Today, George Osborne said:
“I regard tax evasion and, indeed, aggressive tax avoidance as morally repugnant.”
Well, yes. But what is “aggressive” tax avoidance, as opposed to ‘non-aggressive’? Does this mean that the latter is absolutely morally sound? I really don’t understand. If ‘evasion’ is the illegal failure to pay a tax bill, or to declare taxable income, does ‘avoidance’, then, refer to those legal activities which lessen that liability? So, what distinguishes such activities as aggressive and non-aggressive? Is it the amount avoided? Or whether or not one employs others to increase that amount? (And does a written-off tax bill get down-graded to ‘avoidance’?)
Oh for simple beauty! At Keyhaven yesterday, this little egret, Egretta garzetta, already sporting its summer plumes…
Lee Turnpenny 