David Cameron and his mother, Mary: Does she benefit from her late husband's tax avoidance? If so, how much does Cameron himself stand to gain when she passes on? These questions may seem in poor taste but they are important.

David Cameron and his mother, Mary: Does she benefit from her late husband’s tax avoidance? If so, how much does Cameron himself stand to gain when she passes on? These questions may seem in poor taste but they are important.

Remember the moment – can it really have been only yesterday? – when David Cameron said the following:

“I own no shares. I have a salary as prime minister and I have some savings, which I get some interest from and I have a house, which we used to live in, which we now let out while we are living in Downing Street and that’s all I have.”

That was in relation to his father Ian’s tax avoidance company Blairmore, based in Panama. But what about Jersey-based Close International Equity Growth Fund, in which Cameron Sr was a director and of which he held 6,000 shares? Those assets were reportedly left to his family after his death in 2010 – and isn’t David Cameron his son?

David Cameron is facing further questions over his links to offshore investment funds, after it emerged that his late father was involved in a second company based in a tax haven.

Labour accused the Prime Minister of failing to “put the record straight” despite four statements in the space of three days.

Channel 4 News reported that Ian Cameron was a director of Jersey-based Close International Equity Growth Fund and held 6,000 of its shares. His assets were reportedly left to his family following his death in 2010.

Downing Street has said that the Prime Minister, his wife or his children do not stand to benefit from offshore funds or trusts in the future.

The denial is the latest of a series of statements issued by No 10 in the wake of the Panama Papers revelation that David Cameron’s father ran an offshore investment fund called Blairmore Holdings in the Bahamas, which never paid UK tax.

Asked specifically about the Jersey off-shore fund, a spokesman for No 10 said: “On the subject of the PM’s finances, we have nothing to add to the statements already issued.”

(Source: Panama Papers: David Cameron faces questions over father’s off-shore fund in Jersey | UK Politics | News | The Independent )

Furthermore, it seems Mr Cameron (Jr) has been a bit naughty in making sure the names of people who benefit from such organisations can remain hidden:

David Cameron personally intervened in 2013 to weaken an EU drive to reveal the beneficiaries of trusts, creating a possible loophole that other European nations warned could be exploited by tax evaders.

The disclosure of the prime minister’s resistance to opening up trusts to full scrutiny comes as he faces intense pressure to make clear whether his family stands to benefit from offshore assets linked to his late father.

he wrote in November 2013 to Herman Van Rompuy, president of the European Council at the time, to argue that trusts widely used for inheritance planning in Britain should win special treatment in an EU law to tackle money laundering.

In the letter, seen by the Financial Times, Mr Cameron said: “It is clearly important we recognise the important differences between companies and trusts. This means that the solution for addressing the potential misuse of companies, such as central public registries, may well not be appropriate generally.”

(Source: David Cameron’s personal intervention on trusts set up tax loophole | Financial Times )

Note that Cameron personally intervened to ensure that beneficiaries could remain nameless.

Now he’s saying that, even though his father ran two tax avoidance organisations, he isn’t seeing a penny from it – perhaps because he knows it can’t be proved?

In the light of these latest revelations, his position is becoming more precarious by the minute – not just regarding tax avoidance, but as prime minister of the UK.

Oh, and remember Mr Cameron’s wife, Samantha? It was also stated that her assets include only “a small number of shares connected to her father’s land, which she declares on her tax return”.

That’s all very well, but…

What about the fact that she works for a company that is based in a tax haven?

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook