strong article on the same idea :

http://www.counterpunch.org/mccann02262009.html

asked him about this on 5 live the other week and he basically said that U2 were a corporation and that management had a duty to maximise its profits. Although he did imply he was not complicit in it by the way he said it.

Do you think he gives any of his 'profits' to the poor or do you think his messiah complex is enough?

The Irish government for a long time gave a low rate of tax to creative acts of all sizes. No one saw fit to criticise U2 for benefiting from a low-tax regime in their country of birth; why should we be surprised that they move their tax base when their government changes the rules? And Bono is quite right about the corporation, whose Directors have a legal obligation to run the company in the interest of the shareholders and not according to the political prejudices of a bunch of onlookers.

Mark JF - I think this misses the point. It's the hypocrisy of the moralising little toerag that sticks in the craw. The sanctimonious git expounds on how we should do our bit to eradicate world poverty, whilst looking for any legal means to avoid paying tax. And using the corporation/Directors excuse just doesn't cut it for many people.

He is tax dodging and transferring his tax responsibilities to the rest of his considerably less wealthy countrymen. Saying it is the responsibility of the company to the shareholders etc is weasel word play. Who are the shareholders, may we ask? The members of U2 maybe? This is an old story anyway, and I remember a comment from the Irish PM at the time to the effect that he looks forward to the next time Bono beards him about the government not contributing enough to overseas aid. It may be legal but it stinks and he should be ashamed of himself. Mind you all his good works are just ego inflation anyway.

a subject we are not privy to the exact details of, could all the naysayers come up with some substantive figures on just how much tax the U2 corporation and Bono individually should pay? And how much of his after tax income should be give to charity? It seems there's a lot of very naive politicking going on from both camps and very little constructive suggestion.

... but Private Eye is full of stories of corporations and their convoluted tax avoidance schemes.

Is Bongo any more hypocritical than, for example, a newspaper which talks about wasted taxpayers money on a regular basis whilst being simultaneously owned by a large international corporation which uses a complex system of international interests to avoid paying tax?

Rich people are basically hypocrits. They all seem to claim that not paying tax is for the greater good. Boner is no worse than any of the rest of them. We're the true fools for continuing to buy their damn products.

in her fake diary of Bono in yesterday's Grauniad

- I can't walk down a street in Dublin without a nurse or teacher stopping me and saying, "It's an honour to pay for the roads you use."

They ain`t my strengths thats for sure. I like U2 and their music but, when their leader begs us to make poverty history and then later, decides to decamp some of his financial affairs to another country to avoid tax in some form is just wrong. Its wrong. Did you get that Bono. I would point the massive in the direction of the current output of Mark Thomas on podcast. Very revealing. Shame on you Bob Geldof.

As someone whose employment status has changed in the last month, to the point where for the first time in my life I'm probably going to need an accountant. Does this make me a bad person if I start writing things off and take advice to lower my tax burden? I'm pretty sure every rocker who wants to make poverty history has a flank of accountants and business advisors in the wings managing the wealth.

If you hate Bono, you hate Bono - this is just more fuel for the fire. However I'm Irish, and I know U2 begrudgery when I see it. Over the past 25 years, the strength of Irish U2 begrudgery is inversely related to the strength of the Irish economy. He might be seen as preachy but I'm pretty sure Bono contibutes more than his tithe to global causes. He certainly does more than me.

I've a feeling I'll be shot down for saying this but U2 have done so much for Ireland over the last 30 years. I was born in 1974 and was acutely aware as a kid of the Paddy being the butt of the joke on British tv in the years before political correctness. Coupled with "The Troubles", it led to a poor world view of what Ireland was really like. [Which still exists: Since I've moved to London in 2004 you still occasionally get comments to remind you you're an immigrant, and people have already decided things about you based on that.]

U2 have always kept their base of operations in Ireland, employing what I believe is about 70 or so people. U2 have aided tourism to the country - next time you see a South American under 25 in Dublin, ask them why they came to town. They have fought a global stereotype and have done for Ireland what the Beatles did for Liverpool - except the Beatles got out of the North West as soon as they had the first hit, and they never went back.

U2 are a global brand/product who generate most of their cash outside of Ireland. If they're doing anything illegal, well I hope they get caught. Treating them like the Bernie Madoffs of rock is a bit much, there are other things to get angry about. Like the financial management of the country by Irish government for the last few years - shouldn't you fix the roof when the sun is shining?

writing on this thread knows any of the details of U2's financial affairs.
No one knows what Bono thinks about the U2 tax arrangements.
No one knows exactly what U2 contribute to the Irish economy.
But what we do know is that he is trying to make life better for millions of people around the world. Whether you think he is sincere or not, I would guess it's a safe bet to say that he has done more good than any of us.

to say too much, but am against tax avoidance/evasion in general, as one who has a partner working in an understaffed and underfunded NHS, fully aware that there are a lot of very wealthy people out there who could contribute a lot more than they do, and I believe something should be done, agreed upon, among countries to prevent this kind of carry on. I'm with Twango on the need for social responsibility. This idea of the unfettered, pure pursuit of maximum income as a good thing, regardless, should be a discredited Thatcherite philosophy by now. Sorry, I came over all political there. Not the done thing. And someone who does knowingly avoid tax and also preaches about what public funds should be spent on is doubly wrong, if that is what he is doing.

being made here, along with a lot of conjecture and a conflation of personal and public interests. If you or I decide to minimise our tax burden, then that is a personal matter. What a government does with it's citizens money is a public matter. If someone tries to influence that government to do some good for the poorest people on Earth, I believe that person should be applauded, even if they do it solely to boost their own ego.