-
2 additional points (I'm sure that other aspects are there, just to be uncovered):
1 - He never bothered to declare his offshore holdings in the Parliamentary Members interests register prior to becoming PM in 2010, contra to parliamentary rules
2 - He held bearer shares, an investment device his government has since abolishedbut the biggest uncovered point is: how is his father's offshore estate now being administered, and by what tax avoidant mechanism does Cameron and family benefit, because they have, they do, and they will.
-
Don't forget the letter he personal wrote to Donal Tusk to try and stop prying in to trust funds.
http://uk.businessinsider.com/david-camerons-offshore-trust-letter-2016-4 -
Like you I have a few questions coming from a similar angle - to understand not to condone.
Illegal money laundering and embezzlement aside if I earned then saved £100 in UK I would pay tax via my savings account. If instead I put it off shore in Panama I would be avoiding the tax I pay on my savings in my savings account. Is that actually illegal?
Clearly for my £100 it's not worth doing but how much do you have to have offshore for it to be worth it?
Or is it people are moving the money from source before any tax whatsoever is paid in the UK? I.e. my local chippy taking my £3.50 for large chips and mushy peas and sticking it in an envelope and sending it to Panama?
I think what I'm trying tosay is I haven't a fucking clue.
Normally I don't struggle with shit like this so please humour me for a minute (I was the one explaining how off shore tax havens work to my other half) and I'm not playing devil's advocate, I'm merely trying to arm myself with correct facts for discussion (read: shouting at right wing wankers I work with) purposes.
Cameron sold his shares which totalled £30k (laughable but we can come back to that) in 2010. He paid UK tax on the £30k he made. All above board. So far everything he's admitted to have done/we can prove(?) suggests he hasn't done anything illegal, just immoral and the exact opposite of what he's been saying he's trying to stop. That can't be the end of the story though, can it? What further questions should we be asking, and what information can we glean/assume from what he have got?