April 5th, 2012

Ken Releases Partial Figures –
Earned £238,646 and Paid £34,661 in Tax at 14.5%

(Click here to enlarge)

He claims his income from employment last year was £5,700? LBC must be slave masters!

Ken earned £755,778 from media appearances and his books according to Silveta’s Company House filings. It’s not looking good…

UPDATE: Ken paid 14.5% of his gross income in tax last year. He brought in £238,646 via Silveta Limited and paid £34,661 in tax. He’s a tax avoider…

UPDATE II: Boris’ numbers were signed off by a respected firm of accountants and Paddick has gone the whole hog and actually released the bits of paper. What proof do we have that this page of numbers rushed out by Ken is legit? It isn’t even signed off by his accountant…


90 Comments

  1. 1
    Ken Livingslime says:

    Like

  2. 2
    John says:

    ah

    Like

  3. 3
    John says:

    ha

    Like

    • 37
      Del Boy says:

      Cushty.

      Like

      • 55
        meme says:

        £65k in dividends !!! only £5k in earnings ?

        same for his wife … is it a 50-50 partnership? did they both benefit?

        Like

        • 62
          Racked off says:

          i wish i earned as much as he pays in tax

          Like

        • 67
          Angry of London says:

          They are equal share holders in VATLIES Ltd, so by definition, they both took identical dividends over the periods mentioned. Of course, even Ken might see that £63K is a lot for ‘typing up’ his back-of-a-fag-packet memoirs. Looks like Emma’s ‘earnings’ went straight to the joint account. That would mean he’s actually paying less than 10% income tax.

          No-one is better at spending someone else’s money that a man who has contributed as little as possible to the pot. W_*anker.

          Like

          • Spartacus says:

            ”so by definition, they both took identical dividends over the periods mentioned”

            I’m a shareholder in Bank of Scotland ”so by definitition . . . ? ”

            Like

        • 70
          Anonymous says:

          I can see £34,661 tax paid but I can see only £94,568 income can I ask where is £238,646 coming from?

          If £238,646 income is company income we also need to look at company expense. If you take the same logic and look at our FTSE 100 companies they would not have paid even 0.01% tax.

          Like

      • 68
        To Be Fair says:

        To be fair, Ken was at great pains to point out that he employed 3 people with the money he saved, the fact that one of them was his wife is merely incidental.

        Like

    • 74
      Anonymous says:

      Are Boris’s accountants respectable as KPMG and Pricewaterhouse?

      Like

      • 85
        Jeffrey Bernard says:

        Yes. But cheaper.

        Like

      • 86
        Jeffrey Bernard says:

        One other question. Mr Watts’s spreadsheet suggests that Ken paid income tax of £22.6K on income + pension + interest totalling £31,235 in 2010/11, which amounts to a princely (nay, selfless) average rate of 73%. Surely Ken needs a new accountant …

        Like

  4. 4
    Racked off says:

    what a crock of shiite.

    Like

    • 6
      81IIy 8owden i5 7he gre@test ump1re ever ! says:

      yeaer?

      Like

    • 24
      HHJ Jalland says:

      In any Court litigation there should be full and frank disclosure of all documents.

      Simply coming up with a self prepared summary is not good enough in my Court

      I am adjourning this case now and suggest that both Mr Johnson and Mr Livingstone go home and come back here tomorrow with all their financial documents for me to see.

      If this matter had been dealt with correcty an adjournment would not have been necessary. I will therefore hear representations from both parties tomorrow as I am minded to make wasted costs orders.

      Like

  5. 5
    MrAngry61 says:

    By receiving £5700 emoluments in 2010 & 2011 RedKen avoided paying Class 1 National Insurance in either year – unlike Boris or Paddick.

    Like

  6. 7
    Labour says:

    my pants are on fire

    Like

  7. 8
    Tuscan Tony says:

    Dividends are of course his net income on his shares after expenses etc.: he should show the gross company turnover attributable to his services provided. I suspect very little of that company income was contributed by the other shareholder, i.e. wifey.

    Like

  8. 9
    Selohesra says:

    So where are the earnings he received through his service company and used to donate to Labour and pay for his wifes services?

    Like

    • 12
      Selohesra says:

      I thought that was what all the fuss was about in the first place

      Like

      • 53
        sockpuppet #4 says:

        Sort of. It would be interesting to know what was going off there.

        I don’t really see how this gets packaged up into a soundbite for the public to be forcefed. Unless its the one Boris made up in the lift.

        Like

  9. 11
    Hogwash says:

    How much was he paid in Venezuela?

    Like

  10. 15
    Accountant says:

    I am more interested in “income” rather than “income from employment”

    Like

  11. 16
    Baron Hogwash says:

    Minimum wage Ken earns only £5700 ! …………………… plus a wee bit £89000 dividends and pensions – poor Ken I shed a tear for you Ken.

    At least next year you can claim to have earned £9200 tax free eh Ken ?

    Like

    • 50
      MrAngry61 says:

      The lower threshold for NICs was 5720 – Ken’s likely to receive less than the lower limit even if he receives less salary than his personal allowance.

      Like

  12. 17
    YorkshireLad says:

    Utter ******!!!
    Why declare Corporation Tax?
    Forgive me, but that is not a PERSONAL liability

    Like

    • 32
      Peter Grimes says:

      Indeed – if Livingslime wants to claim the CT paid on dividends is down to him he should include the company income which paid him the dividend.

      Typical piece of Lefist legerdemain, and you can bet your boots that Livingslime will now stand pat and say that he has declared fully!

      Like

  13. 18
    Ken Livingslime says:

    put up or shut up!

    Like

  14. 19
    Baron Hogwash says:

    Where are the expense figures, capital gains, property etc etc….. lets see your total income Ken dodo!

    Like

  15. 20
    Anonymous says:

    You don’y pay Corp Tax on dividends. The effective tax rate after you put it through a company will be about 30% though (depending on what else he’s doing…).

    Like

  16. 22
    tube_thumper says:

    when you look at the childish presentation its either a clever and crafty liar or a comp-lete thickos.

    I think a bit of both

    bye Ken

    Like

  17. 23

    So it is true, he paid himself in dividends so that he only had to pay 20% tax. Tut Tut!

    Like

  18. 26
    Racked off says:

    I am really racked off

    Like

  19. 28
    Teacher says:

    “He bought in ” Do you have a dictionary ?
    Look up bought and brought AGAIN dimmo.

    Like

  20. 29
    Ken The Sectarian says:

    What puzzles me is why Miliband didn’t sack Ken a month ago.

    With a half decent candidate, Labour could have walked the London Mayoral elections this year, under the circumstances.

    Now, because of Miliband’s lack of gonads, Labour are lumbered with a sectarian hypocrite of the first order, a nasty piece of work who should have been consigned to the dustbin of history years ago!

    Anybody but Ken!!!!!

    Like

  21. 30
    Pentangelis says:

    How does he manage to pay £22,000 income tax on earnings of £5,700?
    On those ‘bald’ figures the man is qualified not just to be Mayor of London, but Governor of the Bank of England with the role Chancellor as his Saturday job!

    Like

  22. 34
    Baron Hogwash says:

    Ken Dodd is better with his finances than Chick-Ken Livingstone.

    Like

  23. 35
    Golly says:

    There is nothing like openess and transparency in Local Government.

    And that is exactly what we have got here.

    Like

  24. 39
    Jane Birkin from Paris says:

    This is truly pathetic now on both sides of the political divide.

    Like

  25. 46
    Let's hope HMRC aren't staffed by leftists says:

    This was not put together by an accoutant.

    You do not pay corp tax on dividends. Corp tax is paid on company profit. In fact, a company may not pay a dividend out of pre-tax profits.

    The main thing in contention here is that the company that Ken Livingstone is a director for, Silveta Ltd, *evaded* taxes by recording a £19000 payment from the company to the Labour Party as an expense of Silveta Ltd. As we know, legitimate business-related expenses are tax deductable, but this expense is clearly nothing to do with the business of Silveta Ltd. It is therefore illegal tax evasion.

    I have no quarrel with tax avoidance, it is perfectly legal. It is hypocritical of Ken to avoid tax given his rhetoric on tax avoiders, but no crime has been committed in that regard.

    Like

    • 61
      Harry Redknapp's accountant says:

      But Ken said ” nobody in Britain employs people and pays income tax on the money they paid them”. Presumably he’s happy for me to pay my cleaner and gardner from untaxed earnings, or has he got it wrong?

      Like

    • 65
      Red Ken Lyingscum says:

      Me ? A hypocrite ? How very dare you ??

      Next, you’ll be telling us that Hypocrisy and Kendacity Mendacity is in Liebour’s D-N-A.

      Like

    • 80
      Anonymous says:

      I suspect Ken means that Corporation Tax of that amount was paid on the money that was paid out to him as Dividend. But I’m pretty sure you understood that.

      Like

  26. 48
    Some Geezer wot hopes WARREN Buffett (and Ken) would retire to Margaritaville says:

    Warren Buffett’s Rule: The boss of a corporation should not be taxed at a lower RATE simply in virtue of being the boss and being able to avoid income tax by taking remuneration in other lower-taxed ways.

    Some Geezer’s “Buffett” Rule: hypocrites like Warren Buffett and Ken Livingstone, who bemoan this abominable state of affairs, yet make ample use of it, should be buffetted as often as possible till they shut their gobs and actually scratch a cheque for “a fairer amount.”

    Like

  27. 49
    Panic-stricken tax-dodging rich foreigners running around like headless chickens says:

    Ken wipes floor with blowjob and a couple of drips.

    ha ha ha ha ha

    Like

    • 56
      BBC NEWS says:

      Please don’t make our job harder with your partisan nonsense. Its getting very hard to keep supporting when Ken has been caught Red Ken Handed.

      we don’t want the public to get wind of the fact that we allow our ‘talent’ to use companies to produce, market, and create shows, that they then app/ear in.
      it saves stars millions and us a fortune in N.I.

      but the silly little people mustn’t know.
      So please keep quiet.

      BBC

      Like

  28. 51
    BBC NEWS says:

    We were going to make this our stop story.
    But then we remembered we don’t often cover London or political news.

    So instead, here’s the history of glass. With June Brown.

    Like

    • 75
      Spartacus says:

      You are close. The big bbbc story is hose pipe bans and water – or lack thereof.

      Russia Today is showing the pensioner in grease who torched himself with petrol.

      Like

  29. 52
    Purcell's Dealer says:

    Pension figures boys and girls. Pension figures.

    Looks like Ken is paying around 11% tax on earnings.

    The cosy realtionship with the wife is clearly illegal. HMRC issued warnings about this way way back in 2005.

    One rule for the self serving venal scum (politicians) and another for us. As always.

    Like

    • 60
      sockpuppet #4 says:

      Presumably he’d get away with that if his wife is paid a reasonable (ly-small) amount.

      Wasnt the HMRC thing about a computer programmer and his wife who did a bit of admin, and they were both paid the same?

      Like

      • 79
        GnosticBrian says:

        Arctic Systems v Jones

        Like

        • 89
          Anonymous says:

          HMRC lost the Arctic Systems case in the end — though you might wish to take advice from your accountant it you are planning on doing something similar.

          Like

      • 83
        Purcell's Dealer says:

        It was indeed and the rule of thumb on this is that your spouse/relative must be paid at market rates unless they are directly responsible for bringing in part of the income generated by the company.

        Ken fails on both of those. Not surprising since he’s doing EXACTLY what his buddies in NuLab brought in IR35 to stop.

        One rule for them, and the rest of us can fuck off.

        Like

  30. 54
    Mikis says:

    Where’s the figure for Sylveta dividends or income earned by his wife (not quite sure what her employment role was)? Or the payments to staff which are likely to turn out to be disallowed political contributions, unless Livingstone can show that staff had an actual job connected with running the company.

    I’d also prefer to see the figures issued by the company’s auditors rather than on a grubby slip of paper.

    Like

  31. 58
    Stuart mcCormick says:

    This was one of the lead stories on the BBC website this morning untill Ken first delayed his release and then did so in such an unconvincing way, its currentley only on the UK politics sections.

    Like

  32. 59
    Drop a Daisy cutter on the BBC says:

    I see the Guardian is up in arms at Amazon for not paying UK corporation tax. Remind me how much the Guardian Media Group pays in tax again someone

    Like

  33. 63
    Mikis says:

    Livingstone has also got a cheek querying Boris’s NIC Class 4 payments which are quite normal. On the other handing by ducking under the threshold Livingstone avoided all NIC. What a to***r!

    Like

  34. 66
    Mike says:

    Guido, this is important:

    As a co-director (and presumably 50/50 shareholder) of his company, Ken’s wife will have been paid EXACTLY THE SAME DIVIDENDS as him unless she specifically elected not to on each payout. So the tax avoidance is effectively doubled. Whoops.

    Like

  35. 69
    Arthur Scargill says:

    Let’s see the same from Osborne now.

    Like

  36. 71
    Anon E Mouse says:

    I suspect that the reason that Ken’s income from employment is so low is that he has probably used Silveta as a personal service company and they gain the income from LBC and others and not Ken directly, as an individual.

    Like

    • 82
      Purcell's Dealer says:

      In which case it falls foul of IR35 as nobody else can be substituted to fulfil the role. HMRC should be investigating that but we all know they won’t.

      He’s scum – it was his party that brought IR35 in but the rules don’t apply to them do they?

      Like

  37. 76
    Anonymous says:

    “corporation tax paid on dividends”?

    wtf? corp tax is paid on company profits. Divident tax is a personally liability.

    Can’t believe how transparently he is trying to slime his way out of this one….

    Actually, yes I can.

    Like

  38. 77
    Post hoc says:

    With figures like that he should take himself to court for not paying himself the minimum wage – ahem, perhaps his wife will….

    And this is the man who feels he is competent to manage a budget of billions?

    Like

  39. 81
    Ken Kooks the books in deep fried VAT says:

    Ken is kooking the books. Very dodgy!

    Like

  40. 84
    Anonymous says:

    I think Ken was 65 in 2010/11 so would not pay national insurance.

    Like

  41. 87
    Leonardo Fibonacci says:

    Thank God I invented the Fibonacci retracement sequence by which formulation all can be retraced toits original staus.

    Below are my formulae which may hel Mr Livingstone ” recant ” .

    Fibonacci ratios

    Fibonacci ratios are mathematical relationships, expressed as ratios, derived from the Fibonacci sequence. The key Fibonacci ratios are 0%, 23.6%, 38.2%, and 100%.

    The key Fibonacci ratio of 0.618 is derived by dividing any number in the sequence by the number that immediately follows it. For example: 8/13 is approximately 0.6154, and 55/89 is approximately 0.6180.

    The 0.382 ratio is found by dividing any number in the sequence by the number that is found two places to the right. For example: 34/89 is approximately 0.3820.

    The 0.236 ratio is found by dividing any number in the sequence by the number that is three places to the right. For example: 55/233 is approximately 0.2361.

    Kapish now Mr K . Get to work !!

    Like


Seen Elsewhere

Israeli Ambassador’s Letter to Clegg | Twitter
What Became of Cameron’s Big Society Network? | Indy
SpAd Reshuffle | PR Week
Clegg Under Pressure to Expel Ward | Telegraph
Labour’s Teachers Trained in the Art of Brainwashing | Jago Pearson
R.I.P. John Blundell, Former IEA Director General | Atlas
UKIP Hasn’t Gone Away | ConHome
Ward: I’d Be a Terrorist if I Lived in Gaza | Breitbart
Ruffley Faces Deselection | Times
Ruffley Faces Crisis Meeting | Mail
Ruffley Told to Consider Position | BBC


new-advert
Westbourne-Change-Opinion Guido-hot-button (1)


Sarah Vine writes of Esther McVey…

“McVey told Grazia that she hasn’t married or had children because she ‘never found anyone to wind her biological clock’ … If I remember rightly, half the current Cabinet would have cheerfully ‘wound her clock’ if she’d given them a glimmer of a chance.”



Flight Watch says:

Russia Today is a cauldron of bullsh*t. The only people that take it seriously are deluded conspiracy theorists. Other RT journos have resigned citing the same reasons.

It’s about as believable as Press TV, KCNA of North Korea or the Daily Mirror.


Tip off Guido
Web Guido's Archives

Subscribe me to:






RSS




AddThis Feed Button
Archive


Labels
Guido Reads