This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/21/parliamentary-watchdog-not-investigate-david-cameron-tax-affairs-panama-papers

The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Parliamentary watchdog will not investigate Cameron over tax affairs Parliamentary watchdog will not investigate Cameron over tax affairs
(about 1 hour later)
Parliament’s standards watchdog will not investigate the prime minister, David Cameron, over the offshore controversy revealed by the Panama Papers data leak. David Cameron will not face an investigation by parliament’s standards watchdog after a Labour MP complained the prime minister had not declared a shareholding in his late father’s offshore fund.
The parliamentary commissioner for standards, Kathryn Hudson, has decided not to investigate the matter, but her office refused to explain the reasons for that decision. Kathryn Hudson, the parliamentary standards commissioner, decided not to investigate the matter dating back to his time as leader of the opposition, but her office refused to explain the reasons for the decision.
Cameron was forced into the position where he had to release a six-year summary of his tax affairs after it emerged he made a £19,000 profit from selling shares in an offshore trust set up by his father, Ian. Related: The Panama Papers: leaktivism's coming of age | Micah White
The prime minister insisted he was not involved in a tax dodge, and said the way the trust was set up was entirely proper, but he did admit he had badly handled the subsequent furore after details of the business emerged in the Panama Papers. The complaint was submitted by John Mann, the campaigning Labour MP, after Cameron revealed he once owned £30,000 of shares in Blairmore, the Panama- and Bahamas-based law firm.
Cameron said he had initially been angry about the way his father’s memory had been “traduced” as a result of the controversy. After the political storm erupted, Cameron said he was happy to provide more information about his personal finances to the parliamentary standards commissioner if required. The prime minister said he made a £19,000 profit from selling his shares in the offshore fund in early 2010. He was forced into the admission in the days after Blairmore was named as a client of Mossack Fonseca, the law firm at the centre of the explosive Panama Papers leak reported by the Guardian and other global media organisations.
Cameron said he sold his shares in the offshore trust, Blairmore Holdings, in January 2010, five months before becoming PM, because he wanted to avoid any conflict of interest. Cameron did not register it with the parliamentary standards commissioner because it was below the threshold for usual disclosure. However, MPs are also meant to declare interests that “might reasonably be thought by others to influence his or her actions, speeches or votes”. Submitting the complaint, Mann said action would have to be taken, arguing he had “broken the rules and principles of standards in public life”.
“I did not want anyone to be able to suggest that as prime minister I had any other agendas or vested interests. Selling all my shares was the simplest and clearest way that I could do that,” Cameron told the Commons at the beginning of last week. At the time of the row, the prime minister said he had followed all the rules for the registration of shareholdings in full. “The Labour party has said it would refer me to the commissioner for parliamentary standards. I have already given her the relevant information and if there is more she believes that I should say I am very happy to say it,” Cameron said.
The prime minister said at the time he had given information on the affair to the parliamentary standards commissioner. The standards commissioner confirmed on Thursday there was no case for an investigation.
“There are strict rules in this house for the registration of shareholdings – I have followed them in full. The Labour party has said it would refer me to the commissioner for parliamentary standards; I have already given her the relevant information and if there is more she believes that I should say I am very happy to say it,” Cameron told MPs. Related: Spotlight-style Panama Papers movie in development
The PM used the Commons address to explain why he had not made all relevant information public sooner. Cameron said he sold his shares in the offshore trust, Blairmore Holdings, in January 2010, five months before becoming PM, because he wanted to avoid any conflict of interest. “I did not want anyone to be able to suggest that as prime minister I had any other agendas or vested interests. Selling all my shares was the simplest and clearest way that I could do that,” Cameron told the Commons in a statement about the Panama Papers leak.
“I accept all of the criticisms for not responding more quickly to these issues – but as I said, I was angry about the way my father’s memory was being traduced. The prime minister said at the time he had given information on the affair to the prliamentary standards commissioner. The prime minister also used the Commons address to explain why he had not made all relevant information public sooner, after he avoided questions for a week about whether he had ever benefited from Blairmore. He said: “I accept all of the criticisms for not responding more quickly to these issues, but as I said, I was angry about the way my father’s memory was being traduced. I know he was a hardworking man and a wonderful dad and I’m proud of everything he did to build a business and provide for his family.”
“I know he was a hardworking man and a wonderful dad and I’m proud of everything he did to build a business and provide for his family.” Cameron also faced questioning over a £200,000 gift from his mother, which followed the £300,000 inheritance he received after the 2010 death of his father Ian. The payments by Mary Cameron to her son in May and July 2011 were given tax-free, and will only become liable to inheritance tax of up to 40% if the prime minister’s mother dies within seven years of handing over the money. There is no suggestion that they have broken any rules.
Cameron also faced questioning over a £200,000 gift from his mother, which followed the £300,000 inheritance he received after the 2010 death of his father Ian.
The payments by Mary Cameron to her son in May and July 2011 were given tax-free, and will only become liable to inheritance tax of up to 40% if the prime minister’s mother dies within seven years of handing over the money. There is no suggestion that they have broken any rules.
Cameron said parents should not be embarrassed about passing money on to their children, and insisted it was something “fully recognised” in the tax system.Cameron said parents should not be embarrassed about passing money on to their children, and insisted it was something “fully recognised” in the tax system.
The Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, dismissed the PM’s Commons statement at the time as a “masterclass in the art of distraction” and suggested Cameron did not understand public anger over tax avoidance and evasion. The Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, dismissed the PM’s Commons statement at the time as “a masterclass in the art of distraction” and suggested Cameron did not understand public anger over tax avoidance and evasion.