Posts Tagged ‘Pearson’

Private Eye on More Tax Avoiding Press Barons

March 18, 2016

I found this feature on in Private Eye’s issue for the 17th-30th April 2015 on how Yevgeny Lebedev, the former owner of the Independent, the Barclay twins, who own the Telegraph and Lord Rothermere all use their non-dom tax status to avoid paying British tax.

Non-Dom Press Barons
Street of Sham

So consuming was the Tory press’ rage at Ed Miliband’s plan to make Russian oligarchs and gulf petro-billionaires in London liable for the same taxes as British citizens, its hacks forgot to the declare their interest.

“London backlash over Ed’s non-dom attack,” boomed the front-page of the London Evening Standard, as if a mob had descended on Labour HQ to defend London’s much-loved oligarchs and hedge fund managers. “Attacking non-doms could backfire on us,” continued an editorial inside. Sarah Sands, the Standard’s Uriah Heepish editor, did not risk her career by saying who the “us” included – namely her boss, Standard proprietor Evgeny Lebedev, the Russian who last year dodged the Eye’s repeated questions of his own domicile.

Silence infected the Telegraph too, where not one of the reporters who warned that Labour’s “cataclysmic” decision would drive away “tens of thousands of entrepreneurs and business leaders” mentioned that their owners, the weirdo Barclay twins, reside in Monaco and the Channel Islands to avoid British tax.

Instead they quoted James Hender, head of private wealth at Saffery Champness accountants, who warned that the rich may leave. The Telegraph didn’t tell its reads that Hender boasts of his long experience ensuring that “the most tax efficient strategies are adopted for non-UK, situs assets” for his non-dom clients.

It was the same at the Mail, which failed to declare that its owner, 4th Viscount Rothermere, is treated by the tax authorities as a non-dom. And at Sky, political editor Faisal Islam reported that “Baltic Exchange boss Jeremy Penn slams Labour non-dom plans” without declaring that his owner, Rupert Murdoch, does not pay UK tax and that Penn acts for super-rich shipping owners.

Jolyon Maugham QC, who has advised Labour and the Tories on tax reform, tells the Eye that any reader sill enough to believe the Tory press and tax avoidance industry should look at what they said in 2008, when Labour introduced the first levies on non-doms.

Back then the Mail then said the central London property market would crash as non-doms sold up and moved to Switzerland. In fact, between Labour introducing the levy and 2014, prime central London property prices rose 41 per cent. At the end of 2014, Knightsbridge estate agent W.A. Ellis said 54 per cent of sales were to overseas buyers.

The Mail was equally certain the City would suffer. On 8 February 2008 it cried that the levy “risks the City’s future”. The British Banking Association warned of “a devastating blow”. The Telegraph of 12 February 2008 said that “the country’s wealthiest individuals are being bombarded with leaflets and letters explaining how easy it would be to relocate to Switzerland, Monaco and a host of other countries”. Not to be outdone, Mike Warburton, senior tax partner at accountants Grant Thornton, said the levy was the “final straw”. If a word of this had been true, there would be no non-doms left for Miliband to tax. As it is, there are 115,000 because, as Maugham says, London remains “a very nice place to live, if you’re wealthy. And that won’t change.” Or as the Financial Times put it: “The many advantages of London as a financial centre do not dissolve simply because of a change in a hitherto generous tax treatment of resident non domiciles.”

The pink ‘un has only recently realised the iniquity of the non-dom rule, with an editorial last month calling for its abolition. Editor Lionel Barber modestly claims some credit for Miliband’s stance. But as editor for almost a decade, why was he so late to the party? Surely not because, until 2013, FT owner Pearson was run by US-born Dame Marjorie Scardino, who would certainly have qualified for non-dom status and whose London flat, the Eye revealed, was owned via an offshore company?

So there you are. Fleet Street’s extremely rich proprietors, with the exception of the Financial Times, take the view that, in the words of the ‘Mayflower Madam’, the brothel owner arrested for tax evasion in New York now over a decade ago, paying tax is only for the ‘little people’. And they have no qualms about getting rich, while shifting the tax burden on to the poor and demanding low wages and zero-hours contracts. All the while proudly declaiming their patriotism, like the Sun, owned by Rupert Murdoch, resident in America. So much for real patriotism.

From 2013: Gove’s Connections to Murdoch’s Online Education Business

April 19, 2014

Commend him for announcing the Savile investigation

Michael Gove, former Murdoch journalist and supporter of Murdoch’s plans to expand into British education. And privatise it.

This is from Private Eye for 1st – 14th November 2014.

More on the close relationship between education secretary Michael Gove, former Times journalist, and the US online education business owned by his old boss, Rupert Murdoch.

Gove responded to the recent one-day strike by British teachers by going to Boston on one of his frequent fact-finding trips to learn from US schools policy. The highpoint was the keynote speech he gave to the annual conference of the Foundation for Excellence in Education, a “reform” charity founded by Jeb Bush, brother of former US president George “Dubya”. The event was funded by Rupert Murdoch’s online education firm, Amplify, a regular supporter of Bush events.

Amplify wants to replace trained teachers with online material supplied by Murdoch’s News Corp; but its computer systems have already failed in some schools. Nevertheless it is still well connected – not least to gove. Before the hacking scandal broke, Murdoch and his staff, including Amplify boss Joel Klein, had regular meetings with the education secretary to discuss setting up News International schools in the UK.

Shortly before Gove spoke in Boston this month, Bush’s foundation was accused of being “a dating service for corporations selling education products to school chiefs”. American liberal group Progress Now challenged its tax-free status, arguing that the foundation was breaking tax rules by paying for school administrators to have private “VIP” meetings with its for-profit sponsors. The foundation described these meetings as “scholarships” for education official so they did not have to be disclosed on tax forms.

The Foundation also receives funds from Financial Times publisher Pearson, which has a lucrative sideline running tests and exams for schools. Other sponsors of the conference at which Gove spoke included “K-12”, a US company that replaces state schools with “virtual” schools, where pupils don’t see teachers but sit at a computer either at home or in a lab. How long before Gove proposes cyber schools in the UK?

Gove is thus partly pushing the privatisation of the British school system for the profit of his old employer, Rupert Murdoch. Once again Murdoch is seen standing behind and influencing government policy. As for Virtual schools, I can remember that my old university was experimenting with the idea of recording some lectures and making them available over the Net in a form of Virtual distance learning following experiments with the idea in some Spanish universities. I have a feeling the idea has had to be abandoned simply because it doesn’t work. Not that this seems to have got through to Gove and the Americans, like K-12. Proper, qualified teachers cannot be replaced, and Gove attempt to replace and downgrade them will lead to a disastrous decline in educational standards. But as private firms stand to profit, and the kids affected are only working and lower middle class, he certainly won’t be worried.