On 22/06/2012 22:44, himself wrote:

Bertie Wooster wrote:
Judith wrote:

It has now emerged that Sir Chris Hoy, Britain's multiple Olympic
gold medal winning cyclist, has also received a loan from his own
company.
The latest accounts of Hoy's Trackstars Ltd state: "At 30 June
2011 Sir Chris Hoy owed the company £324,771 (2010, £898 – owed
from the company). This amount was unsecured and interest free
with no fixed repayment terms. During the year dividends totalling
£130,000 (2010, £440,000) were paid to Sir Chris Hoy."
To put that in English, in 2010 Hoy received £440,000 in
dividends, which attract taxes not hugely dissimilar from salary.
But while he received about £455,000 from the company during 2011,
£325,000 came via the open-ended company loan, which attracts
minimal tax. It is not clear from the accounts if Hoy's move,
which is legal, resulted in a tax saving.

Having seen Hoy's disclosure, one tax expert who asked not to be
named, said: "It is likely that such arrangements could come
under attack under the 'disguised remuneration' rules recently
introduced by the Treasury."

In a statement, Hoy's agent, Rob Woodhouse, said: "Trackstars Ltd
is a UK registered taxpaying company established for legitimate
commercial purposes. Neither [Hoy] nor the company participates
in any 'disguised remuneration' scheme.
"[He] has not received any lottery funding since October 2008. He
has continued his promotional obligations as a member of the
governing bodies' lottery funded world class programmes."
Woodhouse declined to explain why Hoy had taken out the loan in
the same year as his dividend was slashed by an almost identical
figure.
He also would not say if Hoy had repaid any of the loan, or if the
Olympian had made a tax saving. Hoy's accountants, Edinburgh-based
Jeffrey Crawford & Co, did not return phone calls.
Directors' loans started to become known as a tax avoidance tactic
after a number of Premier League footballers used such schemes.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/jun/22/chris-hoy-received-loan-firm

I wonder if Plankwit uses a similar scheme to "hardly pay any tax at
all" on his £100,000 - £250,000 income.

Enough to make anyone on P.A.Y.E sick to the stomach.
One reason why not a penny of mine is donated to the lottery.

Not sure what the connection to the lottery is.

I was once questioned by the inland revenue how I accounted for a 56p
exhaust bracket.

You were unlucky.

These schemes for paying no tax or little tax have been popping up in the
last couple of years and HMRC are addressing them. It is not credible that an
earner gets only about £5,000 a year to live on, plus "loans" which will
theoretically have to be repaid at a later date. For a start, why would an
earner voluntarily move from a situation where they are earning a substantial
income to a situation where they are getting a bare subsistence wage and
"loans" UNLESS they were doing so for a reason not directly connected with
the operation of their "business" but directly connected with tax issues?

We can be sure that HMRC are now firmly on the track of these sca... schemes...

And that even though there are legitimate tax advantages to operating as a
(theoretical) company rather than as a[n] (actual) sole trader, those tax
advantages are not intended to stretch to paying no tax or a derisorily-small
amount of tax.

Hoy sounds like he could be another Carr in the making, and as I'm sure we'll
all agree, a bit more celebrity financial hubris need not be a bad thing in
straitened times.