High queef, watched a film called Jolt last night, not sure if it was enjoyably shit or just shit, one of them(
broadsword now that's fresh, Mon 26 Jul 2021, 14:23,
archived)
Nah just the one out of shooting fish with weird new fake pouty lips(
broadsword now that's fresh, Mon 26 Jul 2021, 14:36,
archived)
Shooting fish is a great film (
Smash Monkey 2 Anyone know a good therapist in South Africa?, Mon 26 Jul 2021, 15:49,
archived)
not heard of that one tbhjust looked it up, looks like it could be amusing. I watched 'Criminal' the other day - I can't believe the cast they got for such a heap of wank. Someone must have been owed some massive favours.
'CIA agent Bill Pope is on a mission to save a hacker from a dreaded criminal. However, when the agent is mysteriously killed, his memories are grafted into Jerico Stewart, an ex-convict'
It's even shitter than it sounds like it would be
(
Queef Smegwin U r a ๐๐, Mon 26 Jul 2021, 14:29,
archived)
Tommy Lee Jones, Gary Oldman, Kevin Costner, Gal Gadot, Ryan Reynolds....I suspect money laundering or a tax write off
(
Queef Smegwin U r a ๐๐, Mon 26 Jul 2021, 14:43,
archived)
I saw one once where the chap's earned income was 10 mill, with a 4 mil income tax liabiltySo he wrote out a cheque for 2 million to enter the scheme, received a tax rebate of 4 million, and so was treated for tax purposes as if he'd earned 50 grand in the tax year rather than 10 million.
Nice work if you can get it eh.
(, Mon 26 Jul 2021, 15:36, archived)
nah m8, 100% on the levelThose schemes were legit at the time (though engineered specifically to egregiously avoid tax), but HMRC clamped down hard on them subsequently.
I could go into detail about how the schemes actually worked but even I find it deathly boring.
(, Mon 26 Jul 2021, 15:55, archived)
surely that was only ever legal because someone forgot to make it illegal(
Turing's Artificial Hand Sig Sauer, Mon 26 Jul 2021, 15:57,
archived)
it was the 'film partnership' schemesyou'd 'borrow' 97% of your participation from the scheme provider, write a cheque for the 3%, then it would just so happen that 40% of your total investment (including the borrowed bit, which was interest only) would equal your income tax bill. To pay the interest on the 'loan' bit you just assigned your partnership income from the film to the lender.
Then, before the 15 year (iirc) tax relived period was up you'd pay a firm a relatively small sum to buy your partnership investment from you, at which point your deferred tax bill essentially vanished (it would be based on the huge sum funded by the loan).
HMRC then slapped huge tax bills on people based on total participation amount rather than the amount of the cheque written when they decided the schemes were not intended to finance films after all.
I TOLD YOU IT WAS BORING.
(, Mon 26 Jul 2021, 16:05, archived)
pretty lol though when one client complained and said they hadn't understood what they were buying into.Her day job was a tax lawyer, designing these exact schemes.
(, Mon 26 Jul 2021, 16:18, archived)
Someone watched legally blonde one too many times (
Smash Monkey 2 Anyone know a good therapist in South Africa?, Mon 26 Jul 2021, 17:34,
archived)
she was just lying; she'd only made a personal contribution of 20 grand to get a 40 grand rebate, and was being hit with a tax demand many multiples of that.(, Mon 26 Jul 2021, 17:56, archived)
Yup that sounds pretty plop.Jolt didn't take itself too seriously but about 1/3 of the film was clearly setting up Jolt 2 - Jolty Boogaloo
(
broadsword now that's fresh, Mon 26 Jul 2021, 14:42,
archived)
