Panama Papers
-
<a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://i.stuff.co.nz/business/79814716/Panama-Papers-Green-Party-donor-listed-in-offshore-leaks'>http://i.stuff.co.nz/business/79814716/Panama-Papers-Green-Party-donor-listed-in-offshore-leaks</a><br><br>
Awkward -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="jegga" data-cid="578534" data-time="1462856315">
<div>
<p><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://i.stuff.co.nz/business/79814716/Panama-Papers-Green-Party-donor-listed-in-offshore-leaks'>http://i.stuff.co.nz/business/79814716/Panama-Papers-Green-Party-donor-listed-in-offshore-leaks</a><br><br>
Awkward</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Yet another reason why Shaw is a retard...</p>
<p> </p>
<p>"It's not whether someone's got a foreign trust, it's whether they're doing anything illegitimate such as tax avoidance, money laundering of anything like that," he said.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Since when is tax avoidance illegitimate ?</p> -
<p>Now Greenpeace have been named in the as using the trusts </p>
<p> </p>
<p><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/nodes/121744'>https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/nodes/121744</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p><img src="http://www.torontomazda3.ca/forum/images/smilies/facepalm.gif" alt="facepalm.gif"></p> -
<p>am sure they had legit reasons for using one unlike anyone that put thier money in a NZ trust.</p>
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Baron Silas Greenback" data-cid="578538" data-time="1462858237">
<div>
<p>Yet another reason why Shaw is a retard...</p>
<p> </p>
<p>"It's not whether someone's got a foreign trust, it's whether they're doing anything illegitimate such as tax avoidance, money laundering of anything like that," he said.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><em><strong>Since when is tax avoidance illegitimate ?</strong></em></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>That pisses me off so much in the press - when they whine about tax <strong>avoidance</strong>. Every company on the actively & agressively tries to avoid tax. Its completely legal and will get you in zero trouble. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Anyone reporting that is either an idiot who doesn't know the difference between evasion & avoidance, or more probably, working on the idea that their audience doesn't.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="gollum" data-cid="578614" data-time="1462871024">
<div>
<p>That pisses me off so much in the press - when they whine about tax <strong>avoidance</strong>. Every company on the actively & agressively tries to avoid tax. Its completely legal and will get you in zero trouble. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Anyone reporting that is either an idiot who doesn't know the difference between evasion & avoidance, or more probably, working on the idea that their audience doesn't.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>It was the co leader of the Green party... so reassuring when someone who is supposedly the 'face of business' for the Greens doesnt have basic knowledge.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote">
<p> </p>
<p><span style="color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12.8px;">The penalty for taking an abusive tax position is 100% of the resulting tax shortfall. The purpose of the penalty is to deter taxpayers from entering into arrangements for the main purpose of avoiding tax.</span></p>
<p style="font-size:12.8px;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;">An abusive tax position is one that:</p>
<ul><li>is based on an unacceptable tax position, and</li>
<li>has tax avoidance as a dominant purpose.</li>
</ul><p style="font-size:12.8px;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;">For an abusive tax position shortfall penalty to be imposed on tax positions taken before 1 April 2008, the tax shortfall must be more than $20,000.</p>
<p style="font-size:12.8px;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;"><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.ird.govt.nz/how-to/debt/penalties/shortfall-penalties/sf-penalty-abusive.html'>http://www.ird.govt.nz/how-to/debt/penalties/shortfall-penalties/sf-penalty-abusive.html</a></p>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>I don't believe you can apply a blanket ruling to the foreign trusts as each situation would have to be judged on it's merits, but you can get in trouble for tax avoidance in the form of penalties (just not a criminal conviction). </p> -
<p>John Key kicked out of Parliament...Greens/Greenpeace demand apology.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/79871399/key-thrown-out-of-parliament-over-panama-papers-row.html'>http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/79871399/key-thrown-out-of-parliament-over-panama-papers-row.html</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Key thrown out of Parliament over Panama Papers row </p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div> </div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p> </p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p><span>JO MOIR</span></p>
<p> </p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div><img src="http://www.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/b/a/6/c/q/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1bjx5z.png/1462935348708.jpg" title="" alt="1462935348708.jpg"><div><span>CHRISTEL YARDLEY / FAIRFAX NZ</span></div>
<div>
<p>John Key refuses to apologise over Greenpeace claims.</p>
</div>
<div> </div>
</div>
<p>John Key has been kicked out of the House by the Speaker for the first time since being elected Prime Minister.</p>
<p>Key was made to leave the debating chamber after he continued to talk over top of Speaker David Carter after he rose to his feet.</p>
<p>"Obviously I just didn't see him, didn't hear him, I was in the middle of an answer," he said after leaving the House.</p>
<p>"I was talking to James Shaw but you know (the Speaker) makes the call."</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Key said he had "never been kicked out as Prime Minister before."</p>
<p>Key had been in heated debate with Opposition politicians over his claim Greenpeace was listed in the Panama Papers data base.</p>
<p>Greenpeace called it a sham reference.</p>
<p>Key was answering a question from Greens co-leader James Shaw about why the Prime Minister wouldn't apologise to Greenpeace for wrongly implicating them in the Panama Papers.</p>
<div>
<div>
<div> </div>
</div>
</div>
<p>"I don't like the fact that they're there but they are there so in what way have I misrepresented them?" Key said.</p>
<p>"I think the member should do this, I think he should get on his feet and say, John, on Saturday night I went on TV..."</p>
<p>At that point Carter cut off Key's microphone and rose to his feet and demanded order but Key continued to shout across the House at Shaw.</p>
<p>Carter said the same thing had happened yesterday and he had given Key a "fair warning" and he was to be treated "no differently to anyone else in this chamber".</p>
<p>He then told the Prime Minister to leave.</p>
<p>Before heading into the house, Key told waiting media he would not apologise for mentioning Greenpeace. </p>
<p>"No, look it's a statement of fact actually that Greenpeace are in the database - they are a beneficiary, as you can see, of the exodus trust. </p>
<p>"And I think what it goes to prove actually is that a lot of New Zealanders are having their name dragged across the TV set every night, who are unwittingly implicated simply by going about and doing their things. </p>
<p>"They have no knowledge of what's happening at all."</p>
<p>That was the "real danger" of the database. </p>
<p>"[Greenpeace] are in the database, I'm not making it up. I mean, you go into the database, you type in Greenpeace and they come up. </p>
<p>"And that's not the only issue, I mean last night we saw a situation where Deborah Pead's name was right across the TV set and she's done absolutely nothing wrong. </p>
<p>"I mean that's essentially my message to New Zealanders; there's some serious issues for us to consider out of the Panama Papers, the Government takes the issue seriously," he said.</p>
<p>It was a "tragic sullying" of the names of some people. </p> -
<p>Good on him for not apologising. So sick of 'demands for apologies'. You should never apologise unless you are actually... sorry.</p>
-
<p>or wrong....Greens/Labour cant have it both ways, they want to drag peoples names out all over, but someone on their side of the fence will get caught up too.</p>
-
<p>And I feel easier about a faceless corporate getting named than small businessman and families.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>But I dont like the naming of people or companies that are doing nothing wrong at all.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="JC" data-cid="578772" data-time="1462944610">
<div>
<p>Apparently Mojo Mathers was outed by John Key as having a foreign trust and her response was that it's not true, she has a UK trust, which aren't foreign.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Not sure that's exactly what she said.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://blog.greens.org.nz/2016/05/11/q-when-is-a-trust-not-a-foreign-trust-a-lamledra-a-family-home-in-cornwall/'>https://blog.greens.org.nz/2016/05/11/q-when-is-a-trust-not-a-foreign-trust-a-lamledra-a-family-home-in-cornwall/</a></p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Nepia" data-cid="578782" data-time="1462945952">
<div>
<p>Not sure that's exactly what she said.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://blog.greens.org.nz/2016/05/11/q-when-is-a-trust-not-a-foreign-trust-a-lamledra-a-family-home-in-cornwall/'>https://blog.greens.org.nz/2016/05/11/q-when-is-a-trust-not-a-foreign-trust-a-lamledra-a-family-home-in-cornwall/</a></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>It pretty much is what she said.</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p style="font-size:12px;color:rgb(119,119,119);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;text-align:justify;"><em>On top of the Greenpeace allegations Key also took a swipe at Green Party MP Mojo Mathers, who along with National MP Paul Foster-Bell, has been linked to a foreign trust.</em></p>
<p style="font-size:12px;color:rgb(119,119,119);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;text-align:justify;"><em>During Question Time Key told Shaw to “just turn around and ask his colleague, Mojo Mathers, (who) has a foreign trustâ€.</em></p>
<p style="font-size:12px;color:rgb(119,119,119);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;text-align:justify;"><em>Mathers sought leave in the House to dispute Key’s claims and clarified she was a “beneficiary of a UK-based family trustâ€.</em></p>
<p style="font-size:12px;color:rgb(119,119,119);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;text-align:justify;"> </p>
<p style="font-size:12px;color:rgb(119,119,119);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;text-align:justify;"><strong><em>“It is not a trust that I own, and it is not a foreign trust,†she told the House.</em></strong></p>
<p style="font-size:12px;color:rgb(119,119,119);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;text-align:justify;"> </p>
<p>I think its time we ran a pool on how much longer Andrew Little has before he gets rolled. The man is such a colossal fuckwit, I see his press secretary resigned today. What a thankless task that would have been.</p>
<p> </p>
<p style="font-size:12px;color:rgb(119,119,119);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;text-align:justify;"><em>Labour leader Andrew Little later defended Mathers and said Key’s comments were “dumb†and “totally tastelessâ€.</em></p>
<p style="font-size:12px;color:rgb(119,119,119);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;text-align:justify;"><em>“If he was a man he would stand up and apologise, he didn’t do that.â€</em></p>
<p style="font-size:12px;color:rgb(119,119,119);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;text-align:justify;"><em>“She should never have been put in that position. She’s the only deaf member in the House and this is New Zealand sign language week. It was just totally tasteless,†he said.</em></p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="jegga" data-cid="578787" data-time="1462946713">
<div>
<p>It pretty much is what she said.</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p style="color:rgb(119,119,119);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;text-align:justify;"><em>On top of the Greenpeace allegations Key also took a swipe at Green Party MP Mojo Mathers, who along with National MP Paul Foster-Bell, has been linked to a foreign trust.</em></p>
<p style="color:rgb(119,119,119);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;text-align:justify;"><em>During Question Time Key told Shaw to “just turn around and ask his colleague, Mojo Mathers, (who) has a foreign trustâ€.</em></p>
<p style="color:rgb(119,119,119);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;text-align:justify;"><em>Mathers sought leave in the House to dispute Key’s claims and clarified she was a “beneficiary of a UK-based family trustâ€.</em></p>
<p style="color:rgb(119,119,119);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;text-align:justify;"> </p>
<p style="color:rgb(119,119,119);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;text-align:justify;"><strong><em>“It is not a trust that I own, and it is not a foreign trust,†she told the House.</em></strong></p>
<p style="color:rgb(119,119,119);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;text-align:justify;"> </p>
<p>I think its time we ran a pool on how much longer Andrew Little has before he gets rolled. The man is such a colossal fuckwit, I see his press secretary resigned today. What a thankless task that would have been.</p>
<p> </p>
<p style="color:rgb(119,119,119);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;text-align:justify;"><em>Labour leader Andrew Little later defended Mathers and said Key’s comments were “dumb†and “totally tastelessâ€.</em></p>
<p style="color:rgb(119,119,119);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;text-align:justify;"><em>“If he was a man he would stand up and apologise, he didn’t do that.â€</em></p>
<p style="color:rgb(119,119,119);font-family:Arial, sans-serif;text-align:justify;"><em>“She should never have been put in that position. She’s the only deaf member in the House and this is New Zealand sign language week. It was just totally tasteless,†he said.</em></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Ok, I'd only read that blog post as her response and not what she said in Parliament, but, don't you think this just getting into semantics? The type of foreign trust that's being discussed here (whether true or not) are markedly different than being a beneficiary of an historical family trust (set up in the country that the family was based in at the time and presumably most of the beneficiaries still are).</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Nepia" data-cid="578798" data-time="1462947721">
<div>
<p>Ok, I'd only read that blog post as her response and not what she said in Parliament, but, don't you think this just getting into semantics? The type of foreign trust that's being discussed here (whether true or not) are markedly different than being a beneficiary of an historical family trust (set up in the country that the family was based in at the time and presumably most of the beneficiaries still are).</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>The majority of trusts are pretty benign I'd say but leftards have gone all out smearing pretty much every trust, so fuck her. They have made so much out of NZ being mentioned 61000 times in 11 million , 61000 times in 11 fucking million ffs documents, if they had any perspective at all they'd see how pathetic it is to be making so much out of something like that. Its time leftards realised that the majority of NZ see Nicky Hagar as a creep and as credible as Ian Wishart and Cameron Slater and should stop fapping themselves dry every time he goes public with some allegations he's twisted out of proportion and made to look as awful as possible . I saw Patrick Gower on tv trying to pretend this is actually as bigger deal as he desperately wants it to be and I felt embarrassed for him.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>This was a pretty interesting perspective <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://bowalleyroad.blogspot.co.nz/2016/05/the-number-of-beast-new-zealand-lefts.html'>http://bowalleyroad.blogspot.co.nz/2016/05/the-number-of-beast-new-zealand-lefts.html</a></p> -
<p>I hope nobody is surprised that the wrong end of the stick is being portrayed in the NZ media. This is exactly the sort of thing which should create a huge outcry when looked at on the surface. But if you scratch that surface, then all of a sudden a dose of reality hits you.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I was trying to explain this whole thing to my parents in my simple terms, and the best I could come up with was this. Without global tax structure, everything would be much more expensive, and certain governments would be much more wealthy. On the face of it, it seems like tax evasion. But do you think your fuel, drilled in saudi arabia, refined in khazakstahn, sold wholesale in Chicago, then shipped via a panama registered ship through dubai, singapore, sydney before hitting NZ soil would cost $1.xx a litre without them? </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Or what about your superfund which returned 8% last year. Happy for this to return only 5% once all taxes are applied relative to all countries where paper profit was made? Even though you've already paid your tax on this?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I'm not saying the system is perfect, but it's amazing the amount of tax treaties / avoidance schemes which are setup to actually benefit everybody, not just the rich.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Nepia" data-cid="578798" data-time="1462947721">
<div>
<p>Ok, I'd only read that blog post as her response and not what she said in Parliament, but, don't you think this just getting into semantics? The type of foreign trust that's being discussed here (whether true or not) are markedly different than being a beneficiary of an historical family trust (set up in the country that the family was based in at the time and presumably most of the beneficiaries still are).</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Semantics?? No. Factually correct, it is however smear and insinuation. Painting a picture of wrong doing with a stupidly broad brush at the innocent. WHich sums up the entire panama papers fiasco by Opposition parties, Hager and the main stream media in NZ...</p>
<p> </p>
<p>which was Keys point.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>And he made it well.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Nepia" data-cid="578798" data-time="1462947721"><p>Ok, I'd only read that blog post as her response and not what she said in Parliament, but, don't you think this just getting into semantics? The type of foreign trust that's being discussed here (whether true or not) are markedly different than being a beneficiary of an historical family trust (set up in the country that the family was based in at the time and presumably most of the beneficiaries still are).</p></blockquote>
<br>
The point is that everywhere is foreign if you're somewhere else. There are choices as to where trusts reside and just as Mojo's family chose to have theirs reside in the UK some people in the UK (and elsewhere) choose to have theirs in NZ. I don't have a problem with her choice, just with her party's selectivity in what constitutes a dodgy trust vs a legitimate one. -
<p><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/4it0om/new_zealand_prime_minister_john_key_thrown_out_of/'>https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/4it0om/new_zealand_prime_minister_john_key_thrown_out_of/</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Got us onto the front page of Reddit... tho the US hasn't woken up yet. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>The converstation is right on the money tho -</p>
<p> </p>
<p>"Besides his fucked up and rude hair pulling BS, the first gif isn't endearing, it<strong><em>'s quite sad that a grown ass family man can't hammer a rucking nail.</em></strong> Really distances him from the blue collar crowd, makes it seem like he might simply pay for someone to do simple tasks for him."</p>
<p>"Its a bloody embarrassment to all Kiwi blokes."</p>