Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AMA

I’m a tax adviser to millionaires and billionaires. AMA.

134 replies

LetsTalkTax · 02/01/2024 16:24

I advise rich people on their tax affairs. With all the posts today of people outraged by Vinted being taxable, I thought it might be a good time to do an AMA and dispel some of the myths posted about the tax that rich people don’t pay.

OP posts:
LetsTalkTax · 02/01/2024 21:35

Portakalkedi · 02/01/2024 21:28

Are there ways us ordinary non- rich people can improve our tax liability?eg, I have worked all my life and am a good saver, but really pissed off that I have to pay tax on interest when that money was already taxed.

Sadly not. I know most of the tricks of the trade, and pay 45% on my income, and I’m taxed on interest.

I have a pension and an ISA and that’s it!

OP posts:
LetsTalkTax · 02/01/2024 21:37

Berringtons · 02/01/2024 20:58

You are “maximising the reliefs that are made purposefully available to them by government.” So the people who move client money into off shore tax havens are in a different department.

And of course, “there are no loopholes” because technically it’s all legal.

Just silly word games. Everybody knows what’s going on. The ultra wealthy haven’t moved $2 trillion to the British Virgin Islands because they want the money to enjoy the nice beaches.

A client had just paid me £50,000 to explain why his wealth is more tax efficiently kept in the UK than moved into a low tax jurisdiction. I looked at everything. Someone should really teach them how to better write those “loopholes”!

OP posts:
Anglosaxonhelp · 02/01/2024 21:42

LetsTalkTax · 02/01/2024 20:11

It's complicated, but basically it has a sense of where your true home is (the exam teaching is your domicile is where you intend to be buried). It's really hard to lose domicile, and so if she has any intention to return to India at any point in the future then she will be Indian domiciled.

However once she's lived here for 17 years, she will be deemed UK domicile and the beneficial rules will cease to apply to her. She will lose the deemed domicile if she leaves for at least 3 years.

So on the basis she's living here temporarily for her husband's career and she intends to return to India, and has not been here for 17 years, she's not UK domiciled. Once she's been here 17 years she loses the tax benefits anyway even though she's still strictly non-dom.

The 17 year period could be shorter, which is probably what Labour will do.

You are slightly out of date here. Deemed domicile (for income tax, capital gains tax and inheritance tax) now occurs after 15 years of UK residence out of the last 20 years.

LetsTalkTax · 02/01/2024 21:45

BillStickersWillBeProsocuted · 02/01/2024 20:49

Your view seems to assume the law isn't written by millionaires who stand to gain from "loopholes" they add for their own benefit

Most reliefs have good commercial purposes.

Inheritance tax relief on businesses and farms - stops them being sold for pieces after death to fund a tax bill.

Inheritance tax relief on heritage assets - only for those who can afford heritage assets, but keeps them in the UK for cultural purposes.

Tax efficient investments that reduce tax liabilities - hugely important for risky start ups trying to attract capital.

Domicile rules - encourage mega rich oligarchs and sheiks to visit and spend significant cash in a UK economy.

There’s more anti-avoidance and loophole closers than there are reliefs (ok, I’ve never counted but most reliefs have at least one targeted anti avoidance rule).

Only 4% of the population pay IHT at all, the whole tax exists only to be paid by the ultra wealthy. So any reliefs will benefit them by definition.

Anyone can incorporate a sole trade for the tax benefits, but they only become truly beneficial if you leave all your money in the company. Anyone can do that… but unfortunately most of us need to spend it.

Yes the rich benefit from reliefs the most, but that’s because they have more complex affairs and higher tax bills than the average man and so have more scope to claim them.

But please, enlighten me on the loopholes you think the ultra wealthy are exploiting - and who these ultra wealthy are. Me and my colleagues have spoken with probably all of the Times rich list at one time or another, and I’d say the majority of those aren’t benefitting from these “loopholes”.

In fact there’s literally a rule that if HMRC think what you are doing is legal but abusive of the rules, they can ignore the rules and tax you as they think it should be taxed anyway!

OP posts:
LetsTalkTax · 02/01/2024 21:47

Anglosaxonhelp · 02/01/2024 21:42

You are slightly out of date here. Deemed domicile (for income tax, capital gains tax and inheritance tax) now occurs after 15 years of UK residence out of the last 20 years.

As is the hazard of responding on technical queries while watching Netflix 😂 I promise I have closer attention to detail 9-5!

OP posts:
Talkinpeace · 02/01/2024 21:49

@chickenpieandchips
I make January less stressful by having a policy of double fees for all records delivered after New Years Eve.
Thus my January workload is either here and relaxed or lucrative (or both)

grumpytoddler1 · 02/01/2024 22:47

I am also a tax advisor. Hello to all the other tax advisors! My personal pet hate is when people complain that rich people can 'just move it all offshore'. UK resident and domiciled individuals have not been able to avoid tax by doing that for decades. Not sure why anyone thinks HMRC haven't already dealt with that.

Soporalt · 02/01/2024 23:58

Also until quite recently a tax advisor to HNWIs. Why does the general public still think that rich people use "loopholes" to avoid tax, when successive governments of all colours have eliminated any such possibility? It's a combination of lazy journalism and MPs continuing to go on about closing loopholes without specifying what they might be. (They don't exist any more.)

There are still a number of dodgy tax avoidance outfits out there selling schemes they say have been "approved" by leading counsel and/or HMRC. Any proper advisor will be able to explain why the scheme won't work and the stress and expense of it will be something you'll always regret.

Also there is something called Professional Conduct in Relation to Tax that most of the professional bodies (lawyers, accountants etc) have signed up to. NO legitimate advisor will go near this stuff.

Berringtons · 03/01/2024 08:37

“A client had just paid me £50,000 to explain why his wealth is more tax efficiently kept in the UK than moved into a low tax jurisdiction. I looked at everything. Someone should really teach them how to better write those ‘loopholes’!”

Clearly your client was not Douglass Barrowman or Michelle Mone. Can you explain how/why they lived in a £20 million house in Belgravia but it was actually owned by an offshore trust in the BVI?

Not a ‘loophole’ of course. Just a ‘tax efficient arrangement’.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread