Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
onlyliveonce

Tax

47 posts in this topic

If you're not paying tax on your proceeds ....

- Don't put down £110k in cash on a flat

- Don't leave 72k in cash in your flat

otherwise it's possible you may, at some point, share a cell with Donna Astuaits.

Sent down today for failing to pay £120k in tax earned as a WG.

16 months probably serving 8, but probably of equal concern to her and her family, is a very public outing of her line of work.

Seems a bit harsh when a 48k remortgage would have brought her up to date.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blimey! *resists temptation to make friends with her to find out how she managed to earn so much in current economic climate*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish I earnt that much!! How on earth did she do that? And why on earth did she do that?!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they don't catch you earning it, they'll catch you spending it!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2170899/High-class-hooker-went-game-pay-Masters-course-fees-jailed-failing-pay-120-000-tax.html

Yes, she should pay tax like the rest of us but I feel rather uncomfortable reading this.

Is there any need for this to be publicised?

I've felt for a long time that the sex industry needs regulating (more to protect girls than any other reason) but this doesn't sit easy with me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.dailymail...20-000-tax.html

Yes, she should pay tax like the rest of us but I feel rather uncomfortable reading this.

Is there any need for this to be publicised?

I've felt for a long time that the sex industry needs regulating (more to protect girls than any other reason) but this doesn't sit easy with me.

this is nothing to do with industry regulation.

it is simple tax evasion. which is illegal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"A high-class escort was jailed for 16 months today for failing to pay £120,000 in tax.

Donna Asutaits, 29, made more than £300,000 between 2005 and 2007"......

http://www.dailymail...20-000-tax.html

Thread already posted about it below.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is nothing to do with industry regulation.

it is simple tax evasion. which is illegal.

Yes I agree but maybe we can evolve to some sort of recognition for what these ladies do rather than mix it all up with morals. It's all to seedy and corruptible but in it's purest form it is something that is recognisable and deserves legitimicy. In short, you cannot blame the WG for the failings and disparity of the punter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a ridiculously harsh sentence, there are thugs out there who beat people up for fun who have criminal records that would fill a phone book yet avoid prison. MP's habitually avoid paying tax by employing clever accountants.

Ok, she may be out in 8 months, but those 8 months will ruin her! Surely, all the judge had to order was she pay the money owed to the inland revenue and if he felt punishment was warranted, giver her a community service order or at worst a suspended sentence.

I hope her lawyers lodge an appeal agains this sentence, it seems unduly harsh. As far as i can see, it was a first offence.

Poor girl ,she deserves support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did anyone shed a tear when Lester Piggott was jailed for tax evasion; I think not

Merely because this is a lady who supplies the services we purchase does not entitle her to avoid paying her dues.

This is a question of right and wrong - she was wrong to avoid paying her taxes and any subsequent punishment is deserved

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.dailymail...20-000-tax.html

Yes, she should pay tax like the rest of us but I feel rather uncomfortable reading this.

Is there any need for this to be publicised?

I've felt for a long time that the sex industry needs regulating (more to protect girls than any other reason) but this doesn't sit easy with me.

Do a Jimmy Carr legally or pay your tax is my way of looking at it. If at all smart people should really consider the possible consequences of not paying their tax, its hardly a secret that the tax man wants paying.

It makes lurid rag headlines or print sadly which is why it got the publicity it did, i have sympathy on this aspect of this case because no doubt a number of other people got done for the same but it wasnt in the paper in their cases or not as prominently.

Until there is a grown up debate on all aspects of prostitution free of femi-nazi agendas, journalistic stereotypes and biased politicians this outing will no doubt continue. This woman just gives these people more ammunition to use to continue their agenda in my view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's all to seedy and corruptible but in it's purest form it is something that is recognisable and deserves legitimicy. In short, you cannot blame the WG for the failings and disparity of the punter.

Being a prostitute is legitimate. It is though illegal not to pay the relevant tax. I can't see how you can blame the punters for that.

She was pretty stupid to pay a £110,000 deposit in cash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being a prostitute is legitimate. It is though illegal not to pay the relevant tax. I can't see how you can blame the punters for that.

She was pretty stupid to pay a £110,000 deposit in cash.

You cant but because of the failings of the punter it cannot be fully legitimised. To legitimise rather than legalise rids it of the seedy corrupt element. WG's don't advertise to tempt adultery they advertise a product that is legitimite. If we are not legitimite it is not their fault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The proceeds of crime hearing to recover the unpaid tax (including VAT as providing escort services is a variable transaction) will probably result in all of her assets being seized plus her personal bankruptcy.

Pressure on public finances, budget cuts and the need to replace income and corporation tax no longer available from failed businesses will result in HMRC taking any opportunity to prosecute tax avoiders from any industry. The sex industry is hitherto generally untapped resource which is nearing the top of the list

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You cant but because of the failings of the punter it cannot be fully legitimised. To legitimise rather than legalise rids it of the seedy corrupt element. WG's don't advertise to tempt adultery they advertise a product that is legitimite. If we are not legitimite it is not their fault.

I'm quite prepared to wager that the only reason that she didn't pay the tax was because she thought that she'd never get found out. I doubt that immorality, illegitimacy or shame came into it.

If she'd paid a modest amount of tax and not paid her flat deposit in cash then she'd have probably got away with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm quite prepared to wager that the only reason that she didn't pay the tax was because she thought that she'd never get found out. I doubt that immorality, illegitimacy or shame came into it.

If she'd paid a modest amount of tax and not paid her flat deposit in cash then she'd have probably got away with it.

Isn't it true that certain business's are now obligated to notify the authorities if they recieve a certain amount in cash ? In the same way that if you overheard two passengers on a bus discussing possible terrorist activities it's your duty to inform the police of what you've heard .? I think the cash amount is 5,000 .

My accountant told me this , but he is from Pakistan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't it true that certain business's are now obligated to notify the authorities if they recieve a certain amount in cash ? In the same way that if you overheard two passengers on a bus discussing possible terrorist activities it's your duty to inform the police of what you've heard .? I think the cash amount is 5,000 .

No. Some countries have a specified limit above which transactions have to be reported. This just results in criminals splitting up large payments into smaller ones.

To avoid this flaw the UK cunningly requires the reporting to SOCA of all "suspicious" transactions, of whatever value - could be £5,000, but equally could be £5. Unfortunately giving useful guidance about what constitutes "suspicious" is a bit tricky, so this approach also has its drawbacks.

More details here:

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/mlr/your-role/suspicious-transaction.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know a young lady who went to Westminster Universty, but unfortunately it wasn't Donna Asutaits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't it true that certain business's are now obligated to notify the authorities if they recieve a certain amount in cash ? In the same way that if you overheard two passengers on a bus discussing possible terrorist activities it's your duty to inform the police of what you've heard .? I think the cash amount is 5,000 .

For banks there are no notifiable amounts. It's entirely up to the bank whether they refuse to accept the cash or decide to report it. There's no "de minimis" disclosure limit apart from the current minimum threshold amount of £250 under section 339A POCA.

Solicitors, accountants, tax advisers and insolvency practitioners who suspect that their clients have engaged in tax evasion or other criminal conduct from which a benefit has been obtained, are required to report by making a Suspicious Activity Disclosure.

Others subject to the money laundering regulations include financial institutions, credit institutions, estate agents, high value dealers (who accept cash equivalent to €15,000 or more for goods sold), and casinos.- Money Laundering Regs. 2007.

Unfortunately it's a lot more complicated than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies for any confusion, I have merged three threads which were all on this topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You cant but because of the failings of the punter it cannot be fully legitimised. To legitimise rather than legalise rids it of the seedy corrupt element. WG's don't advertise to tempt adultery they advertise a product that is legitimite. If we are not legitimite it is not their fault.

Failings of the media, femi-nazis and politicians in my view, certainly not of punters who just want paid for sex. This woman not paying tax was 100% her own personal responsibility and she got caught bang to rights, completely down to her as i clearly see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no "de minimis" disclosure limit apart from the current minimum threshold amount of £250 under section 339A POCA.

Isn't that the threshold for allowable transactions rather than disclosure? i.e. You can allow sub £250 transactions on a suspicious account to go ahead without getting official permission, but you still have to report your suspicions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0