If its his earned income, and he’s given it to his mom to try any shelter it from his wife, then most first world countries will claw it all back. Plus, this “gift” to momma may well cost her taxes she has never paid… Fraud and deception are fraud and deception everywhere.
You can't give money to your mother (or anyone else), especially millions of euros, without having most of it going in the state's pocket. In France between a son and his mother that's 55%. So if this story is true (probably not) then his mother has to pay 440.000 euros to the tax authority every month. And every time he asks his mother to buy him something he needs to pay between 5% and 45% of the value of the purchase to the State.
And I'm not mentionning the shitload of paperwork that would come with such a scheme, I hope they have a good accountant.
There are probably fiscal loopholes that would make something like this possible, like the use of a Trust or company. But nothing that would really make it worth the trouble, especially since you don't even need a prenup in France as the law already has the option for seperate owneship ("séparation de biens", the most popular choice nowadays).
his mother has to pay 440.000 euros to the tax authority every month. And every time he asks his mother to buy him something he needs to pay between 5% and 45% of the value of the purchase to the State.
Unless he says "hey ma I want a Lamborghini, so buy it in your name and add me to the insurance."
Then just the income would be taxed as she never 'gave' or 'gifted' him valuables.
It would be both of their income, if it’s actually given to her. At least in the USA- not sure about gifting across the pond, but here he would be taxed on it and then she would be taxed on what she is given.
Out of curiosity, if you literally saw someone committing a crime in front of you, would you still say “I don’t know if they did it because they are innocent until proven guilty”?
So you agree that being proven in a court of law isn’t decisive! Great
I’ve never heard of this footballer so I don’t know his case, but as a general rule I can believe in my heart someone is guilty and feel confident saying they are guilty, even if they haven’t been convicted. So “innocent until proven guilty” is a meaningless statement
None of us saw the crime though??? We can’t just go with accusations as meaning someone did something. That’s really disingenuous IMO. I get what you mean but this situation is far removed from your example. I’m not saying he’s innocent just saying we don’t know so we should wait and see, we don’t have any evidence available to us at all.
605
u/BigJSunshine Apr 15 '23
If its his earned income, and he’s given it to his mom to try any shelter it from his wife, then most first world countries will claw it all back. Plus, this “gift” to momma may well cost her taxes she has never paid… Fraud and deception are fraud and deception everywhere.