Jump to content
Grebfromgrebland

Also In The News

Recommended Posts

paedophile, child rapist catholic scumbag George Pell fails in his appeal 

 

rot in hell you perverted scumbag. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

I'm not saying they're unnecessary, as you say we need people standing up to the nazi admirers but the name 'antifa' doesn't really mean anti fascist to a lot of people in the same way that feminism doesn't really mean feminism to many people because of all the twats who have attached themselves to the movement for the wrong reasons.  Defenders of the hard right have seized on this to largely discredit the term and make it seem that calling oneself anti fascist is akin to being an extreme leftist.

 

Oh yeah, I totally agree - because of those excesses and because the hard right are pretty skilled at manipulating public opinion (Goebbels demonstrated that early on) the name has been tainted, and that negative perception is a big problem.

 

However, as big a problem as it is, I still believe it secondary to the bigger problem which is actually doing something to negate the resurgence of the hard right itself - as much as Prussian spouts r/ENGLIGHTEDCENTRISM on here about how they don't exist and even if they do they're not organised and not a threat to anyone at all (not even Heather Heyer, Ricky John Best or Taliesin Myrddin Namkai-Meche apparently, they were killed by "lone wolf" nutjobs, not part of an overarching ideology.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 20/08/2019 at 19:20, Wymeswold fox said:

Good job they weren't around in the 60s when swimming in the see meant turds ahoy as all the sewage was pumped straight into the sea.

 

Mind you it is disgusting although probably someone's 5 year old dropped it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 20/08/2019 at 19:20, Wymeswold fox said:

 

49 minutes ago, davieG said:

Good job they weren't around in the 60s when swimming in the see meant turds ahoy as all the sewage was pumped straight into the sea.

 

Mind you it is disgusting although probably someone's 5 year old dropped it.

 

HERE IT IS!...

 

...IT'S NO BIG DEAL!

 

B4OslAvCUAA3uP_.jpeg.117a11d86f40042e03e73de613acd593.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SouthStandUpperTier said:

 

 

HERE IT IS!...

 

...IT'S NO BIG DEAL!

 

B4OslAvCUAA3uP_.jpeg.117a11d86f40042e03e73de613acd593.jpeg

 

You wouldn't say that if you swallowed the little fooker !! ...   :S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Buce said:

To be honest, unless it's a pretty clear indicator of forthcoming policy decisions I've actually stopped paying attention to the ridiculous rubbish the man comes out with. It's patently obvious that he can *say* pretty much anything he likes no matter how ridiculous or offensive it might be and the lines in the sand are going to remain pretty much as they are, given all that he's said in the past.

 

Knowing that, I'm going to keep focused on policy decisions for the sake of my own sanity.

Edited by leicsmac
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a bit wordy but we need context on why the country is being exploited by elite and foreign billionaires. 

 

Is this the real reason why Farage and Rees-Mogg want a speedy Brexit?

PUBLISHED: 11:55 28 August 2018 | UPDATED: 12:24 28 August 2018

Chevan Ilangaratne and Dami Olatuyi

Cheers! Nigel Farage and Jacob Rees-Mogg. Photo: Dan Kitwood/Getty Images.

Cheers! Nigel Farage and Jacob Rees-Mogg. Photo: Dan Kitwood/Getty Images.

The EU's forthcoming anti-tax avoidance rules could be a big boost for our public services but, as Chevan Ilangaratne and Dami Olatuyi explain, they will be binned if Farage and Rees-Mogg get their way.

 
 
 

In all honesty, tax and law are an unattractive couple. Even specialists in the field will admit as much. That said – few doubt the necessity of tax. It pays for new hospitals and schools. It builds new houses. It keeps us safe on the streets. It helps us care for children and the elderly.

Thus the value of taxpayers’ money cannot be understated – however discouraging it is to see chunks of your earnings go to tax collectors. The same applies to businesses – big or small – who pay corporation tax... well, that’s when they pay it.

In recent years, the likes of Google, Amazon, Apple and Starbucks have come under the spotlight for large-scale tax avoidance. This means they’ve arranged their finances rather cleverly – albeit within the law – to dodge tax obligations they would otherwise have to fulfil. Less tax paid by these huge companies means less money to invest in our public services – we all lose out!

Well the EU have had enough.

As from the start of 2019, yes coincidentally just as the Brexit deadline looms, all EU member states will have to apply the Anti Tax Avoidance Directive (ATAD). It’s an EU law designed to tackle businesses shirking their tax-paying responsibilities.

The likes of Nigel Farage, Jacob Rees-Mogg and a host of wealthy Brexit donors are unlikely to warm to ATAD. It fact, it might be one of reasons why some Brexiteers are hell-bent on pushing for the hardest Brexit possible.

How will ATAD work?

The directive seeks to tackle the thriving culture of corporate tax avoidance. For example, consider the scenario in which an EU company shifts profits to a related company in a low-tax country reducing the tax paid on these profits: under ATAD, a company could still do this, but the profits will be taxable at EU rates.

Another situation is where EU businesses developing a new product move it to a low tax country to avoid paying larger taxes on the profits once it is developed. Thanks to ATAD this tactic won’t work as member states can levy tax on the product before it is moved.

Even with ATAD, you might argue companies – through their nifty lawyers – will find new loopholes to avoid tax, right? The EU thought of that: ATAD provides a general anti-abuse rule to counteract these regimes where national laws have failed to address them.

There are many other measures in ATAD which you will no doubt be inspired to research. But before you do that, you will hear people air grievances that this Directive is another example of how the EU hates business or that it is another instance of Brussels encroaching on our sovereignty.

Dealing with the first allegation, anti-tax avoidance laws are not developed to harm businesses. Their objective is to ensure companies play ball in a competitive market which means paying their fair share of tax. Flowing from this, in a globalised market, agreeing a set of rules to encourage fair trade is hardly an encroachment upon sovereignty. It is an acceptance that the world today sometimes requires countries to come together and agree on things for mutual benefit.

Vital for our schools and hospitals

Britain becoming a low-tax haven economy on the shores of Europe is a Brexiteer fantasy – and ATAD compliance poses a direct threat to that. But a low-tax haven for the rich will thrash the public services upon which the vast majority of us rely on and deepen inequalities in modern day Britain.

Most of us can agree tax is far from ideal but a means to very vital end. If the likes of Google or Amazon were going to be put out of business by following the ATAD one could see the logic in rallying against it. But we know these major corporations will be just fine; meanwhile our schools and hospitals are left in crisis.

• Chevan Ilangaratne and Dami Olatuyi are members of the organisation Lawyers Against Brexit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Grebfromgrebland said:

This is a bit wordy but we need context on why the country is being exploited by elite and foreign billionaires. 

 

Is this the real reason why Farage and Rees-Mogg want a speedy Brexit?

PUBLISHED: 11:55 28 August 2018 | UPDATED: 12:24 28 August 2018

Chevan Ilangaratne and Dami Olatuyi

Cheers! Nigel Farage and Jacob Rees-Mogg. Photo: Dan Kitwood/Getty Images.

Cheers! Nigel Farage and Jacob Rees-Mogg. Photo: Dan Kitwood/Getty Images.

The EU's forthcoming anti-tax avoidance rules could be a big boost for our public services but, as Chevan Ilangaratne and Dami Olatuyi explain, they will be binned if Farage and Rees-Mogg get their way.

 
 
 

In all honesty, tax and law are an unattractive couple. Even specialists in the field will admit as much. That said – few doubt the necessity of tax. It pays for new hospitals and schools. It builds new houses. It keeps us safe on the streets. It helps us care for children and the elderly.

Thus the value of taxpayers’ money cannot be understated – however discouraging it is to see chunks of your earnings go to tax collectors. The same applies to businesses – big or small – who pay corporation tax... well, that’s when they pay it.

In recent years, the likes of Google, Amazon, Apple and Starbucks have come under the spotlight for large-scale tax avoidance. This means they’ve arranged their finances rather cleverly – albeit within the law – to dodge tax obligations they would otherwise have to fulfil. Less tax paid by these huge companies means less money to invest in our public services – we all lose out!

Well the EU have had enough.

As from the start of 2019, yes coincidentally just as the Brexit deadline looms, all EU member states will have to apply the Anti Tax Avoidance Directive (ATAD). It’s an EU law designed to tackle businesses shirking their tax-paying responsibilities.

The likes of Nigel Farage, Jacob Rees-Mogg and a host of wealthy Brexit donors are unlikely to warm to ATAD. It fact, it might be one of reasons why some Brexiteers are hell-bent on pushing for the hardest Brexit possible.

How will ATAD work?

The directive seeks to tackle the thriving culture of corporate tax avoidance. For example, consider the scenario in which an EU company shifts profits to a related company in a low-tax country reducing the tax paid on these profits: under ATAD, a company could still do this, but the profits will be taxable at EU rates.

Another situation is where EU businesses developing a new product move it to a low tax country to avoid paying larger taxes on the profits once it is developed. Thanks to ATAD this tactic won’t work as member states can levy tax on the product before it is moved.

Even with ATAD, you might argue companies – through their nifty lawyers – will find new loopholes to avoid tax, right? The EU thought of that: ATAD provides a general anti-abuse rule to counteract these regimes where national laws have failed to address them.

There are many other measures in ATAD which you will no doubt be inspired to research. But before you do that, you will hear people air grievances that this Directive is another example of how the EU hates business or that it is another instance of Brussels encroaching on our sovereignty.

Dealing with the first allegation, anti-tax avoidance laws are not developed to harm businesses. Their objective is to ensure companies play ball in a competitive market which means paying their fair share of tax. Flowing from this, in a globalised market, agreeing a set of rules to encourage fair trade is hardly an encroachment upon sovereignty. It is an acceptance that the world today sometimes requires countries to come together and agree on things for mutual benefit.

Vital for our schools and hospitals

Britain becoming a low-tax haven economy on the shores of Europe is a Brexiteer fantasy – and ATAD compliance poses a direct threat to that. But a low-tax haven for the rich will thrash the public services upon which the vast majority of us rely on and deepen inequalities in modern day Britain.

Most of us can agree tax is far from ideal but a means to very vital end. If the likes of Google or Amazon were going to be put out of business by following the ATAD one could see the logic in rallying against it. But we know these major corporations will be just fine; meanwhile our schools and hospitals are left in crisis.

• Chevan Ilangaratne and Dami Olatuyi are members of the organisation Lawyers Against Brexit

I was under the impression this had already come into effect at the start of 2019, and we passed legislation to cover it.

 

698f704cfa63e61eab76683c54cd3678.png

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Innovindil said:

I was under the impression this had already come into effect at the start of 2019, and we passed legislation to cover it.

 

698f704cfa63e61eab76683c54cd3678.png

From what I can gather it will be fully in force on 1st January 2020 with ATAD 2 (the revenge) in force 1st January 2022.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 07/08/2019 at 19:14, Kopfkino said:

Banana republic can be added to the list of terms like fascist and nazi that people have become fond of throwing around with evidently no knowledge of what it means

 

Add to coup to that list as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...