David Cameron has to resign.

[PirateSmile]

If there is any evidence he has had even one penny of benefit from his father's dodgy tax arrangement, surely Cameron has to go?
He's saying 'it's a private matter' whilst presumably working on his notes for next month's conference on cracking down on such tax scams. You really couldn't make it up. He will no doubt plead ignorance but that's no defence. He is the PM. He should know he's benefiting from is essentially large scale fraud.
Are we really going to let him get away with this?

sleep suggest you read the Times today on IIP and other Trusts and inheritance tax planning. I would be extremely surprised if the Cameron family did not have such "ordinary tax planning" arrangements in place. Osborne definitely does as that is how his shares in the family business are held according to his disclosures.

FWIW I expected to read a mud slinging exercise at Tony Blair but the article very clearly explains the changes Labour made to limit the tax benefits of these trusts, (especially if they are distributing income as his appears to) and the extent to which he pays tax and contributes to charity. I have never ever been a Blairite but I have quite a bit more respect for his position having read all this. (the veil of secrecy is apparently to protect his privacy and to make it easier for him to negotiate / do business with those he deals with in less politically stable countries which again I can understand even if I don't unreservedly approve).

He should be sacked and not have the opportunity to resign purely off the state of this country down to him and his policies.

Going on the train to Manchester under the railway arches there are tent villages for the homeless, so whereas before you may have had the odd one or two sleeping rough there are actually tent villages. I was shocked to see how many there were.
I know this isn't relevant to dodgy daves tax situation but he needs to hang his head in shame

Arrested the country had an opportunity to sack him in 2015 and chose to keep him.

Sleep. This is probably "the tip of the iceberg" in terms of what funds are secreted where. Historically, he has benefited and are you seriously thinking he will not continue to do so, and his family, in future? That's what the money is doing there!. A nice little long term investment for the future. And David Cameron won't be retiring at 70 and retraining to do a less physically taxing job at 60. He will be very comfortably off, thank you. Now, some may argue that it's not his "fault" he was born into money/top private education etc but.....it's how he's used that privileged upbringing to collude in gaining from funds, spirited away by his father. My parents pay tax on their pension (which was already taxed at source) and will most likely be expected to use the proceeds of their home to pay for care, as they age. So, at least I won't need to worry about paying inheritance tax . No, Mr Cameron. We are NOT all in this together

I'm confused about how pension payments were 'taxed at source' Eliza? The incentive to save into a pension fund is the fact that is is tax deductible? (and lots has already been said here about where and how many pension funds are invested - ie often in a way to avoid or minimise tax). And I still maintain that you can't hold DC responsible for his parents' actions, added to which he hasn't avoided tax by having funds offshore. 'Probably the tip of the iceberg' is a bit vague in terms of facts!

IHT is hugely divisive wrt public opinion but I think that there are very few people who would not take perfectly legal measures to avoid it if they were in a position to have to worry about it. You sound like you are simply angry at DC for coming from a wealthy background - but the same can be said for many MP's, from all political persuasions. I totally get the anger and resentment about the ever-widening divide between rich and poor - it is morally wrong - but I don't think DC's individual wealth comes close to the level of those we really should be pointing the finger at such as press/media magnates for avoiding/evading taxes, this whole affair has just given DC haters the opportunity to shout about it.

Eliza by referring to DC's father "spiriting away" funds you display your ignorance Of the facts. As has been said ad nauseam, Blairmore was not some sort of personal piggy bank to hide money from the taxpayer. It was an investment fund. All returns from the fund (which were themselves not guaranteed, as is the case for all investments) were taxable in the country of receipt. All taxes were in fact paid. There was no loss to the HMRC who in fact certified the fund every year.

Wonder why this has fallen off the news agenda? Because there is no news here. Oh, apart from the fact that DC is richer than most of us. Well, blow me down. Oh and by the way did you rave against the careful tax management of Tony Benn's £5m estate? No, didn't think so.

Eliza22

Your parents' pension was not taxed at source. What bollocks!

The money that goes into a pension plan is gross of tax. Only when you withdraw (i.e. when you are retired) do you pay tax on it. To repeat - you only pay tax once.

Due-hard Tories much? No point in having a viewpoint then. You just ride rough shod over people who don't agree with all you say. You work all your life and pay your taxes. You draw your pension and get taxed again. Your savings are taxed. Nothing changes for me. DC is hugely privileged and what his ilk get away with is just wrong.

But he hasn't "got away" with anything, because he hasn't done anything remotely illegal !!!

Most viewpoints are enhanced by being based on facts Eliza. Makes them much more credible I find.

So is it 'about 30k' ... or 'about two million pounds'...? Either way, he should resign!

Ahem...the country chose him? Not so. 76% of the population didn't vote for Cameron- the fact that they got back with a paper-thin majority shows that- and our broken political system.
The Tories are privatising the NHS and the schools- nobody voted for that!

rose what evidence do you have about privitisation? About 60% of NHS money has gone to private companies since it began and 90% of NHS interactions are with private providers - again unchanged since the beginning. How much of the remaining 10% of interactions are they privatising?

I'll say again Eliza, pension income is previously untaxed earnings. And nobody is riding roughshod over your views, it's a discussion, people are trying to point out the facts rather than hypothesising and criticising DC 'and his ilk' by which you seem to mean anyone with a wealthy family who 'must' have achieved that position through dodgy means ? Can't you see how that comes across as simple prejudice?

Well, whatever the facts, Tory MPs have started the old NLP to minimise Cameron's activities. They are going on TV to lie that Cameron has been completely open and transparent at all times about these offshore investments when the actual truth is nothing of the sort. How can we believe what they say when we were only ever given a smokescreened 1/3rd of a story? Legal, illegal, moral or immoral, whatever Cameron's deals are, the public are being treated like irrelevant fools who need to be reminded not to question their "betters".

I wonder why corbyn's fees for speaking are put through an offshore company? Hmm. Where is the outrage for him? Or are some pigs more equal than others?

What a fuss about nothing! DC's dad organises his tax affairs legally, and thereby avoids (legitimately) paying some tax. Each of us do the same, when we contribute to an ISA. DC's dad dies and leaves DC £300,000. I haven't seen reports of what the dad's estate was worth, but the inference that the legacy to DC came from unlawful offshore tax planning gains is without foundation. Later, DC's mum (who inherited most of the dad's estate) gives DC an extra £200,000. So what? How many of us have received cash from parents, as adults? If over the small annual exemption such gifts are potentially exempt transfers, and free of IHT if the donor lives more than another 7 years. Otherwise taxable.

DC's only 'crime' seems to be that he has more money than most of us. On that basis, should Boris be strung up without trial?

As peggy crackers notes, Corbyn's arrangements are far more interesting, although undoubtedly legal. DC practises what he preaches; perhaps Corbyn doesn't?

Dc practises what he preaches

Don't think he does actually , him claiming DLA whilst calling other people ( who aren't millionaires who have no choice but to claim )they are scroungers according to him. He said people shouldn't claim benefits if they don't have to .
In fact all his tirades about people on benefits shows him to be the biggest hypocrite going.

DC had a seriously ill child (who died). If he received DLA (which isn't taxable) it was because he was entitled to it. He did nothing wrong there. There is a whiff of hypocrisy in his claiming benefit (when he is very well off by most people's lights) and saying "people shouldn't claim benefits if they don't have to." However, what he actually said earlier this year was that to some extent living off benefits was a lifestyle choice. His claiming DLA was not 'living off' benefits nor was it 'a lifetsyle choice.' His was an offensive comment, but one which, when taken with a look at the statistics, has an element of truth. Since benefits were cut, more people have come off benefits, which could suggest that their receiving benefits was 'a choice.'

DC's words were vague and wholly without detail, and it is difficult to make too much of them. I dislike this government and what it is doing in almost every respect, but ad hominem criticism on the basis of a vague (albeit inflammatory) comment isn't terribly helpful.

There is so much to criticise the government on over it's so-called austerity programme, but sadly the opposition haven't a clue how to do it and seem to spend their time name-calling and infighting. DC and crew must be clutching themselves with glee at having such a useless opposition while we, the people, will pay the price in the years to come.

I disagree with you on the statistics showing that his comments ' benefits were a lifestyle choice and since benefits have been cut more people have come off benefits ' implying more people are now are in work.

Yes more people are probably off benefits than ever before thanks to DC and have probably been sanctioned and or homeless or dead.

Or the could be among the 2 million extra employed people.

Ahhh....and they wonder why birthrates have plummeted .....