|
Author |
Topic Options
|
Posts: 5233
Posted: Fri May 24, 2013 8:55 pm
Jughead Jughead: $1: My situation has prevented me from fulfilling all of my tax obligations and I am truly sorry. I recognize that it is my responsibility and I will fulfil it directly and personally.
Interesting statement. Let's see now, he has not filed his taxes for several years now, and he owes $58097 in back taxes. His base salary as an MP is $160,000. First off, he clearly broke the law by not filing his taxes. Secondly, he earns a minimum of 160K per year. His back taxes equals $58097. His salary clearly demonstrates that he has the means to pay off his taxes, yet decided not to. Why is he still an MP? He clearly broke the law. Has anyone asked him to resign? Let's look at the honorable Nigel Wright. He has not broken any laws, he merely granted 90K of his own money to a friend in order to pay off a debt. There are no laws against offering your own money to an individual to pay off a debt. Yet he has resigned. Resigned for breaking no laws, while Mr. Benskin is still employed as an MP after not filing his taxes which by the way is punishable by jail time (1 month to 3 years). Those taxes are owing from before he was an MP. He was an artist at the time and had good years and bad years. I don't believe that excuses him from paying what he owes, but it makes it more understandable how he ended up in this situation. Mr. Wright did break the unwritten law that in politics( and journalism for that matter) the appearance of conflict of interest is as bad as actual conflict. As well, he very likely also broke the written laws regarding gifts to sitting senators.
|
Posted: Sat May 25, 2013 5:48 am
Big surprise! You have to search for this story on the CBC.
Quick! hide it!
|
OnTheIce
CKA Uber
Posts: 10666
Posted: Sat May 25, 2013 6:44 am
Where are all the usual suspects from the left, bitching and moaning as they do about any business avoiding paying taxes? Boots? Andy? Zip? Bueller?
Now we have someone just not paying any taxes and breaking the law and the left sits silent.
|
Posted: Sat May 25, 2013 7:04 am
OnTheIce OnTheIce: Where are all the usual suspects from the left, bitching and moaning as they do about any business avoiding paying taxes? Boots? Andy? Zip? Bueller?
Now we have someone just not paying any taxes and breaking the law and the left sits silent. Not a Tory..Not a Story.. I'm going to start a running thread for stories like these.
|
Posts: 35256
Posted: Sat May 25, 2013 7:10 am
OnTheIce OnTheIce: Where are all the usual suspects from the left, bitching and moaning as they do about any business avoiding paying taxes? Boots? Andy? Zip? Bueller?
Now we have someone just not paying any taxes and breaking the law and the left sits silent. But, but... the Cons and the Libs did it too.
|
Posts: 35256
Posted: Sat May 25, 2013 7:21 am
Shouldn't the party leadership do a background check before accepting someone to run as MP? Does he have a criminal record, has he ever been arrested, did he file his taxes and does he owe anything, has the media ever posted anything on him... Facebook page, his Twitter account... etc.
Mind you, we all know that the NDP never expected to get these people elected.
Last edited by raydan on Sat May 25, 2013 7:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
|
Posts: 11907
Posted: Sat May 25, 2013 7:26 am
raydan raydan: Mind you, we all know that the NDP never expected to get these people elected. How true. Just like when Rae and the NDP won in Ontario, they weren't remotely ready to run the province. But a little pre-election vetting might have helped them. This putz though, was making no effort to repay his taxes. The only time Revenue Canada, or other tax agencies, will approach your place of work for a garnishment of wages is when you repeatedly ignore them and not send any money to them. He's had 2 years to a least make a payment plan and chose instead to not pay.
|
Posts: 42160
Posted: Sat May 25, 2013 7:32 am
It is interesting that when the CBC discusses the Senatwhores involved in scandals they always seem to not mention the Liberal Senator...just go on about Jabba. Pam and Brazeneau
|
Posted: Sat May 25, 2013 7:44 am
ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog: It is interesting that when the CBC discusses the Senatwhores involved in scandals they always seem to not mention the Liberal Senator...just go on about Jabba. Pam and Brazeneau Oh you mean Marc? what's his face? The one who WAS a Liberal.
|
Posts: 35256
Posted: Sat May 25, 2013 7:47 am
2Cdo 2Cdo: raydan raydan: Mind you, we all know that the NDP never expected to get these people elected. How true. Just like when Rae and the NDP won in Ontario, they weren't remotely ready to run the province. But a little pre-election vetting might have helped them. This putz though, was making no effort to repay his taxes. The only time Revenue Canada, or other tax agencies, will approach your place of work for a garnishment of wages is when you repeatedly ignore them and not send any money to them. He's had 2 years to a least make a payment plan and chose instead to not pay. But on the plus side, that young MP and single mom, Ruth Ellen Brosseau seems to be fitting in and look's really serious about what she's doing.
|
Posted: Sat May 25, 2013 7:52 am
raydan raydan: 2Cdo 2Cdo: raydan raydan: Mind you, we all know that the NDP never expected to get these people elected. How true. Just like when Rae and the NDP won in Ontario, they weren't remotely ready to run the province. But a little pre-election vetting might have helped them. This putz though, was making no effort to repay his taxes. The only time Revenue Canada, or other tax agencies, will approach your place of work for a garnishment of wages is when you repeatedly ignore them and not send any money to them. He's had 2 years to a least make a payment plan and chose instead to not pay. But on the plus side, that young MP and single mom, Ruth Ellen Brosseau seems to be fitting in and look's really serious about what she's doing. You just like how she looks from behind...and the front.
|
Posts: 35256
Posted: Sat May 25, 2013 7:55 am
She's even getting better at speaking French.
|
Posted: Sat May 25, 2013 12:16 pm
Unsound Unsound: Jughead Jughead: $1: My situation has prevented me from fulfilling all of my tax obligations and I am truly sorry. I recognize that it is my responsibility and I will fulfil it directly and personally.
Interesting statement. Let's see now, he has not filed his taxes for several years now, and he owes $58097 in back taxes. His base salary as an MP is $160,000. First off, he clearly broke the law by not filing his taxes. Secondly, he earns a minimum of 160K per year. His back taxes equals $58097. His salary clearly demonstrates that he has the means to pay off his taxes, yet decided not to. Why is he still an MP? He clearly broke the law. Has anyone asked him to resign? Let's look at the honorable Nigel Wright. He has not broken any laws, he merely granted 90K of his own money to a friend in order to pay off a debt. There are no laws against offering your own money to an individual to pay off a debt. Yet he has resigned. Resigned for breaking no laws, while Mr. Benskin is still employed as an MP after not filing his taxes which by the way is punishable by jail time (1 month to 3 years). Those taxes are owing from before he was an MP. He was an artist at the time and had good years and bad years. I don't believe that excuses him from paying what he owes, but it makes it more understandable how he ended up in this situation. Mr. Wright did break the unwritten law that in politics( and journalism for that matter) the appearance of conflict of interest is as bad as actual conflict. As well, he very likely also broke the written laws regarding gifts to sitting senators. The rules are a little tight to say the least. I wonder how senators can host birthday parties, or even be invited to a Christmas party. If these rules are indeed true, they obviously would not be allowed to accept any personal gifts. Having rules like this really restricts their freedom at a personal level.
|
andyt
CKA Uber
Posts: 33492
Posted: Sat May 25, 2013 2:47 pm
Unsound Unsound: Jughead Jughead: $1: My situation has prevented me from fulfilling all of my tax obligations and I am truly sorry. I recognize that it is my responsibility and I will fulfil it directly and personally.
Interesting statement. Let's see now, he has not filed his taxes for several years now, and he owes $58097 in back taxes. His base salary as an MP is $160,000. First off, he clearly broke the law by not filing his taxes. Secondly, he earns a minimum of 160K per year. His back taxes equals $58097. His salary clearly demonstrates that he has the means to pay off his taxes, yet decided not to. Why is he still an MP? He clearly broke the law. Has anyone asked him to resign? Let's look at the honorable Nigel Wright. He has not broken any laws, he merely granted 90K of his own money to a friend in order to pay off a debt. There are no laws against offering your own money to an individual to pay off a debt. Yet he has resigned. Resigned for breaking no laws, while Mr. Benskin is still employed as an MP after not filing his taxes which by the way is punishable by jail time (1 month to 3 years). Those taxes are owing from before he was an MP. He was an artist at the time and had good years and bad years. I don't believe that excuses him from paying what he owes, but it makes it more understandable how he ended up in this situation. Mr. Wright did break the unwritten law that in politics( and journalism for that matter) the appearance of conflict of interest is as bad as actual conflict. As well, he very likely also broke the written laws regarding gifts to sitting senators. At the very least he should have filed tax returns. In fact you have a legal obligation to do so. If he couldn't pay, he could have tried for a payment program or even forgiveness. But not filing is a crime, and he should be charged. Also, I'm not sure how having a good and bad years is an excuse. Surely he was obligated to pay some taxes quarterly if he was self-employed. And he should set money aside in a good year for taxes owing, not blow it all, relying on a good year the next to be able to pay. I don't have any sympathy for this guy.
|
Posts: 5233
Posted: Sat May 25, 2013 3:41 pm
Jughead Jughead: The rules are a little tight to say the least. I wonder how senators can host birthday parties, or even be invited to a Christmas party. If these rules are indeed true, they obviously would not be allowed to accept any personal gifts. Having rules like this really restricts their freedom at a personal level. You don't see a difference between giving a buddy a nice bottle of wine or buying him a good dinner for his birthday, and writing a $90, 000 cheque for someone who's in the middle of a scandal regarding improper expenses?
|
|
Page 2 of 4
|
[ 49 posts ] |
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 64 guests |
|
|