Tax lessons from Tony Blair

Robert Powell
by Lovemoney Staff Robert Powell on 17 January 2012  |  Comments 23 comments

We look at the tax arrangements of a company linked to Tony Blair and what lessons we can learn from this arrangement.

Tax lessons from Tony Blair

Tony Blair certainly hasn't put his feet up since he ceased to be Prime Minister in 2007. He's done charity work, been a peace envoy in the Middle East and made a lot of money from speechmaking and consultancy work.

As part of that new career, the former Prime Minister set up a company called Windrush Ventures, which generated revenue of £12 million over the last financial year, but only paid £315,000 in tax.

Blair Inc.

Windrush Ventures is part of a dense corporate web unofficially known as Blair Inc. This complicated network of companies allows the full extent of the former PM’s income to remain hidden.

As I said, Windrush generated income of £12 million last year. However, almost £11 million of that income was written off as ‘administrative expenses’ and hence classed as tax allowable. This brought total profits for the company down to just over £1 million. Corporation tax was levied on this at 28%, resulting in a bill of just £315,000.

In fairness, I should add that Mr Blair has paid top-rate 50% income tax on his personal income, but City accountants have nonetheless been scratching their heads at Windrush's large expenses figure. The accounts show that Mr Blair paid £2.3 million in wages to 26 staff in the last tax year. A further £300,000 went on office equipment, while £550,000 was spent on rent for Mr Blair’s Mayfair business base.

However this leaves almost £8 million of expenses completely unaccounted for. Much of this figure may have gone towards footing the frequent overseas trips made by Mr Blair and his business entourage. Analysis by The Sunday Telegraph this week revealed that in just 12 months, the former PM made 61 trips abroad – totalling almost 224,000 miles of travel.

Administrative expenses

Work-related expenses are the key advantage of setting up your own business or declaring yourself self-employed, although there are some important differences between the two tax statuses.

Tax-allowable expenses include premises costs, stock costs, travel expenses, repairs and – importantly – staffing costs (including your own salary). However a nimble accountant will pick out every legally-legitimate loophole going in order to minimise your tax bill.

How to do it...

Practically, setting up your own business will garner the largest tax advantages if your earnings are high enough to push you into the upper income tax brackets (as Mr Blair’s do).

All business profits are subject to Corporation Tax. This is charged at 20% for profits under £300,000. A marginal (inclining) rate is charged if profits are between £300,000 and £1.5 million and the full rate of 26% (25% in the 2012/13 tax year) is levied on profits exceeding £1.5 million. However these profit boundaries apply after tax allowable expenses – including your own salary – have been deducted.

The idea is to take a salary out of these takings that is taxed at the 20% income tax rate.

An example...

Say your business took £300,000 of income in the 2011/12 tax year. The first job is to write off any allowable expenses. For this example let’s peg this figure at £100,000 – made up of a £35,000 salary for yourself and £65,000 for other admin costs.

These expenses can then be written off immediately, leaving profits of £200,000. Corporation tax at 20% is due on this, giving a bill of £40,000.

Meanwhile your £35,000 salary is subject to 20% basic rate income tax, after you’ve had your personal allowance, which stands at £7,475 this year. So £27,525 of your salary is subject to a 20% levy, giving an income tax bill of £5,505 and a net pay packet for the year of £29,495, minus National Insurance of course.

So your total tax bill for the year – with salary – would come to £45,505. That’s 15.16% of your original £300,000 income. And even when you take expenses out of the equation, you’re still not paying any more than 20% tax – equivalent to a basic rate earner – on any of your profits.

In context, if you had earned £300,000 from a full time or self-employed job (after expenses), income tax at 50% would be levied.

In addition, the remaining £160,000 sitting in the business account can be used to fund your pension (tax free), pay out dividends or finance director’s loans: three extremely tax-advantageous ways to make the most of your company cash. Have a read of What we can learn from Wayne Rooney’s tax return for some more information.

Going self-employed

As I mentioned earlier, the tax perks of starting your own business only really start to take hold in the upper echelons of income levels.

For example, a tennis coach with an income of £25,000 will most likely be a sole trader, in other words: self-employed.

All income will go into the business account and any cash our coach needs for living expenses will be taken out as and when. At the end of the tax year, all allowable expenses (transport, admin, repairs etc. but not the personal cash drawn out across the year) will be deducted from the total income amount. Income tax and NI will then be levied on the remaining profits, taking into account personal tax-free allowances.

Tax deadline closing in

One thing that self-employed workers and business directors do have in common is that they are both required to file a self-assessment tax return. The deadline for submitting paper returns has already passed. However taxpayers can still file online up to the end of January.

Take a look at How to get your online self-assessment tax return right for some tips on coughing up this year and avoiding HMRC’s lofty late-fees.

Your take

What’s your take on Tony Blair’s post-Downing Street career?

Have your say using the comment box below.

This article was modified on 25 January 2012. The Office of Tony Blair would like to make clear that Mr Blair is a top-rate 50% taxpayer on his personal income. All his businesses pay full UK Corporation Tax. He also uses some of his income to support the charities he has established as well as making other donations. 

Enjoyed this? Show it some love

Twitter
General

Comments (23)

  • fenemore
    Love rating 205
    fenemore said

    Considering he spent the best part of a decade telling the rest of us to pay tax, you would think he would WANT to contribute to the pot instead of finding ways of avoiding it.

    But then again what can you expect from a capitalist socialist. Ok its an oxymoron, but Blair managed to combine the two. He may have been a socialist for political reasons, but underneath he was always a capitalist. Cosying up to bankers and "The City" was his only second to being seen with the "rich & famous".

    I remember back in 1994 following the death of John Smith - how Blair, even before Mr Smith's funeral, "preened" himself for office. That creepy grin and his whole demeanour led me to think "if this man ever gets into power we are in deep doodoo".

    Alas - the rest is history! Now Blair continues to persue his own capatilist tax-evading life-style and we are all left to pick up the pieces of his & Brown's disasterous tenure.

    Report on 17 January 2012  |  Love thisLove  7 loves
  • rbgos
    Love rating 81
    rbgos said

    Working on your example, there are two points I'd raise -

    How do you come up with £125k left in the company? There was the original £300k turnover, minus £35 income, minus £65k expenses, leaving £200k. Then £40k tax was removed, leaving £160k. (or have you accidentally subtracted the salary twice??).

    The main point is that, despite earning £300k, the subject of your example has less than £27k to live on during the year. The rest is tied up in the company, he cannot spend it on himself. Which is fine if he can live on that, as you say, the rest can be put into a pension, or just saved up or invested and taken out of the company years later.

    Yes, he can pay himself dividends, but these have already been taxed at 20% corporation tax, and (as they will take him into being a higher-rate taxpayer) they'll then be subject to dividend income tax (which is effectively 18% of the original pre-corp-tax amount), total 38%, which is only slightly less than he'd have to pay if he just took the money as salary at 40% income tax.

    Oh, and another point... You'll also need to be confident that you can demonstrate that the $65k of business expenses were incurred purely for the benefit of the business, and that you did not get any personal benefit from it. Tony Blair can no doubt get away with claiming that a flight to America was a necessary expense to attend a speaking engagement; as a freelance engineer I'll have more difficulty justifying the engineering content of a week in Corfu...

    But you can get away with charging £200 per year per employee to "staff entertainment", e.g. company Christmas Party, which will cover a few nice lunches out!

    Report on 17 January 2012  |  Love thisLove  1 love
  • Luniversal
    Love rating 47
    Luniversal said

    If Phony Bliar lives to be 1,000 and screws £100 billion out of gullible Arabs and Americans by working his elder statesman act, he will never live down being the only prime minister in modern times who sent British soldiers to die in and lose a war on false pretences.

    If he spends so much time globetrotting, it is because that smarmy face gets the bird everywhere in the country he betrayed and in the political party he emptied of principle.

    Can one imagine 'Clement Attlee Inc.'?

    Report on 17 January 2012  |  Love thisLove  4 loves
  • Robert Powell
    Love rating 3
    Robert Powell said

    rbgos,

    You're quite right. Corrected.

    Robert

    Report on 17 January 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • david coles
    Love rating 5
    david coles said

    I never did like Blair as a prime minister or on a personal note his wife, in truste worthy I guess. The first time I really saw his "true colours" and proof of my feelings for him was when he announced his idea of any police officer witnessing a youth commiting a "yob" crime in a public place to "march" the youth to the nearest money machine and demand the youth to take out money to pay the find then and there. This in my eyes was a good idea saving many hours of court time, but then a while later one of his sons was witnessed doing a "yob" crime in I believe a drunken state and we never did hear any more of the prime ministers goog idea, I guest we would not and I was prooved right. Then we had Brown as prime minister coming in "through the back door" so this once great country continued to slide down hill to where we find our selves today. My late mum and dad said to me when I was a child the labour party was for the working class of which we were part of, wrong thank goodness for the present party in power.

    Report on 17 January 2012  |  Love thisLove  3 loves
  • tuttogallo
    Love rating 75
    tuttogallo said

    No self-respecting business has a profit margin of only 8.3%. I hope that the business affairs of team tony will be thoroughly investigated by HMRC on behalf of those of us who do not have accountants and have to pay up.

    In retrospect the Blair era looks like a sea of errors. Even worse than the lost opportunity, is the betrayal of hope (it is a new day is it not?). It's different this time! I know, let's spend much more than we get in.... during a boom..... the bust will be someone else's problem.

    Blair (and wife's) ruthless exploitation of the advantages that we, the voters, conferred on them is simply nauseous. If the politicians are not prepared to serve us for the price of their salary and over generous pensions, then they should stay out and stick to being career business men. It is shameful.

    Report on 17 January 2012  |  Love thisLove  3 loves
  • spanmik
    Love rating 6
    spanmik said

    Some socialist, just proves you cannot trust a socialist government. He and Brown wrecked the economy.

    Report on 17 January 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Talent
    Love rating 77
    Talent said

    One word is suffice.... SCUM.

    Report on 17 January 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • CuNNaXXa
    Love rating 362
    CuNNaXXa said

    Please remember that every politician is in the game for one thing only, and that is to advance their own station in life.

    We ARE the great unwashed. The consumer. The masses. They, on the other hand, are special. We are their ticket to easy street.

    They order us to pay our taxes, which they then spend (on themselves as well as their whims), and they order us to die for them on foreign wars that may, or may not, have a bearing on our own security and peace of mind.

    How many MPs have put themselves in the firing line by going to a foreign country and taking up arms? None. Yet they expect us to defend this country for them.

    Even in the US, only one senator had a family member serving in the Gulf, under fire.

    In the early and middle ages, our leaders lead from the front, now they lead from behind. The definition of 'leader' is one who leads, yet our current clutch of ministers are more than happy to send thousands of troops overseas while living in two luxurious houses paid for by the taxpayer (and in some cases living in one house while claiming mortgage payments for two; the real one and the fictional one).

    (QUESTION:: If those MPs who were caught claiming mortgage payments for properties they didn't own, tried to claim it was an oversight, can we really trust them to oversee the welfare of 68 million people? Can they be trusted to do the right thing? And is it right for us, or just them?).

    No politician can be trusted. Even when it appears that they are fighting our corner, they are doing it for their own benefit. Maggie sold our council house stock, not because she wanted to see council house tenants own their own asset, but because she wanted to ensure another term in office.

    Report on 17 January 2012  |  Love thisLove  3 loves
  • electricblue
    Love rating 643
    electricblue said

    Third Rate Prime Minister, Second Rate Socialist and First Rate Crook. Above comment was right, the word SCUM was sufficient.

    Report on 17 January 2012  |  Love thisLove  1 love
  • MK22
    Love rating 142
    MK22 said

    SO, change the tax rules. Levy tax at a lower rate but on gross income. Simples.

    Report on 17 January 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • aledbuoy
    Love rating 0
    aledbuoy said

    Wonder how he lives with himself with even a hint of awareness of his seemingly united bad press. Psychopathic?

    Report on 17 January 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • SevenPillars
    Love rating 70
    SevenPillars said

    Do people honestly believe that Blair or Brown were socialist? Or that the New Labour Government was ever socialist? I think notions of socialist/socialism have just become a convenient term for people to use when they want to attack certain supposedly left wing politicians, when the reality is its use has become meaningless in UK politics and the modern world in general.

    Real socialists don't rescue bankers or capitalists. Chinese communists are the best capitalists in the world right now, go figure. I just think that these terms are used more by people because it is helps them attack targets they don't like and justifies the notion that we have a democracy and political choice when in reality we don't. Blair and Brown bought into the freeing up of the financial markets, light touch regulation, that began with Thatcher and Reagan in the US. The roots of the financial mess we are in now began in the 1980's not 1990's. The idea that Cameron and Osborne are clearing up the mess of the previous Government is nonsense that politicians feel they can always con the public into thinking. Cameron and Osborne are rooted in the problem as much as Blair or Brown in that none of them have a clue in that if you give too much freedom and power to the financiers the masses ultimately lose, inflation sees to that. Still, we all in it together aren't we?

    As for Blair lining his pockets, he is simply showing what a great modern day champagne socialist capitalist he is. As for the large expenses figure, like others he got plenty of practice when he was in Parliament of how useful they were. Weren't Blair's PM expenses receipts shredded "by mistake" when they were about to be made public?

    Report on 18 January 2012  |  Love thisLove  2 loves
  • oldhenry
    Love rating 265
    oldhenry said

    You will find if you try to pass off travelling to the US for a business conference it will be examined in detail by the taxman. The content will be scrutinised to see if it was just a 'jolly', which they will infer it was. It is then for you to prove otherwise. This is real world taxation, clearly Blair ,like Vodafone, has a special deal with a special taxman.

    Report on 18 January 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • SiGl26
    Love rating 26
    SiGl26 said

    Thanks for a very useful article. However Robert says "In addition, the remaining £160,000 sitting in the business account can be used to fund your pension (tax free), pay out dividends or finance director’s loans: three extremely tax-advantageous ways to make the most of your company cash."

    RBGOS has already pointed out that dividends, paid out of taxed profits, are themselves taxable. Admittedly there is no National Insurance to pay, so the marginal rate of ~38% looks good compared to tthe rate on salary over £150k of 64.8% (50% tax, 2% employee NIC, 12.8% employer NIC)

    I'll point out that since April 2011, the maximum one can pay into a pension tax-free is £50,000, so if the company paid all its profit into the owners pension it would raise a Pension Charge at the applicable income tax rate (40 or 50%)

    I'm in the very fortunate position that for the last few years my employer has been sharing out its surplus as bonus salary (paid before CT, company makes no profit) and I've been able to stash my share of this in a pension fund, started from scratch at age 50. I'm now faced with my pension fund growing much more slowly, and a big tax bill. Disillusioned, moi? [and I read today that Consultant doctors are complaining about their pension being limited to an equivalent of 'only' a £1.7M private fund...]

    Report on 19 January 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • mosicle
    Love rating 19
    mosicle said

    Isn't it amazing that the likes of Tony Blair can get away with manoevering his accounts to basically cheat on his tax bill, and get away with it, and yet ordinary citizens such as myself have the devils own game to get an alleged underpayment of tax recinded. The tax office have all my details supplied allowance and coding details , they now say it's incorrect and I owe them £800. The staff are rude,unhelpful and not knowledgeable and are actually obstructive. I can not now get them to answer the phone, holding for over an hour last time, no response to letters and they have failed to contact me with repayment details and account numbers despite stating they would do so about 3 weeks ago!! No doubt they will say that's my fault as well!! HMRC need a darn good shake up, they are so incompetent and yet nothing at all is done about them.I'm sure Mr. Blair don't have this trouble!!!

    Report on 21 January 2012  |  Love thisLove  1 love
  • dmhzx
    Love rating 26
    dmhzx said

    And onther compliation for the sake of it - Marginal relief, designed to confuse as much as possible.

    Corporation tax comes in at various levels, as does personal tax. With personal tax you pay one rate for the first amount, and a higher rsate for anything above that. Nice and simple, and we can all understand it.

    Corporation tax however: once you go over a threshold your taxable at the new rate on the whole lot (like stamp duty on houses). Recognising that that is fudamentally unfair (unlike stamp duty on houses), rather than simply saying OK, just pay the higher rate on whatever is above the threshold, they say ,no, you still have to pay on the whle lot, but we will give you some relief on the extra you're paying on what was below the threshold so that you're not paying any more than you would have odne had we been fair and simple. This relief will apply unitl you have paid the same amount as you would have doen under a simple scheme.

    And of course they like to keep it complicated so that small businesses are further 'taxed' by having o pay some one who does understand it.

    And the whol edifice was complicated further by a huge amount by the 'Best Chancellor ever: - Pesnion stealing gold giving away prudent Gordon Brown. - Hime and Blaie are alomst totally responsible for the current budget deficit .And Bair, with a first class honours degree in pulling up the ladder after you, has the best tax avoidance scheme in the universe, as well as a pension pot that is far larget than anyone else is allowed to accumulate.

    And I bet he has the gall to claim child benefit as well.

    Report on 21 January 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Mike10613
    Love rating 599
    Mike10613 said

    I am amazed that no one complains about all the travelling politicians and ex-politicians do. It contributes to global warming yet they are the ones to tell us to use less energy and add VAT to fuel to encourage us to do so and extra taxes to vehicle fuels. Tony Blair pays about the same percentage of his income in tax as Warren Buffet but the latter thinks the rich should pay more. It is time to clamp down on the parasites they are bleeding this country dry and it isn't benefit scrounging scum; it tax avoiding scum.

    Report on 21 January 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • bengilda
    Love rating 77
    bengilda said

    And we pay hundreds of thousands to provide Blair with bodyguards who travel the world with him!! He should be impeached or whatever we can do and stripped of his assets until he has repaid UK Ltd for all the damage he and his "gang of deadbeats" did.

    Report on 21 January 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • easygoing
    Love rating 156
    easygoing said

    What a vitriolic lot you are. It will be interesting how history will record the last 20 years when the hysteria dies down and the facts are analysed. When the real facts of any era are revealed a greater sense of the real time are becomes apparent. The 50s governments and the Suez crisis for example.

    I don't believe that calling people scum is really helpful to any debate. We seem turn to easily to low grade personal insults rather than proper debate.

    Report on 21 January 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • krustallos
    Love rating 39
    krustallos said

    fenemore, Blair wasn't any kind of socialist for any reasons, political or otherwise. Any definition of socialist which would include Blair would probably have to include the Lib Dems, Ted Heath and Ken Clarke. Far from telling the rest of us to pay tax his government allowed numerous foreign billionaires to live here tax free, said they were "intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich" and failed to raise taxes on the wealthy or regulate the City. The gap between the rich and poor INCREASED on his watch. He also pretty much destroyed democracy in the Labour Party. Finally, he invaded a non-threatening country based on a pack of lies. His present behaviour is entirely in accordance with his past behaviour.

    Report on 21 January 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • krustallos
    Love rating 39
    krustallos said

    Incidentally, while legitimate business expenses should of course be tax deductible, the fact that Blair is paying a tiny percentage of his real income is proof of what I've said elsewhere, that the seriously rich pay very little tax indeed and that it's left to the rest of us to make up the difference. If people would stop with the divide and rule and look at where their real interests lie we could sort this out in pretty short order and drastically improve the standard of living for the vast majority.

    Report on 21 January 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • JRAY100
    Love rating 50
    JRAY100 said

    [salary and expenses] written off - or discounted?

    The term written off is assigned to depreciating assets, for example a vehicle being written off at 25% of present written down value each year, subject to a balancing charge either way at disposal.

    Report on 23 January 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves

Post a comment

Sign in or register to post a reply.

Our top deals

Credit card
company
Balance transfers rate and period Representative
APR
Apply
now

Barclaycard 27Mth Platinum Visa

0% for 27 months (3.5% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: assumed borrowing of £1,200, representative 18.9% APR (variable). Purchase rate 18.9% PA (variable). BT fee is reduced from 3.9% to 3.5% (T&Cs apply).

Barclaycard 25Mth Platinum Visa

0% for 25 months (2.4% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: assumed borrowing of £1,200, representative 18.9% APR (variable). Purchase rate 18.9% PA (variable). BT fee is reduced from 3.5% to 2.4% (T&Cs apply)

Virgin Money Credit Card MasterCard

0% for 26 months (2.99% fee) Representative 17.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: assumed borrowing of £1,200, representative 17.9% APR (variable). Purchase rate 17.9% PA (variable).
W3C  Thank you for using CGWEBLIV3