Not a tax haven.

[Tweek]

I don't think Code99 is quite right there. Happy to be corrected. But this has gone through several ammendments since 2015 and just needs to include people who hold the position of senior managing officials. Not beneficial owners.

[gettafa]

 

The loss of the green screens:

 

All the shutters came down amidst sighs of relief from Athol Street and environs. And no one batted an eyelid.

 

 

And why should it? The information is available to the people that matter.

And who do you prefer the people that matter be?

I don't prefer anyone other than those who have a legitimate legal need to know.

I'm involved in two companies on the Isle of Man. And it's fuck all to do with you (or any other nosey twat with nothing better to do). I'm quite happy for it to be something to do with the relevant authorities though. More than happy.

 

 

OK, but you still haven't said who you would be (more) than happy to see this information. "Relevant authorities" and "legitimate legal need to know" becomes a bit subjective.

 

Maybe it's time our dictator was to show the UK the way and have Isle of Man go the Norway model on transparency.

Edited April 11, 2016 by gettafa

[notwell]

 

 

The loss of the green screens:

 

All the shutters came down amidst sighs of relief from Athol Street and environs. And no one batted an eyelid.

 

 

And why should it? The information is available to the people that matter.

And who do you prefer the people that matter be?

I don't prefer anyone other than those who have a legitimate legal need to know.

I'm involved in two companies on the Isle of Man. And it's fuck all to do with you (or any other nosey twat with nothing better to do). I'm quite happy for it to be something to do with the relevant authorities though. More than happy.

 

 

OK, but you still haven't said who you would be (more) than happy to see this information. "Relevant authorities" and "legitimate legal need to know" becomes a bit subjective.

 

Maybe it's time our dictator was to show the UK the way and have Isle of Man go the Norway model on transparency.

 

jes' you've got some agenda over this "transparency" lark.

 

Next you'll be asking for banks to reveal the name of the account holder and their account number to the general public in the interest of "transparency".

 

Just to make it clear - the relevant authorities are those that have a legal interest in having to know the details of a companies ownership. Those being the police and HMRC and any relevant tax authority with a need for the information.

There isn't anything subjective about it. There is no need to you or me or the next man to know who owns XYZ Limited. Nothing more than people being nosey bastards. Or worse still criminals in these shit hole countries trawling data bases looking for locals with assets so they can extort them. Again, it's none of their business and they shouldn't be able to find out anything.

[manxie44]

 

 

 

The loss of the green screens:

 

All the shutters came down amidst sighs of relief from Athol Street and environs. And no one batted an eyelid.

 

 

 

And why should it? The information is available to the people that matter.

 

And who do you prefer the people that matter be?

I don't prefer anyone other than those who have a legitimate legal need to know.

I'm involved in two companies on the Isle of Man. And it's fuck all to do with you (or any other nosey twat with nothing better to do). I'm quite happy for it to be something to do with the relevant authorities though. More than happy.

OK, but you still haven't said who you would be (more) than happy to see this information. "Relevant authorities" and "legitimate legal need to know" becomes a bit subjective.

 

Maybe it's time our dictator was to show the UK the way and have Isle of Man go the Norway model on transparency.

jes' you've got some agenda over this "transparency" lark.

 

Next you'll be asking for banks to reveal the name of the account holder and their account number to the general public in the interest of "transparency".

 

Just to make it clear - the relevant authorities are those that have a legal interest in having to know the details of a companies ownership. Those being the police and HMRC and any relevant tax authority with a need for the information.

 

There isn't anything subjective about it. There is no need to you or me or the next man to know who owns XYZ Limited. Nothing more than people being nosey bastards. Or worse still criminals in these shit hole countries trawling data bases looking for locals with assets so they can extort them. Again, it's none of their business and they shouldn't be able to find out anything.

These sound like the words of someone who has something to hide , or supports those that do. Those who don't pay the Tax they should are very low on the human scale, in that they plainly care little that many places can't afford to educate their children properly of treat their sick ( ie The Isle of Man ). They are nauseous individuals if not legally , then morally

[oldmanxfella]

Cheers, Bernie.

[Andy Onchan]

 

 

 

 

The loss of the green screens:

 

All the shutters came down amidst sighs of relief from Athol Street and environs. And no one batted an eyelid.

 

 

And why should it? The information is available to the people that matter.

And who do you prefer the people that matter be?

I don't prefer anyone other than those who have a legitimate legal need to know.

I'm involved in two companies on the Isle of Man. And it's fuck all to do with you (or any other nosey twat with nothing better to do). I'm quite happy for it to be something to do with the relevant authorities though. More than happy.

OK, but you still haven't said who you would be (more) than happy to see this information. "Relevant authorities" and "legitimate legal need to know" becomes a bit subjective.

 

Maybe it's time our dictator was to show the UK the way and have Isle of Man go the Norway model on transparency.

jes' you've got some agenda over this "transparency" lark.

 

Next you'll be asking for banks to reveal the name of the account holder and their account number to the general public in the interest of "transparency".

 

Just to make it clear - the relevant authorities are those that have a legal interest in having to know the details of a companies ownership. Those being the police and HMRC and any relevant tax authority with a need for the information.

 

There isn't anything subjective about it. There is no need to you or me or the next man to know who owns XYZ Limited. Nothing more than people being nosey bastards. Or worse still criminals in these shit hole countries trawling data bases looking for locals with assets so they can extort them. Again, it's none of their business and they shouldn't be able to find out anything.

These sound like the words of someone who has something to hide , or supports those that do. Those who don't pay the Tax they should are very low on the human scale, in that they plainly care little that many places can't afford to educate their children properly of treat their sick ( ie The Isle of Man ). They are nauseous individuals if not legally , then morally

 

 

Grow up.

[notwell]

Manxie44/Bernie

 

stop being a cock.

 

I think I've made it perfectly clear that I'm a supporter of people's rights to arrange their affairs as they see fit provided it is within the law.

 

I've no interest in moral bullshit.

 

It's idiots like you that feed this misconception that all tax avoidance must be unlawful and hiding something.

 

It isn't

 

I assume you'd prefer your bank details not to be available to the public. It's your right to have that data protected. If the tax office or the law require access to your bank details they can get them. Which appears fair to me.

 

There is no reason at all to show to all and sundry confidential information.

[dilligaf]

Manxie44/Bernie

 

stop being a cock.

 

I think I've made it perfectly clear that I'm a supporter of people's rights to arrange their affairs as they see fit provided it is within the law.

 

I've no interest in moral bullshit.

 

It's idiots like you that feed this misconception that all tax avoidance must be unlawful and hiding something.

 

It isn't

 

I assume you'd prefer your bank details not to be available to the public. It's your right to have that data protected. If the tax office or the law require access to your bank details they can get them. Which appears fair to me.

 

There is no reason at all to show to all and sundry confidential information.

 

I reckon that's a bit too hard for him to understand. It does not fit into his bent view of everything life.

[thesultanofsheight]

Wooley - Isn't this the register that Allan has announced is being set up in any case?

 

I am not sure if it is. According to the article on IOM Today: "The island has so far resisted having a public register of beneficial ownership, which would mean anyone anywhere could find out the identities of Manx company owners.Only law enforcers would have such access".

 

My view is that this is not the same as the requirements of the 4th AML EU Directive. Unless I am mistaken, Mr Bell does not want this register to be available to banks and journalists...? The EU does want to make this register accessible to by these groups.

 

He is being deliberately vague I think. You are right in that the pressure is being applied in relation to a public register so that every nosy parker in the world can rummage through it looking for global conspiracies. I dont think anything Bell has said (yet) relates to a public register though. The tide will probably start turning on that soon though. It will be interesting to see how far this will run as the whole debate is a mess which seems to be more directed at Cameron himself by those pushing an exit from the EU. I'm not sure they care that much about tax avoidance per see other than situationally it's something they can use to light a fire under Cameron in pursuit of their own ends.

[Monkey boy]

Manxie44/Bernie

 

stop being a cock.

 

I think I've made it perfectly clear that I'm a supporter of people's rights to arrange their affairs as they see fit provided it is within the law.

 

I've no interest in moral bullshit.

 

It's idiots like you that feed this misconception that all tax avoidance must be unlawful and hiding something.

 

It isn't

 

I assume you'd prefer your bank details not to be available to the public. It's your right to have that data protected. If the tax office or the law require access to your bank details they can get them. Which appears fair to me.

 

There is no reason at all to show to all and sundry confidential information.

You're not comparing like for like. A more correct comparison would be Manxie 44 not wanting anyone to know who he worked for, which, unless he was a dodgy fucker, would not be something he'd want to keep secret.

[manxie44]

Manxie44/Bernie

stop being a cock.

I think I've made it perfectly clear that I'm a supporter of people's rights to arrange their affairs as they see fit provided it is within the law.

I've no interest in moral bullshit.

It's idiots like you that feed this misconception that all tax avoidance must be unlawful and hiding something.

It isn't

I assume you'd prefer your bank details not to be available to the public. It's your right to have that data protected. If the tax office or the law require access to your bank details they can get them. Which appears fair to me.

There is no reason at all to show to all and sundry confidential information.

What a sad and abusive individual you are. However I don't intend to lower myself to your dubious standards. Suffice to say, the net is closing ,it's to be hoped it will shut up the bad tempered waffle of someone plainly under presure. Goodbye. To you and those like you.

[notwell]

I'm not under any pressure I can assure you.

 

It just bores me when clueless people like you waffle on about things they've no real understanding of.

[notwell]

 

Manxie44/Bernie

 

stop being a cock.

 

I think I've made it perfectly clear that I'm a supporter of people's rights to arrange their affairs as they see fit provided it is within the law.

 

I've no interest in moral bullshit.

 

It's idiots like you that feed this misconception that all tax avoidance must be unlawful and hiding something.

 

It isn't

 

I assume you'd prefer your bank details not to be available to the public. It's your right to have that data protected. If the tax office or the law require access to your bank details they can get them. Which appears fair to me.

 

There is no reason at all to show to all and sundry confidential information.

You're not comparing like for like. A more correct comparison would be Manxie 44 not wanting anyone to know who he worked for, which, unless he was a dodgy fucker, would not be something he'd want to keep secret.

You are talking crap in all fairness.

 

Where someone works has nothing in common with owning or being part of the ownership structure of a company.

 

If you have a company that is your business. Not mine or anyone else's. And the only people it need concern is company registry, the tax authority and the police if needed.

 

Why should I know about your company ownership?

[oldmanxfella]

 

Manxie44/Bernie

stop being a cock.

I think I've made it perfectly clear that I'm a supporter of people's rights to arrange their affairs as they see fit provided it is within the law.

I've no interest in moral bullshit.

It's idiots like you that feed this misconception that all tax avoidance must be unlawful and hiding something.

It isn't

I assume you'd prefer your bank details not to be available to the public. It's your right to have that data protected. If the tax office or the law require access to your bank details they can get them. Which appears fair to me.

There is no reason at all to show to all and sundry confidential information.

What a sad and abusive individual you are. However I don't intend to lower myself to your dubious standards. Suffice to say, the net is closing ,it's to be hoped it will shut up the bad tempered waffle of someone plainly under presure. Goodbye. To you and those like you.

Cheers.

[Monkey boy]

Well why shouldn't you? We're talking about the beneficial ownership of a company, ie. who benefits from it financially, why is it so unreasonable to know that? Judging by the last couple of week, it's is undoubtedly in the public interest so why not? I don't keep the company who I am a financial beneficiary of (ie. who I work for) a secret, I can't imagine why anyone would want to unless they were up to no good.