few would disagree with the proposition that the rule of law is at the core of democracy and that retrospective legislation is therefore morally reprehensible. However, the vast majority will accept willingly that taxes are needed to enable the government to fulfil its public duties and that those who seek to avoid sharing the burden should accept the risk inherent in their decision.”
“Although tax sometimes does feel like a punishment, it is outside scope of Article 7, as it does not belong to the criminal sphere. (Tax penalties are arguably within Article 7 (see Jussila v Finland (73053/01) [2006] ECHR 996.)
Taxpayers have had to rely on a different human right to appeal against the use of retrospective tax legislation: the right to property. This right was not originally included in the ECHR, which perhaps shows the difficulties governments had with the very concept of an enforceable right to property. After several failed attempts, the right was enshrined in Article 1 of Protocol 1 of the ECHR:

“Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions (…) The preceding provisions shall not, however in any way impair the right of a State (…) to secure the payment of taxes…”

“So there you have it: the very Article which is intended to protect citizens against the arbitrary confiscation of their property is subject to the caveat that states need to be able to raise taxes. This is not very promising. Indeed, Stanley Burton J commented in R (ex parte Federation of Tour Operators and others v HM Treasury) [2008] STC 547 that “the hurdle for the taxpayer on A1P1 is very high”.

Cathya Djanogly is a professional support lawyer in the Tax Disputes & Investigations team at Pinsent Masons LLP.

Recent Comments by woodstein

Is it time for the Sin Bin?
John Clark
March 22, 2018 at 21:58
March 23, 2018 at 00:41
Last two posts on my screen no other posts since ,
you two have chased everyone away?


Is it time for the Sin Bin?
John Clark
March 21, 2018 at 00:09
God help the poor deluded soul.
Going by some posts.

He does not appear to like, “ Innocent until proven guilty.”
“It is a basic tenet of British law that the accused are innocent until proven guilty, and the burden of proof is on the prosecution. “
(Presumption of innocence)
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 11.
Mind you:-
Ministry of Justice gets law ‘terribly wrong’ in its guide to courts.
It states:
“If you say you did not do a crime, you may have to go back to the Court on a different day, to show the Court you did not do the crime. This is called a trial.”10

Is it time for the Sin Bin?
March 18, 2018 at 13:56
If JJ continues to replicate my posts in full on his own site, I may have to consider introducing password protection.0412
 “He is openly soliciting praise for how clever he is and sit back with a self-satisfied and smug grin. The kind of guy who would attempt to inflict love bites on his mirror. Forgive me if I choose to demur.”


Is it time for the Sin Bin?
March 19, 2018 at 11:04
“I won’t sully this blog with a link and others might want to critique the depth of his hypocrisy which in parts is breath-taking – he actually accuses the Bears of being gullible for welcoming Craig Whyte into the club!!!”
 Note to “Radar” keep going, every article you pen knocks another 100,000 off your circulation.

Is it time for the Sin Bin?
Cluster One
March 17, 2018 at 09:41
Need to get image size right
Does this help above?
You have a PM.


SSL Certificates