Haves and have nots - Lorraine Kelly

You'd think she would pretend to be a person that at least lets her guests get a word in edgewise.
Too busy simpering.
I've never liked her.

Can’t stand Lorraine Kelly - even more so!

I always liked Lorraine Kelly, she seemed one of the genuine down to earth ones.

She claimed that when she's on TV she's merely playing a role of herself (Huh?) and is therefor a “theatrical artist” thus making her agent fees tax-deductible

Many years ago we met a lovely couple from Glasgow when we were on holiday and spent most evenings with them.
They knew Lorraine Kelly but could not stand her and said then, all those years ago, that her whole persona is an act.
I remember them mimicking her: 'I'm just an ordinary wee girl from Glasgow'!

They have been proved right by LK herself.

Disagree about footballers' earnings totally, it is obscene and a terrible exemple to our young people.

Meant to add but obviously a very canny Scot!

I know someone who worked with her- he said she was a tough fake b***h- who was difficult to work with-and demanding. And as a scot, her stupid silly voice is patronizing to the real Scottish women, she is playing a part of someone who cares.

I've only seen a few if LK's shows as I don't really watch daytime tv. The show seems to have a very lightweight rota of gossip on soaps, reality shows, fashion, cooking etc and Ms Kelly thinks everything is " so, so, wonderful"
She seems a pleasant enough woman but just boring.

I don’t like the woman, anyone who is so agreeable with everyone has to be false..........and that voice. Yuk.

I totally agree with you Paddyann . What a luxury to be able to negotiate with the tax man about how much tax you pay and when you pay it ! I have just had a £3.96 penalty (it’s the principle not the amount ) added to my PAYE /NI account for the December payment going through 2 days late. My DH was very poorly in hospital at the time and I totally forgot to press the “send” button . A genuine mistake . Still the LK’s of this world don’t have to worry about stuff like that do they?

Gillybob why was her bill allowed to get to that amount? We run a business too and if your tax returns aren't in on time or the accountant sends the cheque late there will be a fine .Our accountant has sent ours late and HE paid the fine as he knew it was down to him .Its like Ecclestone paying a fraction of the hundreds of millions he owed ,as if he was doing them a favour by paying instead of being jailed for not paying .

If I've got this right, they were taxing her as an employee of ITV. She argued that she wasn't employed by them but was self employed and the judge agreed with her. I'm not clever enough to understand the ins and outs but do you think she was wrong to argue her case or should she just have paid what she didn't feel she owed just because she is rich?

I agree with the main thrust of your argument pen50, especially the point you made about your local sandwich shop and VAT. On a similar note, George Osborne putting up stamp duty has not resulted in more money in the coffers, far less and one of the reasons why the housing market has stalled in certain areas where increased stamp duty is a consideration. Hitting the individual and smaller enterprises harder is often counter productive. I still think the guy who addressed Davos made some good points, it's a fine balance I guess.

I have no problem with footballers earnings, they start training so young, career is short

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

quizqueen
I agree.
Like many wealthy exiles ,without the' man in the street' would not be where they are now.

If the woman owed the tax she would have had to have coughed up or gone to jail. But she didn't.

Tax evasion is illegal, tax avoidance is perfectly legal. Having an ISA is a tax avoidance vehicle as is salary sacrifice and the claiming of allowable expenses against tax liabilities. I imagine ISAs are an investment of choice for many on this thread.

Only a fool would pay more tax than they needed to. The money is always better in the hands of the person who lawfully earned it (and, necessarily, paid tax on it) than in those of a third party.

Google 'Milton Friedman's "Four Ways to Spend Money" for the reason why this should be the case.

This is going to be an unpopular opinion here but actually, I disagree. I think tax rates in the UK, and in a lot of the western world, are far too high. It's one of the reasons our high streets are all clones now; huge corporations are able to minimise their overheads (including tax) and hence undercut small independent traders.

Even Keynes thought that the maximum rate of tax in peacetime should be no more than 25%. Well, including national insurance contribution (which is another tax despite its name) I am paying 29.7% - and I am not a higher rate tax payer (though I am an accountant!) If I weren't paying into my employer's pension scheme I would be chucking quite a lot more into government coffers.

I wanted to have lunch at my local sandwich shop a few days ago. It was shut, and there was a sign on the door explaining that they'd decided to not to open on Mondays because they were too close to the threshold at which they'd have to charge VAT - and that would make the business uneconomic. And that, in a nutshell, is what too much taxation does to our GDP.

I know everyone thinks about expenditure on the NHS and suchlike - but actually most public services are bloated with bureaucracy (and I have worked in the public sector, including a big general hospital, and observed this firsthand.) There is little or no incentive to cut overheads - in many cases, quite the reverse. Administrators gain status and power by spending more, not less. Taking away the profit motive means that the normal forces driving efficiency gains disappear; trying to replace them with imposed targets (as agreed with those being measured, surreally) leads of course to a tick box culture.

So I am not at all surprised by, or disapproving of, attempts by anyone to mitigate their tax bill. I would myself if I could. But I would much, much, prefer to live in a lower tax economy which took away the incentive for people to avoid tax and instead grew the pot for everyone. A few other countries (no, not the USA, I don't want that either) manage to provide decent and effective welfare cover for their citizens without taxing them through the roof for the privilege, and I think we should make an effort to learn from their example.

Like boycotting products of people you disagree with, if you don't watch her programme, the rating will go down and so will her popularity with ITV.

When we lived in Spain our state pension was taxed there along with other pensions. When we returned to the UK we noticed that it had been set against our allowances so in effect it was being taxed twice. This was HM Revenue's mistake and had gone on for 9 years. They would only give us 4 years' refund even though it was their mistake.

One law for the rich....

If LK is not working then it is right that sh e does not pay tax. But the people who employ her, profit from the time she is being shown on a program. Should it be a debate or a stupid advert that she is on..therefore they should refuse to pay her..if she is just there as herself then she is a volunteer so I hope she is not being paid

LK I always thought of as being false and avoid her program.
Big egos just show how materialistic these so called lovies are

I agree with all the views expressed about Ms. Kelly alas this is the world we live in. But I also have a gripe over the competitions that are featured in said programmes because you have the likes of Mr crozier etc on free holidays and you can bet they are tax deductible too its the whole mentality but Mr ordinary would not sell these competitions

I'm sure LK has made enough money by now to have been able to set up provision for a time when she's no longer in the public eye.
Which could turn out to be sooner than she expected.

It's Benedict Cumberbatch