Welcome To Zelo Street!

This is a blog of liberal stance and independent mind

Friday 19 October 2012

Guido Fawked – Luciana Berger Howler

[Update at end of post]

The rabble at the Guido Fawkes blog does seem to have problems understanding Limited Companies. First there was all the rubbish spouted about former Labour London Mayoral challenger Ken Livingstone, demonstrating that the odious flannelled fool Henry Cole didn’t understand how the taxation regime works with such bodies, and now the same buffoon has a problem with annual returns.

Ms Berger is duly elected

Cole has gone after Liverpool Wavertree MP Luciana Berger and her constituency party in relation to donations it has received in the recent past. Here, he has discovered a payment from a company called Purple Apple Facilities Management Limited. This company has recently been dissolved, but then, limited companies are set up, sold on, renamed and dissolved on a daily basis.

The flannelled fool has noted – correctly for once – that Purple Apple was, in the year ended on 31 March 2010, dormant. This means it wasn’t trading. So far, so clear. But if the donation made by that company to Wavertree CLP was, as Cole claims, made in April 2011, then the company’s status in the year ending in March the previous year is totally irrelevant.

Trust me ... I'm on telly

The donation wasn’t made in that year. Moreover, it wasn’t made in the next one either, as that would have run from the beginning of April 2010 and finished at the end of March 2011. Any activity from April 2011 would come within the 2011-2012 financial year, and the accounts for that year are not yet available. So what the status of the company was during that time we don’t know.

So when Cole asserts, in relation to the donation in question, “Purple Apple were not however carrying out any business in the UK”, he is making an assumption he cannot stand up. The flannelled fool is either even more stupid than he looks – entirely possible, of course – or more likely he knows full well that he doesn’t have the information to prove his point, but is smearing Ms Berger anyway.

Either way, once again the Fawkes blog has been caught bang to rights making up its facts to fit its agenda, with the perpetually thirsty Paul Staines’ tame gofer giving every appearance of once again having his trousers well and truly alight. If either of them had a gram of principle in them, they would acknowledge they don’t have the information, withdraw the post and apologise to Wavertree CLP.

But the iron law of the Fawkes folks is that they don’t do withdrawals and apologies, especially to rotten lefties, and most especially those in cities like Liverpool. Another fine mess, once again.

[UPDATE 20 October 1415 hours: the Fawkes blog's original snipe at Ms Berger - the above was a follow-up - is even more lame. She had asked the Chancellor "if he will bring forward proposals to make entrepreneurs' relief from capital gains tax available to those who rent out property in the private ... sector".

The Fawkes rabble concluded that this was asking for "a tax cut for property developers" (the characterisation being used twice, to show it was not an accident). Now I'll have to take this slowly and carefully, as we're clearly dealing with people who can't tell the difference between building property and holding and renting it.

People who rent out property are called Landlords. Property developers are something different. Ms Berger was asking about tax relief for Landlords, and not for property developers. Messrs Staines, Cole and Wickham have had to make a blatantly false statement in order to stand up an argument. Another fine mess, once again]

No comments: