Morrissey Central "I DON’T KNOW WHY MY MOTHER IS DEAD" (August 23, 2020)

I DON’T KNOW WHY MY MOTHER IS DEAD

“Following a stroke, her recovery was remarkable.
She had three extensive head-to-toe examinations by the NHS who could find nothing amiss.
Four days following the third all-clear examination I was told that my mother had three weeks to live.
Nine days later she had withered and died without any attempt by the NHS to save her life.
Once the NHS waves you off with paracetamol, get ready to meet your maker.
The official cause of my mother’s death was not the trendy and unquestionable “covid” - but, instead, cancer of the gallbladder … which had gone undetected by the NHS during their three thorough investigations.
How I wish to all gods that my mother had expressed no faith in the NHS.
She might still be alive today.”

Morrissey
23 August 2020.


Untitled_b47und.jpg




Media item:
 
J

Janice

Guest
Im sorry to break this to you all. You’re arguing the toss about Morrissey’s business affairs and in all honesty, none of you have got a clue
You might have some knowledge on the taxing system and/or companies house but, Jesus; you’ve no idea what his finance arrangements are.
:crazy:
 

NealCassidy

FREE SPEECH #FBPB
to make it very very simple for you as a very basic example: (but in reality is more complex than this) but just for illustrative purposes:

Payments to Mr M in a year = £1 million (just using this as an example, I am not saying that is what it is)

As a sole trader income tax and National Insurance on that using each level of tax banding would be £435,000

With a limited company the corp tax would be £190,000 but that is a high level and in reality it would be a lot less because a percentage of the £1 million would be stated as expenses so that would not be taxed under corporation tax. As a very rough guide if £400k was stated as expenses for financial services, office costs, transport, crew, lighting, venue hire, artwork, hotels, insurance etc etc then that would reduce the corp tax to £114,000 and this is very conservative. If he pays people salaries and other costs it would also be different so it is just an example and a very simplistic one.

Then he could just pay himself £40k a year salary which would stay below high rate tax and then if he wanted more he could take that when he needs it as a dividend but he could also keep those below the high rate tax over the year. Any money he doesn't need to spend can remain within the company as retained profit and not be subjected to income tax which is not possible as a sole trader.

The tax benefits of working within the limited company are significant aside from the limited protection it guarantees. No person with this kind of wealth is going to set up a sole trader model that could put all of his personal assets at the reach of debtors. Never in a million years.
No you don’t need to make it simple for me because I know more about it than you - go and do some more study. Why the hell are you typing out all this ignorant crap? Who are you? Anonymous tax-Googler ‘oh I made a mistake but it’s only terminology’ piss off!
 

NealCassidy

FREE SPEECH #FBPB
Im sorry to break this to you all. You’re arguing the toss about Morrissey’s business affairs and in all honesty, none of you have got a clue
You might have some knowledge on the taxing system and/or companies house but, Jesus; you’ve no idea what his finance arrangements are.
:crazy:
I agree but the resident anonymous tax expert appears to know it all
 

NealCassidy

FREE SPEECH #FBPB
you keep banging on and clinging to terminology. This isnt a legal document. It is referred to by many names. I am not quoting the HMRC page. Shows I am not getting this stuff from Google doesn't it if I am making mistakes with the actual name of it?

I have referred to it as a dual tax agreement, a dual tax treaty.

You are saying that doesn't exist and it is called a double taxation agreement!

Wow

You do realise that dual and double amount to the same thing?

Doh
You really are grasping now aren't you.
Actually you accidentally demonstrated you’re not such an expert, in fact quite an amateur, which you don’t like. Don’t cry.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Im sorry to break this to you all. You’re arguing the toss about Morrissey’s business affairs and in all honesty, none of you have got a clue
You might have some knowledge on the taxing system and/or companies house but, Jesus; you’ve no idea what his finance arrangements are.
:crazy:

A certain amount of that is true but this isn't really about what it is but what it isn't when people on here stated he pays UK tax when there is not the case. He is not a sole trader, he is not tax resident in the UK and has no company ties in the UK anymore since they were all at one time very visible and all were closed down and none have come back. He has stated himself his main home is in Switzerland so everything points to him having financial structures running out of Switzerland and possibly Ireland but not in the UK. As for exact details of the financial arrangements well no one would be dumb enough to post that information on a public site would they and it isn't the point of the discussion.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
No you don’t need to make it simple for me because I know more about it than you - go and do some more study. Why the hell are you typing out all this ignorant crap? Who are you? Anonymous tax-Googler ‘oh I made a mistake but it’s only terminology’ piss off!

You don't give up do you.

How have you proved you know more than me?

I don't need to study thanks. I run a multi national company and I understand it fully thanks.

What part of what I posted is not correct? You haven't managed to point anything out that is not correct so far so please clarify what you mean by that?

Are you still really going on about the fact I called something a dual tax agreement instead of a double tax agreement?

That is a little tenuous wouldn't you say? If I was getting it from google I would surely have got the name correct. Because it is coming from my knowledge I said dual tax which is exactly the same as double? Did you go to school? Dual , Double, hello.

Is there anything else you have to prove I am incorrect apart from using the word dual instead if double?

Really. Hold the front page. He said dual, not double.

Lol
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Actually you accidentally demonstrated you’re not such an expert, in fact quite an amateur, which you don’t like. Don’t cry.

ok since you seem to state you know more about all this

Please explain to me why Morrissey would have closed down all his companies in the UK, as listed and then in your view opened up a new company where he is not registered meaning he can not be a person with significant control and therefore have no control of the company, have less than 25% voting rights and less than 25% share holding?

Please explain why that would be of any use to him whatsoever?

You state what I have said is not true so then let's approach it from another angle. Why would he do what you suggest he has done?

It makes no sense at all and would reduce his control of his own money and the amount of money he would have control of.

But we are all listening to your "I know better than you" reasoning.
 

Nerak

Reverse Ferret
wow. you are talking rubbish again.

the whole point of a Dual Tax Treaty is that someone can not pay tax twice between two countries. It is the whole reason why Apple get away with making huge amounts of money of sales in the UK but dont pay tax on them because they are paid in Ireland.

relief tax application! You really should stop trying to understand this stuff by googling. It has nothing to do with "more for estates".

Straight from the HMRC detail on the Withholding Tax for you for the countries we are talking about:



[TD valign="top"]WHT%[/TD]

[TD valign="top"] Royalties [/TD]



[TD valign="top"]Non-treaty territories[/TD]
[TD valign="top"]20[/TD]


[TD valign="top"]Ireland, Republic of[/TD]
[TD valign="top"]0[/TD]


[TD valign="top"]Switzerland[/TD]
[TD valign="top"]0[/TD]


[TD valign="top"]United States[/TD]
[TD valign="top"]0[/TD]


[TD valign="top"]Cayman Islands[/TD]
[TD valign="top"]20[/TD]


So payments to a country with no Dual Tax Treaty will have 20% withheld on royalties.

Ireland because it has a DTT with the UK gets 0 withheld as does Switzerland and the USA.

I added in Cayman Islands as an example of a country often historically used as a tax haven and with no DTT so that has 20% withheld.

What your posts show is the whole style of how you get your information not only within this discussion on tax but with all your postings when you state things as facts but in reality they are far from facts. You misinform on here constantly and base alll your stated facts on snippets of googling and opinion or what you would like the fact to be.

You apply for it. And it depends.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
You apply for it. And it depends.

wrong. I've even posted you the stated rules around WHT and DDT countries and you still say "it depends"

No one applies for exemptions because of a DDT. It is automatic. No one can withhold royalty taxes from a payment going to a country with a DDT. There is no "it depends" about it and no one has to apply for anything.

As I said before it is how Apple operate every day. It is how Amazon operate, how Netflix operate and why people don't like it. You now state the absolute rules as stated by HMRC are now not the case and "it depends".

Sure
 

NealCassidy

FREE SPEECH #FBPB
ok since you seem to state you know more about all this

Please explain to me why Morrissey would have closed down all his companies in the UK, as listed and then in your view opened up a new company where he is not registered meaning he can not be a person with significant control and therefore have no control of the company, have less than 25% voting rights and less than 25% share holding?

Please explain why that would be of any use to him whatsoever?

You state what I have said is not true so then let's approach it from another angle. Why would he do what you suggest he has done?

It makes no sense at all and would reduce his control of his own money and the amount of money he would have control of.

But we are all listening to your "I know better than you" reasoning.
“A new company where he is not registered” - you don’t know what you’re taking about. You run a multi national company? Great - sounds brilliant. I’ve already told you it’s easy to get around PSC rules but you dive right back in to it which is why it’s clear you are just tying to remember what someone else has told you and can’t respond yourself. I won’t be responding to your ignorance any more but do enjoy trotting our your wisdom lord sugar.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
“A new company where he is not registered” - you don’t know what you’re taking about. You run a multi national company? Great - sounds brilliant. I’ve already told you it’s easy to get around PSC rules but you dive right back in to it which is why it’s clear you are just tying to remember what someone else has told you and can’t respond yourself. I won’t be responding to your ignorance any more but do enjoy trotting our your wisdom lord sugar.

You are avoiding the question.

Why would Morrissey close down his companies and set up a new company where he is invisible in the UK when his main home is in Switzerland where it is far cheaper and easier to run a company?

It is not easy to get around PSC rules but please enlighten us? You are talking nonsense. You can't do anything in the UK anymore without being visible unless you have an investor status to someone else''s company and have no control of it or its money.

PSC rules were brought it to stop exactly what you say is possible. It is to prevent criminal activity, funding of terrorism and tax evasion. But you say it is easy. Sure.

Please tell us how?

To have control over a company in the UK and the money within it you have to be registered as a PSC. Since around 2015-2017 there is no way around this. It is through these rules that they have tracked down many people who were hidden from view but owners of companies.

He is not registered as a PSC and he is not registered as a director. He does not exist in any UK legal company.

But that aside. Again, why would he close companies down that he has always used and were always visible including the accounts and then open something where he has no control and is hidden?

That would be very suspicious and for the most part very difficult to set up, not easy as you suggest.

But setting up a company in Switzerland where he states his main home is would to you be wrong.

Very very strange. Running a company out of Switzerland is not illegal and not contrary to any HMRC legislation and is a very common model for many artists and celebs. What I don't get is why you think that is so not likely in comparison to running a hidden non controlling share of a UK company when his main home isn't even in the UK.

You make no sense
 

Nerak

Reverse Ferret
wrong. I've even posted you the stated rules around WHT and DDT countries and you still say "it depends"

No one applies for exemptions because of a DDT. It is automatic. No one can withhold royalty taxes from a payment going to a country with a DDT. There is no "it depends" about it and no one has to apply for anything.

As I said before it is how Apple operate every day. It is how Amazon operate, how Netflix operate and why people don't like it. You now state the absolute rules as stated by HMRC are now not the case and "it depends".

Sure

It's not automatic.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
It's not automatic.

what are you talking about. No one can withhold tax for royalties that are being paid to a country with a DTT.

It would be illegal to do so.

The tax will be paid in the country it is being paid to, it won't be paid in the UK and then again in the destination country.

It is the whole point of a DT Treaty. It is set in stone.
 
Top Bottom