| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 135126 | 2013-09-28 20:36:00 | Family trusts | FoxyMX (5) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1354541 | 2013-10-08 04:21:00 | Digby, I am curious. How do these people use a trust to avoid (or evade) their fair share of tax? Two very common examples: www.stuff.co.nz www.stuff.co.nz |
FoxyMX (5) | ||
| 1354542 | 2013-10-08 04:40:00 | Foxy, the use of trusts by taxpayers such as Penny and Hooper, to EVADE tax as detailed in your attachments, has been found to be illegal. I would not like to be a taxpayer trying to get away with the same dodge. They will be caught. I am still waiting to hear of a LEGAL way to avoid tax by using a trust. | Richard (739) | ||
| 1354543 | 2013-10-08 08:17:00 | A bit OT but there has been a shift in tax terminology which annoys me . For decades throughout the Commonwealth and the USA, avoidance of tax has been lawful = reducing your tax liability . Tax evasion on the other hand was unlawful . Avoid ok - evade - not ok . Nice and simple . Then NZ tax law changed (1993 Act I think) and avoidance became a subset of evasion . Yes I know, its just words but when there has been a longstanding definition there is no benefit in turning that definition on its head . The law relies upon words being defined and carefully used . Rant . . . mutter . . . mutter . . . . :) |
Winston001 (3612) | ||
| 1354544 | 2013-10-08 08:32:00 | As for Penny and Hooper, the Court said there was nothing illegal about the structures they set up. The original purpose was to limit the doctors personal liability in case they were ever sued. At a later time some advisor pointed out possible tax benefits and thus their income was split. I'd have been very leery of the disparity if asked because there was an earlier court win to IRD against a dentist who underpaid himself. Aside from that, I agree with Richard. Trusts exist to protect assets, not for tax avoidance. Tax minimisation - yes that is possible sometimes. |
Winston001 (3612) | ||
| 1354545 | 2013-10-08 08:48:00 | Aside from that, I agree with Richard. Trusts exist to protect assets, not for tax avoidance. Tax minimisation - yes that is possible sometimes. To protect from the trustees wrong doings, dishonesty or bad business practices perhaps. Or is that a bit harsh Winston? |
plod (107) | ||
| 1 2 3 | |||||