Here is Angelina Jolie’s new cover for Interview Russia. It doesn’t seem to be taken from another photoshoot, so maybe she actually did a photoshoot with Interview Russia? Weird. Anyway, there’s some various news stories about Angelina. Earlier this week, there were some stories that she was shopping for some real estate… in London! Probably so she could be closer to Jack O’Connell?! (OMG, that would be amazing.) But when she was on the red carpet last night in London, she told a British outlet that she’s not really interested in buying a London home because of the proposed real estate taxes:
The actress, who is currently in London promoting new film Unbroken, jokingly told Channel 4 News’ Jon Snow that, although she’d like to have an UK base, the proposed tax could deter her.
“I have lived here before and in the future I think it would be really nice to have a foothold here for work, some kind of office would be nice,” she said.
Snow then notes that the UK’s expensive houses are expected to become more expensive with new tax plans, but suggests that this probably wouldn’t discourage Jolie too much.
“I’m quite responsible about money. That could put me off,” she laughed in response.
I tend to think Angelina is pretty good with money, you know? She buys nice gifts for Brad and the kids and she flies by private plane, but she’s not spending money like it’s going out of style. She doesn’t have a crazy wardrobe and Brad is the one with the luxury real estate addiction.
Oh, and before the Unbroken premiere last night, Angelina went to Parliament! She was checking out the House of Lords “to see her close friend Arminka Helic, 46, become a member of the 1,000-year-old institution.” Jolie sat in the gallery with Sir Nicholas Soames. Angelina said she was “extremely proud” of Helic and “She’s been in many ways a mentor to me and she’s an extraordinary woman and I’m very, very honored to be here today.” After the ceremony, Angelina and some of Helic’s friends had tea in the House of Lords’ dining room. Apparently, Baroness Helic (that’s her new title) worked closely with Jolie to put together Summit to End Sexual Violence in Conflict. Angelina is rolling in some really amazing circles these days.
Update by Celebitchy: Here are some new photos that just came out of Angelina in Paris. She was leaving the set of French TV show “Vivement Dimanche”.
Photos courtesy of Interview Russia, Fame/Flynet.
I can’t blame her. She can live anywhere in the world, why live somewhere where you’d be bleeding money?
Oh Please – get a grip, rich people complaining about paying taxes like all the Poors especially when they are people supposedly supporting getting people out of poverty is just so hypocritical.
You dont’bleed’ money in the UK if you are rich but you bloody well should contribute – currently the division between the highest 2% and the lowest 20% is the biggest its been since Victorian times.
She earnms a ridiculous amount of money for play acting and she thinks the paltry tabled mansion tax is too rich??
We don’t want you love – go and hang out with Bono of that’s your attitude frankly..
Oh please! Watch the interview clip. It seemed like she didn’t even know what the guy was talking about and was trying to laugh it off.
Amen
Thank you.
too often an article is read only enough to support your preformed judgement.
Jolie laughed it off and so what if she didn’t. Just because someone is good with money and wealthy doesn’t mean they can’t view things as too expensive or out of budget. That’s hardly Hypocritical nature.
Let’s be logical.
She is not talking or complaining about about paying taxes per se. It is about a specific tax that had been specifically proposed to penalize those with homes valued over a certain amount with a yearly added property tax. It, in fact, would have even included and penalized those with one or two bedroom flats as London real estate values are very high already. The so called mansion tax doesn’t look like it’s happening after all.
She actually sounds like she would like a base in London.
The mansion tax will put a cap on house prices. House sellers will think twice for how much they sell as there is the mansion tax when the price exceeds 2 mio Pounds. The last financial crisis was caused by overpriced / overvalued houses or housing credits etc.
The mansion tax is simply necessary. Too many people put their money into an overpriced house instead of investing it more sensibly. This priorizing of buying expensive property has to do with many things: overpriced houses and the British class system which requires you to represent.
It is a shame the mansion tax won’t happen. Unemployed paupers in social housing estates are being punished if they have one spare bedroom. But the filthy rich don’t want to contribute their share.
A 2 mio Pounds housing tax in London will not affect paupers but those earning 200.000 Pounds and above. Check the housing prices and their monthly mortgages.
well said @charming and to be honest with a lot of expensive property being brought up by non Brits why should they not contribute to the running costs within the UK. Many will not contribute to the lager UK taxes so contributing extra on top of the rates does not seem to be too much of hardship for those who have considerable income at their finger tips. Lets no forget that UK taxes support the OBE process which she was so happy to accept.
If she really wanted to love here she would pay the taxes but I will give her the benefit of the doubt and will assume she was wrong footed and had no idea that she was being drawn into political football
I think the rumors of her buying property was just the press trying to create another Faux Angelina-Clooney are all good pals and planning London dinner party stories…..
I’m glad she stopped the buying property in London rumor.
Are UK taxes out of control?
No. Overall personal tax burden is about 7-9% higher than overall personal tax burden in the US. And we get a health service for free with that 7%, so it’s really not that big of a difference. The UK isn’t a high tax, high welfare country like the Scandinavian ones (more’s the pity, in my opinion).
Cost of living (particularly housing and energy) is high here, however,
We have an election coming up and one party’s manifesto proposes a mansion tax on high value homes. And you can’t get away from bitching about it at the moment. To the extent of asking an American film actress what she thinks about it in a TV interview. Sigh!
•Sixer•
Thanks for this. I was curious.
LS: If you look at the UK as a kind of halfway house between the US (all about the individual and personal responsibility) and the Scandinavian social democracies (all about the common weal and responsibility to the community), you’d be about there.
(Plus, add in a bit of anachronistic snobbery and islander xenophobia, of course!)
•Sixer•
You goofy island empires. 😉
(Since I adjusted to one, I figure I could probably adjust to the other. With the added bonus I could read the signs *squee!* Jury still out whether I could understand anything else 😉)
Sixer – if the max tax difference is 9% but basic health care is included, that means UK taxes are actually lower than US taxes plus health insurance. Although the reforms were assuming about 9% of income going toward health insurance (in deciding appropriate subsidy thresholds), actually most people pay much more and it keeps increasing as you age. They often don’t realize it until they lose their job and are no longer on their employer’s group plan, or when their employer decides to go cheaper with a much higher deductible and much larger copays. Only recently has it become required to indicate how much real money in their paycheck has been going toward the insurance also. Many small businesses were unable to afford insurance plans for employees until the recent reforms (which will probably be overturned, insurance companies are a major political force because profits are so high). The government exchange that kicked in this year allowed tax credits to subsidize insurance for many people, where the government paid the subsidy directly to the insurance companies on the exchange. It was a big profit maker for the companies, who canceled insurance policies for many people in our area and told them to use the exchange. Then the government would pick up most of the bill for policies with much higher premiums. Then the companies on the exchange proceeded to narrow their networks so much that many people found themselves with a great plan on paper that actually let them afford medical care only if they could travel a few hours to reach a doctor or hospital in network. Even our state capitol found most of its doctors and hospitals out of network. Our local doctors and hospital (serving 280,000 people in 7 counties) were all out of network. The coverage would kick in only for emergency care.
I was paying at least 25% of my income in a good year, had to quit insurance when they wanted more than 50% plus a $5000 deductible. And I live in a state with average income $25,000. There would have been nothing left for anything else like eating and sleeping, plus no guarantee they would actually pay the medical bills. Plus they could cancel me any time and actually the premium increases and jump in deductible accelerated after my $15,000 UTI (since medical costs are insane here in the US and insurance companies are free to refuse to pay anything without recourse). Those are the risks of a system where the amount you pay into the insurance pool is not tied to your income and you can be pushed out of the pool any time, even after paying for decades.
The U.K. has other safety nets that US taxes don’t cover also. Most credit card debt in the US is due to uncovered medical expenses (even if you have insurance) and efforts to keep afloat during periods of prolonged unemployment. Very little is due to overspending.
•jwoolman•
I’m torn between teasing (good naturedly) or applauding you. Perhaps I’ll do both.
I find it frustrating that so many people buy into the myth that the U.S. is so wealthy that of course we (the average citizen) are going bankrupt due to our own horrible mismanagement of money. It’s just more ‘blame the victim’ mentality that I wish would stop.
Also, almost anywhere else, you’d be stoned for revealing the fact that not all is hunky-dory here. There are a lot of people that seem to *need* to present a façade to the world. Boggles my mind.
Overall, I rather like the UK or Scandinavian attitudes of community vs everyone for themselves here.
Guess I didn’t tease you afterall. Lol
Sixer
Thanks for breaking this down. This is really odd Jolie had to get asked this question. I guess it does illustrate what a fuss is being made.
@jwoolman – I don’t think Brits (see Anna below!) realise quite what good value for money the NHS is. Of the G7, we have the best outcomes for the lowest price in terms of percentage of GDP. Yes, we do have more safety nets than the US too (a minimum income guarantee for pensioners, for example). But we also have fewer of them than most continental European countries. We are that halfway house!
@FLORC – she was only asked it because the proposed mansion tax is such a hot button topic in the early election positioning. Bloody ridiculous to ask a US film star – but it’s so they can say “Look! The foreign sexy ones won’t come to London if we charge them tuppence extra for their lodgings!”
This might interest you guys. It’s a table showing the scoring for the latest Commonwealth Fund health service report:
http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/article9542817.ece/alternates/w1024/Davis_Mirror_2014_ES1_for_web.jpg
You guys spend so much for so little return!
Hi Sixer, but aren’t Scandinavian countries among the happiest in the world? While they pay very high taxes, the funds are channelled back for pretty good employment, housing, education and family benefits. I recall an Oprah episode where she visited Finland or Denmark to ask why they were so happy paying 50% tax. The interviewee mentioned she doesn’t have to worry about her job, kids etc and the logic is everyone doesn’t mind since almost everyone is subjected to high taxes and get the same benefits. So in her own words, why should there be bitterness on the taxes?
My country has one of the lowest personal tax rates but highest cost of living in the world. The ultra rich are flocking here as capital gains are not taxed but this pushes the cost of property even more. We are taxed for goods and services consumption, housing, car ownership but in terms of medical, housing and employment security, it is nowhere to the Scandinavians standards. In fact, our politicians are the highest paid in the world and even more so than the US president. While I acknowledge the grass may look greener on the other side, appreciate if anyone here from Scandinavia or with more knowledge can shed more light on the perception of their benefits…am genuinely curious and would like to understand.
@ Jade
Yep. The Scandinavian countries always come top for happiness. I should imagine the social democratic principles have a lot to do with it – but at the same time, these simply flow from the national character, don’t they? There’s hygge and jantelov and just a way of being that doesn’t prioritise the individual over the community.
Mr Sixer used to live in Denmark and has many friends there so we visit often. I make no bones about my personal preference being for social democracy, community over individual and the like, plus slow food and other hippy-dippy stuff. So I love it there.
Even so, there are swings and roundabouts to every society. Nowhere is nirvana. You wouldn’t go to Denmark and find that simply EVERYTHING is better.
LS: I wondered who are these people you describe, that boggle your mind in their need to present a facade of hunky dory US life? I’ve never been aware of any myth stating that the US is so wealthy, the average citizen is going bankrupt, due to mismanagement of funds. Did I read you right?
Personally, I believe that Americans complain and agitate for change with the best of intentions. We are a bunch of revolutionaries. The new healthcare law will be ironed out for the well-being of all Americans. Developing a order in which every man/woman is equal, is in within reach, because of our great Constitution. Of course we have problems – but we are also given ways to find solutions. Who boggles your mind; Patriots, Republicans, or just Joe down at the corner store?
•wolfpup•
I see it everywhere and live it.
Examples: There was a ‘feel good’ story about how a homeless family that was being held afloat by the generosity of their church. However the reaction to the story was heartbreaking. The comments were exceptionally nasty. They almost exclusively focused on how the family ‘looked’ and blamed them for their ‘obvious’ personality flaws rather than a broken system.
Sociology and social psychology talks about how we Americans (and humans) tend to function and react to things. So my education plus my personal experiences affect what and how I write.
Google ‘American Dream a Myth?’ and you’ll find quite a few articles that deal with it. The issue I have is that so many buy into the myth.
http://www.academia.edu/1400721/Wyatt-Nichol_H._2011_._The_enduring_myth_of_the_American_Dream_Mobility_marginalization_and_hope
Uh, yeah UK taxes are out of control. Its 40% above GBP 30K. That’s crazy money to be giving away for so-called free health services (which are terrible compared to paid for health services in the US) and free schooling (which is also bad).
It is not as you say
There are many very rich people and clever accountants so they are not hard up
I appreciate my health service as do many others who just have to look at the U.S.to see what happens if you become seriously ill,the debt must add to people’s worries
Taxes are not out of control….Perhaps I should say US guns are out if control ??
As far as the UK education system is still healthy..
But why try to score points ,it is different here attitude’s and values are different and I expect that many would not understand why we feel those who benefit most should contribute to help society .
One of the things that was the most shocking to me about moving to Europe from the States was how much less we pay in taxes, and how much more we receive in return. Health care is the biggest example, of course, but education is a huge factor as well. We are basically middle class, but here we have health care, whereas in the States we were about to be charged $1500/month for health insurance–more than our housing cost–and that was pretty much the final straw.
I don’t know what lemonade you’ve been drinking, but if you actually think the American health care system represents world standard healthcare, you are seriously misinformed. The insurance situation is an absolute disaster. We have manufacturing giants locking out small business and entrepreneurs and forcing hospitals into contracts that charge them exorbintant amounts of money for outdated technology. Hospitals and insurance companies are being forced to merge into powerful monopolies that turn even “non-profit” healthcare facilities into revenue mills. Our maternity care is abysmal for an industrialized nation, particularly for non-white and impoverished women. Coverage for the mentally ill is practically non-existent. The increasing squeeze on hospitals means that they are chronically understaffed, have massive pay discrepancies, and generally have ridiculously high turnover rates. People are actually DYING in this country because hospitals and/or insurance companies refuse to cover certain types of care.
Great health care? Sure, if you’re wealthy and have access to proper resources. If you are poor or live in a rural area, you are shit out of luck. There’s a lot of good to be found in American hospitals, but we have a hell of a lot of work to do to climb out of the clusterf*ck we’re currently in.
As for the school system…I wouldn’t get too smug about that. British schools have backslid significantly in recent years, but America’s don’t even break the top 10. Kind of hard to talk sh*t when we’re barely rated average, eh?
@Sixer: I don’t think you quite realize the problems with the NHS. It offers reactive rather than proactive care – this is the same level of health services as many third world countries. A better model would be to lower taxes and to allow people to purchase health insurance, which would allow them to dictate what level of health care they want. And for all those who can’t afford health insurance, the government could subsidize health insurance a la the model in Switzerland. And just so it’s clear, I’m not a Brit so I do realize how good (or more realistically how bad) the Brits have it and as a health care specialist who has lived in Switzerland, the UK and the US (among half a dozen other countries) I do understand the relationship between taxes and health care.
Sorry to bring in such heavy issues on a gossip blog. Back to Angelina, love the pic 🙂
Anna
Not many British commenters on here could comment more knowledgeably than Sixer you know!
As you day, heavy topic for a gossip site plus tis a holiday for many but I have to shout out, re the NHS, that it’s elective private health care that has nibbled away at its foundations, lo! these many years. People paying to go private nine times out of ten get to use NHS facilities that are thus denied to the rest of us. Political mismanagement too, for sure. But the idea of ditching it altogether is both horrifying and deeply sad, as it is one of the few really decent things we still maintain, for all its current weakness.
Privatisation of the essentials: healthcare, gas and electricity, water, railways: every one a bloody fiasco.
Britain showed its best side in the post-War years with the creation of the Welfare State/NHS. We want to rebuild that original health service, not flog off the last few scalpels and aspirin to some friend of a Tory minister who’ll wring it dry.
(Sorry…..this is no place/time for such a rant)!
sorry Anna not true on the last ratings of first world health services in terms of value for money the UK was near the top and the USA near the bottom. The point about our service is anyone can access it regardless of income and waiting times like treatment for cancer are generally excellent. My brother who lived in Canada has just paid out thousands for state of the art treatment for his cancer which we receive free on our system.
Anna I have worked with people who have worked in both the UK and USA and they do not hold your opinions. The UK service is much better at supporting long term conditions like stokes and dementia and our mental health services are far better than those I have heard about in the USA.I have also seen the different services from a relatives point of view and I have far more trust in the NHS to support you at times of crisis than in many other countries, I for one have no problems with paying the 40 tax on income I make over 32,000 because the NHS through its diligence has kept me alive for the past 15 years.
Switzerland and makes a lot of money from tax avoidance bank accounts and is one of the richest countries in the world and not really a fair comparison.
I would disagree, predictably enough, Anna. And it’s not just me: study after study (international, not British) puts the NHS at the top of health systems in the developed world for delivering good outcomes to the largest percentage of the population at the lowest cost.
In the US, insurance is at the heart of the exorbitant health costs. Although I concede that other insurance based systems elsewhere work well.
I also agree that British medicine takes a conservative approach but I’m not sure this has everything to do with funding type. It has a lot to do with attitudes to risk-taking too and, indeed, outcomes aren’t that different in most cases, whether you adopt a rush-to-surgery or a wait-and-see policy – funnily enough, I copy-edited a PhD paper on risk not so long ago. It said a lot in the difference in various cultures. For instance, did you know that a US firefighter is 8x more likely to be killed in service than a British one? It’s all to do with a country’s attitude to risk/hero complex and it’s also a factor in healthcare.
If you look at the Commonwealth Fund table I linked to above, you’ll see that Britain’s main weak area is ‘healthy lives’ and this feeds into what I said above about Britain being a halfway house – in this area, we have the same problems as Americans – obesity, junk food diets, etc, which feed into health. And that’s a failure of public health rather than healthcare.
Do I think the NHS is perfect? Far, far from it. It’s unwieldy, bureaucratic and while it does a better job than advertised on prevention, it needs to be far far better on public health. But it is economical, not expensive, and it delivers excellent outcomes for patients not just in terms of pounds spent but also in terms of health outcomes.
Sixer you said it all but here it is again. I agree re the conservative approach. The NHS is very medically based in terms of hierarchy and does not embrace alternative medicine or jump at treatments which have not got a sufficient research to support but now embraces psychologically based groups for people with specific medical conditions. Having said that it was the Brits who pioneered person centre care for people with dementia and people from all over the world access Bradford university’s dementia care degrees.
Britain’s healthcare has been lauded as the best out of 11 of the world’s wealthiest countries, following a far-reaching study by a US-based foundation.
In a report entitled “Mirror, Mirror on the Wall,” the quality, efficiency, cost and performance of the US health system was compared to Canada and nine other countries in Europe and Australasia.
It also includes Switzerland
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/uks-healthcare-ranked-the-best-out-of-11-western-countries-with-us-coming-last-9542833.html
Gorgeous cover.
It is, she has nice legs
Actually, she doesn’t, her legs are way too thin, but they look great in this photo.
She’s always had great legs. Let’s not start this thin shaming. Because that’s where it’s going. It’s her body type to carry weight in her midsection and not limbs. Even early modeling photos showed her legs and arms were very thin while she never looked emaciated. During what people say her healthy time was of Tomb Raider days she was taking in a heavy protein diet and much working out. It took time to build her into that weight. Also, her frame has awide rib cage making her chest look larger than it was. All this into account people cannot fairly judge this woman’s weight here.
So, let’s just not speculate and shame.
I don’t think anybodycan seriously claim Angelina Jolie wasn’t seriously low-weight to underweight. Her clavicle is protruding and she has hardly any fat nor any muscle on her upper arms. The lady is too thin even if she is one of these naturally skinny long-boned creatures with extremely fast metabolisms.
And better don’t judge her after her cover pics. Those get photoshopped to the utmost extent. Papparazzi shots are a better source for judgement.
There is a rumour that Brad likes them thin. Look at Aniston when she was with Brad.
Or compare her to some shots of some slim actresses before digital photoshopping: Jane Russel, the very sporty and very tall Rita Hayworth or Marilyn Monroe. None of them were fat but none of them were engulfed by today’s no-fat anorexic no-eating culture.
She does not have nice legs. Sorry, but Angie’s beauty is all in her face.
I never get bored about Angelina
At all. She always gives great interview 🙂
“Angelina is rolling in some really amazing circles these days”_____ So true kaiser I agree with you
“It doesn’t seem to be taken from another photoshoot, so maybe she actually did a photoshoot with Interview Russia? Weird.”
that’s an old photoshoot.
it was first in Newsweek when she was promoting ItLobah
http://www.celebs.com/archives/angelina-jolie-covers-newsweek-talks-in-the-land-of-blood-and-honey.html
Thank you! I’d forgotten about this one, and it’s stunning.
I knew I had already seen these pics!
Bloody mansion tax is even making its way into internet gossip. ARRRGGGHHHH.
If I were Angie, I wouldn’t want to sit next to Nick Soames. He’s like our – bugger, forgot the name, Dick Cheney, is it? The one whose dosh is all caught up in the arms industry so he loves war – yes, Cheney.
Sixer
Dig the way Soames gracelessly praises Britain, rather than the new Baroness, for her elevation. Ugh.
• Hope Angelina had a good gawp at her surroundings, especially the two Daniel Maclise murals in the Royal Gallery. In his ‘Death of Nelson’, the rugged British tars in the foreground are depicted in surprisingly moving detail, in particular their many tattoos, of the ‘I luv Sue’ type. I hope she enjoyed that!
• And in the visitors’ gallery, the back walls also have much smaller Maclise murals, in one of which he sneaked in a portrait of a very controversial woman whom sniffy Victorian London had cast out.
I hope Soames at least showed AJ the interesting stuff, thrones an’ ting aside.
Sixer
Oh, President Cheney. Yes that’s a good description.
(And yes he was President for at least 2 hours. 2 productive hours)
Bet he didn’t show her Tent City on Parliament Square!
Probably thinks it’s a Boy Scouts’
Jamboree. What larks.
She used to have a beautiful home in the English countryside for years. Very classic.
Plan: Ireland is dotted with vast, empty convents, now that nobody fancies becoming a nun. Some wonderful, venerable buildings with lavish lands. Many have excellent architectural pedigrees.
The J-Ps wouldn’t be pestered there, and by heck the convents would be spectacular settings for the children to range over.
• Aaaand Pitt the Elder (Lord Chatham) is quite kindly remembered among otherwise disliked British politicians of yore……Brad could entertain the kids with off-the-cuff tales of this great ‘ancestor’. 😉
🙂
🙂
🙂
Dammit, should’ve contextualised Pitt reference:
There’s a magnificent statue of him in Cork, a city whose trade (like Boston’s, indeed) owed much to his legislation. I can picture Shiloh adopting the oratorical, toga’d pose next to the sculpture.
I’m sick of millionaire celebrities complaining about taxes. Paying taxes is not being irresponsible with money. Taxes pay for example schools and hospitals. Maybe Angelina should move to one of those countries that offer huge tax deductions for millionaires who move in. Us working/middle class people can take care of the sick and the old.
+1
I never heard her or Brad complain about taxes. In fact Brad has said he didn’t mind paying more if it helped with programs.
They have a home in France that I’m sure the pay a lot of taxes on.. The interviewer brought of the tax thing, not her.
She was asked about buying a home in UK.. based on another Home purchase by the couple that was not true.
With the money they both make they pay a lot of taxes.
Didn’t you hear? Taxes are for peasants
My thoughts exactly.
I’m *positive* that Angelina understands the value of a tax dollar, as far as its impact on social welfare. Taxes fund international aid and domestic rebuilding efforts, and she and Brad spend all their free time encouraging both of these, so it’s not like she’s complaining that she pays too many taxes. She was just responding to a politically charged joke about the cost (or proposed cost) of British real estate, and admitting that she does consider these things when making big investments.
In my experience, the people who make anti-tax complaints are the people who don’t fully recognize their own privilege, and who don’t think it’s fair to sacrifice even a tiny portion of their inflated quality of life in order to radically transform strangers’ lives. That doesn’t sound like Angie at all.
ok…..didn’t really sound like complaining to me………just answering a question….balls?
Jackboy’s balls, anyone?
http://insidemovies.ew.com/2014/11/26/jack-oconnell-naked-pizza/?hootPostID=e479df927062d3349d0a4038351f4d46
that set must feel like a huge all boys dorm most of the time. my brother went to a boarding school, every time he came back for holidays, he tended to horrify our elders. took him about a week to ‘behave’ again.
YES! Bring it back, ladies.
ButterBALLS turkey because ’tis the season.
Merry shweddy BALLS for everyone! 😀
Its kind of funny how a throwaway sentence to charmingly deal with an awkward question becomes an entire thing. Part of the fun of celeb gossip is watching it snowBALL from nothing into something big! 😉
Good lord, she pays more in taxes in a month than most of us will pay in our lifetimes. There is nothing, morally or legally, wrong with choosing to live in a place that takes less of your money. She’s not British, she has no obligation to support the British, other than paying what she is legally obligated to pay based on what she earns there, and I don’t see her complaining about any of that. Has anybody ever heard of her complaining about what she pays in the U.S.? I haven’t. I’ve never met a single person, rich or poor, who didn’t try to pay the least they could legally get away with. Should people who deduct their mortgage interest not do it because they should be happy about paying more? Of course not; people would think that is crazy, but then they’re surprised when rich folks feel the same way.
RobN, exactly! You said what I was thinking (only better than I could’ve said it).
This completely.
“She’s not British, she has no obligation to support the British, other than paying what she is legally obligated to pay based on what she earns there”
That is not how owning property abroad works. I have a house abroad (a holiday home not in the UK) and I have to pay tax on owning the property in that country (both international earnings/savings/property as well as local council taxes). Don’t think that this is unusual either. The London Mayor Boris Johnson was born in New York but moved to the UK when he was 5. He has never moved back to the US since but still holds his US passport (as well as his British one). He is now 50. He earns above the US foreign earned income exclusion ($97,600 or £62,000) the US this year have come after him after selling a property and for non payment of US taxes although he hasn’t lived there for 45 years and owns no property there. Is that fair? The US (I think) is the only country who have a citizenship tax, not a residency tax.
Hopefully they will alter the Mansion tax to exclude all taxpaying UK citizens (as there are a lot of pensioners in London who have paid off their mortgages but their apartments are now worth 2 Million) but keep the tax in place for non residents and increase the foreign corporations tax especially when they are buying cheaper properties and raising the rents to kick British citizens out on the streets so they can get more money. Sure it may hurt New York school teachers and council employees but the loop hole they have with this pension scheme is making people homeless and is not helping the housing shortage in Britain.
Do you still get tax relief on your mortgage interest in the States?
Sue: my cousin’s child has dual nationality (he was born when his parents were living and working in the US). Now he’s coming up to adulthood, he’s going to have to give up the US citizenship and that’s all something to do with taxes. Presumably the same as Boris?
Yeah it depends on what he is earning. If he earns over the threshold or sells a house he has to pay taxes to the US Government as well as any taxes he pays in the country he is living in. It is not fair and I am pretty sure it is the only country in the world who treat their citizens like this
I suppose I didn’t make myself clear about Foreign companies and Brits being made homeless. It is to do with Westbrook Partners who many New Yorkers pay for them to invest for their pensions, and New Era Estate in London. Westbrook Partners bought New Era Estate and are tripling the tenants rent. 94 tenants are either elderly, disabled or single parents or low income families, they cannot afford to pay so are being evicted. Most will end up in homeless shelters. These kinds of property investors just make me wild. Britain has a bad housing shortage and corporation tax needs urgently to be looked at and plug up the holes including the Channel Islands.
the interviewer asked her the question she said what she said – she has always said that she has been lucky to do work she loves and get paid for it – she has never said anything abt taxes etc
Sixer: That is true. Four of my kids have dual nationality (the oldest was 5 when we left the US), and all of them are going to have to make that decision when they are grown. If they keep their US citizenship they will have to pay US taxes even if they live and work someplace else. There is an income tax exclusion, but payroll taxes (ie, Social Security, Medicare tax, that kind of stuff) is all charged from the first dollar.
So if you are dual or an expat, even if you are paying all those equivalent taxes to the country where you live, you have to pay them again off of the same income to the US. It’s even worse if, like me, you’re self-employed. I have to pay France their equivalent of payroll taxes (which aren’t very high in my case) and then from the same sum of money earned, pay self-employment taxes (the double Social Security tax and all the others) to the US. It is actually pretty rough and I think I would resent it less if this were some kind of temporary sojourn here, but with no plans to return to the States, it’s hard to justify continuing to pay so much because unlike La Jolie (who I love), I don’t exactly have money to burn.
If you want to live in a country then you pay taxes there. Cause it pays for police and the legal system and streets and all these nice things in civilisations which stars as well as us ordinary folks enjoy so much.
Nobody knows how much taxes they pay. The possibilities for tax avoidance in the US are plentyfold.
Yes, rich people should pay a whole lot more taxes as they tend to profit a lot more from society’s institutions.
And yes, Jolie pretty much directly bashed the mansion tax. It was certainly very stupid of her to do that because she ain’t got no clues about property taxes nor about the conditions in Britain but nevertheless: this is a rich woman who objects to paying taxes which would apply to the rich only.
I am from a duel nationality Canadian/British family and the USA RULE it does not happen with us.
Yup!
So she should pay taxes in USA, France, and GB? That seems ott.
I think if she buys a house there, she should probably pay a tax on that particular property. I think that’s how it works everywhere else. Britain might have been unusual in not charging a tax on those large houses. But since she’s an American, I wonder how the tax divisions work if she has a property there — would the American government also expect a tax from that particular house (i.e world-wide income?) Therefore, would her taxes be split between the two countries on that particular property? (and who gets more?) I should probably go ask her accountants….
For sure she’d have to pay tax to SOMEBODY when she buys a property. I don’t think she’s trying to avoid paying taxes or anything like Bono though.
@ perplexed we all pay council tax on our houses depending on its value, up to a certain level, to pay for local services.
This might help explain about the mansion tax:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29326057
Thanks for the article. I was looking for clarification on how the whole thing works (and also might have worked in the past).
Could someone please tell me what I need to do to read all of the posts. I am only able to see one page and when there are a lot of comments, I can’t read them all. Thanks in advance.
That’s very odd. What kind of browser are you using? Try viewing the page on a different browser.
I google my computer questions with fine results. Just type in your problem, and help will appear.
“so she could be closer to Jack O’Connell?! (OMG, that would be amazing) do you remember she’s married ? It’s nice for her husband
I see no chemistry between her and Jack. I know it’s a joke, but it’s a bit weird. Besides, isn’t he with Cara D?
I hope it’s a joke
I don’t see why she complains about british tax whereas the french tax is more expensive
It may be because she already is paying tax in a few countries it wouldn’t make sense to buy another home somewhere else just for fun. Nothing to do with Britain per se. Just taxes in general.
God that face!
She looks great in the new pictures!
🙂
yes, she looks gorgeous! fillers and botox done right!
It seems to me that people cannot differentiate between what is a statement and what is a joke.
Angelina clearly answered that laughing and as a joke. She lives in France where they pay a lot more in tax.
Angelina has always been responsible with her money – she splits her income in three. One towards her savings, one towards bills and other stuff and the last part goes towards charity. Angelina actually inspired me to follow her way of dividing her income and I am currently do the same thing.
PS: I though Angelina didn’t have any friends especially female ones. Isn’t that what haters claim just because she doesnt go in holidays with them to pap haven or never namedrops them for publicity?
It seems to me that people cannot differentiate between what is a statement and what is a joke.
Angelina clearly answered that laughing and as a joke. She lives in France where they pay a lot more in tax.
Angelina has always been responsible with her money – she splits her income in three. One towards her savings, one towards bills and other stuff and the last part goes towards charity. Angelina actually inspired me to follow her way of dividing her income and I am currently do the same thing.
PS: I thought Angelina didn’t have any friends especially female ones. Isn’t that what haters claim just because she doesnt go in holidays with them to pap haven or never namedrops them for publicity?
To be honest I wouldn’t want to go on holiday with someone who brought their 6 kids along! 🙂
Isn’t it funny how some people ignore “she laughed in response ”
Brad and Angie have a home in France,home in NOLA and the homes in CA that Brad bought before they got together.
All these other stories about homes in GB,Italy,Greece,etc are tabloid fiction.Just like all these stories about extravagant gifts are BS.
It is going to be a feeding frenzy. I see it. Every post is an overreaction. She is not a complainer neve has been. She and Brad spend a lot of time in London.. spending money. And in all these years I have never seen a story about them avoiding taxes.. Nor anything about their Foundation. But people have some serious reading comprehension problems.
Great cover. I also think that she looks great in these candid pics but on the other hand the red carpet ones are not good, she looks older and her fashion sense…well I hate almost all her looks on the red carpet. Luckily she is a beautiful woman that doesn’t need great fashion sense to stand out.
Regarding the taxes topic, she thinks like (almost) all the other millionaires: That’s for peasants only. From my european point of view, I prefer that rich people pay their taxes to invest in healthcare and education than doing these PR charity events.
How is it she thinks taxes are for peasants. Where has she ever said such a thing.. And she and Brad both spend a great deal of their money on healthcare.. They have built a TB Aids clinic and support many health care issues.
that was a very unfair comment. Especially since their actions show how untrue it is.
Well Brad and Angie have done plenty and have donated millions in healthcare and education in the U.S. and other countries. I’m sure that doesn’t apply to them.
I haven’t seen the video so I will not comment on what Angelina Jolie allegedly said according to the Irish Independent report .
If Jolie’s intention was to say that the mansion tax would put her off living in the UK then I would lose all respect for her. The money gained from the proposed “mansion tax” would go towards the British National Health Service. As I understand it, the amount payable would be less than US property taxes. In any event it would be pittance to someone as rich as Jolie.
I am fed up generally with millionaire celebrities who have dubious tax arrangements yet get kudos for making high profile charitable donations.
Apparently Angelina didn’t seem to be aware of the mansion tax issue and context (people who saw the interview say that), so I don’t think she was necessarily trying to be controversial. But she IS an Ayn Rand fan, so she probably doesn’t believe in taxes, full stop.
If Angie is an Ayn Rand fan (Atlas Shrugged), does it follow that she supports Paul Ryan’s wish (he carries that book like a bible), to “shrink” the government, mostly of our social programs for the elderly, poor and indigent? He had it completely worked out as running mate with Mitt Romney. The Republicans wanted to do away with what they call “entitlements”.
Where could she actually participate politically?
Every interview she did in London the interviewer has pushed this rumour that they are buying a house in some posh neighbourhood. At first she outright said it was a “made up story”. Then said she wouldn’t be opposed to having an office in the future to be close to some of her UK colleagues. In other words, shut up and move on to the next question. And still pushing about some tax and how expensive it would be. And she says well I guess not then laughing.
I’m outraged!
The fadeaway doesn’t hide the insane Photoshop. No ones legs can do that.
She’s obviously just joking b in response to his comment. Some people need to lighten up
I’m not very familiar with Arminka Helic, but it sounds like she does great work, and she should be honoured for it. What I don’t understand, is seeing the honour in becoming part of this 1,000 year-old institution. An institution that is more selective than a “whites only” club. An institution that you only need to be born to qualify for, and women are largely excluded.
In Helic’s case, she is a life peer versus a hereditary peer, so she did something other than be born to earn this privilege. In the long run, I’m sure her appointment is progress. Research tells me that she’s the third Conservative Muslim woman peer in the House of Lords, and diversity is almost always a good thing.
If you mean AJ saying she’s ‘honoured’ to be a witness to the proceedings, well, it’s manners, innit.
Maybe she thinks the Upper House, the Queen, the Horseguards, Fortnum & Mason, and the Henley Regatta should all be swept away with revolutionary fervour…..but above all she is polite as a guest.
😉
Mayamae: Please research more about the House of Lords before posting statements.
1. We don’t have new hereditary peers. The HoL was partially reformed such that all except 92 Hereditary peers can sit in it. The remaining peers are ordinary men AND women with no vested interests and for the most part check the politicians with vested interests.
2. We now have Life Peers ONLY. The last hereditary peer was Thatcher back in early 90s. No new hereditary peers are created. Life peers are a cross section of society and include many men and Women. Also lots of Black and Asian peers, so it’s not a white only club. And it’s not a women only club.
3. The Life Peers that sit in the house of Lords (not all do) are political appointments. So blame the prevailing government if you must.
4. For the record, the non white peers tend to hold quite high office eg Baroness Scotland.
What LAK said. Also, while I concede that, being political appointments an’ all, the Establishment is overly represented in the HoL, it’s important to understand the function of the House when looking at what peers are created. The House scrutinises and improves legislation passed up from the House of Commons. It’s supposed to be a check on anything too radical, and also a check on whether or not the new laws will work as written or whether there will be any unintended consequences. The HoL can send bills back to the Commons with amendments.
So, in addition to appointments being party political, they are also intended to provide specialists. So top lawyers will be given peerages for their ability to scrutinise legislation. People from the medical profession (eg Robert Winston, the in vitro pioneer, is a lord) for health acts. Disabled people (eg the para-athlete Tanni Grey Thompson is a baroness) for equality legislation. Etc etc.
well said Sixer I was just about to go there.
Good for her. I am totally irresponsible with my money. I have some, but I’m not prudent with it. I’m not rich, I’m not poor… I am comfortable, but I am not careful with my money. I am generous with it. After all, it’s just money. Can’t take it with you. I’ve known FAR FAR FAR too many people in my life who squirreled away their money for retirement or a rainy day only to die or have something tragic happen in which that retirement and rainy day never came. When it comes to money, I am carpe diem all the way. If a friend wants something and can’t afford it, I buy it. If they come over and see something I have that they like, I give it to them. For whatever weird reason, I have absolutely no attachment to money or material possessions whatsoever. I enjoy shopping (ENTIRELY too much) and I get my “kicks” out of out, but then I give half the stuff away. Seriously – there is something wrong with me. 🙂
No self-respecting Ayn Rand fan would ever willingly pay taxes. Taxes are just a legalised way to steal from the rich to feed the stupid, lazy poor.
Unless you get cancer in old age and can’t pay for it. Then it’s okay to use those evil social security systems!
+1 Haha. Exactly.
The tabs conveniently forgot to add this pic of them hugging on the same balcony.
http://ego.globo.com/famosos/noticia/2014/11/dr-brad-pitt-e-angelina-jolie-tem-conversa-seria-em-varanda-de-hotel.html
http://s2.glbimg.com/aQY303RyooDD8BoircaJvOxkYsQ=/620×0/top/s.glbimg.com/jo/eg/f/original/2014/11/27/brad_pitt_angelina_jolie3_akm.jpg
I go back and forth on whether I think she’s had a (subtle) nose job or not. Maybe she does that contouring thing for red carpet events and photo shoots ’cause when I see candids of her or shots where she’s less made up, it looks like the same nose she’s always had when she was younger and fuller in the face.