BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
Exactly. Tax is a business cost and it needs managing like any other business cost.rjsterry wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:Currently evaluating stated Labour tax policy to see what we can plan for/mitigate. Hope for the best, plan for the worst etc.
You mean working out ways to avoid paying any new taxes that are levied?
If you're running any kind of business and the tax regime changes you need to plan for that. It's not necessarily about avoiding new taxes."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
rjsterry wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:Currently evaluating stated Labour tax policy to see what we can plan for/mitigate. Hope for the best, plan for the worst etc.
You mean working out ways to avoid paying any new taxes that are levied?
If you're running any kind of business and the tax regime changes you need to plan for that. It's not necessarily about avoiding new taxes.
Sure. I just like to cut through jargon - I find jargon helps distance people from what's actually occurring.
Enough of it in my industry. Compensation, benefits, efficiencies, mitigation.
FWIW, I teach folks that, in my experience, asking folk "how much are you paid?" or "how much do you earn in a year working at x" elicits more accurate answers than asking what "compensation" they get.0 -
Offset it with more profit? Oh hang on that means more tax :roll:Stevo 666 wrote:
Not avoid, mitigate the impactRick Chasey wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:Currently evaluating stated Labour tax policy to see what we can plan for/mitigate. Hope for the best, plan for the worst etc.
You mean working out ways to avoid paying any new taxes that are levied?
0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:
Exactly. Tax is a business cost and it needs managing like any other business cost.rjsterry wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:Currently evaluating stated Labour tax policy to see what we can plan for/mitigate. Hope for the best, plan for the worst etc.
You mean working out ways to avoid paying any new taxes that are levied?
If you're running any kind of business and the tax regime changes you need to plan for that. It's not necessarily about avoiding new taxes.
Yes, by managing you mean keeping it as low as you can get away with.
So presumably there's a trade off in the more grey areas; amount of cost reduction (tax paid) versus the risk (that HRMC goes 'err, you need to cough up and pay the full lot').
if one outweighs the other, great - worth considering. Even better if you get ops risk to attribute a value to the reputational cost and other risks.0 -
Blimey, I wish someone had thought of that one before. I'll just go give the sales force that little revelationthistle (MBNW) wrote:
Offset it with more profit? Oh hang on that means more tax :roll:Stevo 666 wrote:
Not avoid, mitigate the impactRick Chasey wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:Currently evaluating stated Labour tax policy to see what we can plan for/mitigate. Hope for the best, plan for the worst etc.
You mean working out ways to avoid paying any new taxes that are levied? "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
No, its the classic misconception about what tax departments do. Also I spend most of my time on non-UK stuff given we're a multinational. Given UK rates as they are now we prefer to maximise income in the UK at the expense of other territories given the rate differentials, but clearly that could change in the political scenario that I mentioned above.Rick Chasey wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:
Exactly. Tax is a business cost and it needs managing like any other business cost.rjsterry wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:Currently evaluating stated Labour tax policy to see what we can plan for/mitigate. Hope for the best, plan for the worst etc.
You mean working out ways to avoid paying any new taxes that are levied?
If you're running any kind of business and the tax regime changes you need to plan for that. It's not necessarily about avoiding new taxes.
Yes, by managing you mean keeping it as low as you can get away with.
So presumably there's a trade off in the more grey areas; amount of cost reduction (tax paid) versus the risk (that HRMC goes 'err, you need to cough up and pay the full lot').
if one outweighs the other, great - worth considering. Even better if you get ops risk to attribute a value to the representational cost and other risks.
A lot of what I do relates to making sure the business does not fall into the myriad pitfalls of international tax which is very easy to do inadvertently. It's not even avoidance in the usual definition, just sensible structuring of complex multi-jurisdictional commercial transactions. If you want a practical example I can give one.
We are more than aware of reputational risk but its not really a big issue as we aren't aggressive. I don't have much time for NGO idiots though."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
-
OK, so you'll have an idea of what the role actually entails (although I also look after Treasury, customs and a spot of Brexit for my sins).Rick Chasey wrote:S'ok.
I've placed a few Heads of Tax in the past."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Here's a thought.
If there's an election Cummings will be campaigning against the Brexiteers he refused to campaign with.“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:
OK, so you'll have an idea of what the role actually entails (although I also look after Treasury, customs and a spot of Brexit for my sins).Rick Chasey wrote:S'ok.
I've placed a few Heads of Tax in the past.
Sure. I've placed more treasurers fwiw. Though usually in those industries the funding side was materially more important, and the control side was much more onerous, so they were always the priorities and tax was quite far down the pecking order.0 -
It is incredible how pitching hypothetical binary statements that aren't true is the bulk of what's happening.
Examples:
The public just want this to end (pro brexit) - well, that's not true, plenty of people are quite happy that we're finally seeing pro-brexit at all costs approaches being held to account.
The majority just want out (in the context of any method, deal or no deal) - complete guesswork with no proof at all, there are a great many people who wanted brexit but never wanted a no deal. That and the fact that pro brexit campaigning mentioned the great deals we'd get, but never were mentioning no deal.
...the examples could go on and on. So, what is really amazing is that these kinds of comments are put out there as if they are facts when they're miles and miles from it.
Unfortunately the only explanations for this flow of false statements can only be down to two things, either the people making them are thick, or the people making them know that the people they want to absorb these false claims are thick enough to accept them as fact.
We live in interesting times.
At least in the last few days there is actually some degree of action to follow and assess, it is far more interesting than just having dumbed down soundbites. Now we get something with teeth and detail to go along with the big side helping dollop of dumbed down soundbites.
At last there is some sort of Brexit news unfolding in front of us that is real. A shame it's taken this long but at last it has heated up.
I did laugh when two farmers were on the news facing a 45% tax on livestock exports to the EU if crashing out, saying they didn't know what was going to happen and it was awful, then within seconds both of them backing Bojo 0 -
is it me or does Johnson seem to have been our prime minister for much longer than a few weeks ?0
-
Stevo 666 wrote:
Let's see what happens at the next GE then. Although I'm not sure that the above coalition would solve all of our governance issues.Rick Chasey wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:
One political 'guru' in a 'Big 4' firm who we listened to yesterday was of the view that if there was a GE we could well end up with a minority Labour government, propped up by some combination of SNP, Lib Dems and maybe some assorted others.bompington wrote:Right now I would say :shock: that the Libs are the closest to me. If enough switch to them, could they be the civilising influence on a Lib/Lab coalition in the same way they kind of managed with the Tories?
In that situation I can't see the SNP disagreeing with too much with Labour have said they want to do, as long as the SNP get their Indyref re-run - after all, they're just nationalist lefties. I could see the LDs/Swinson opposing things such as nationalisation. Also Labour may struggle to implement those policies that would be subject to the 'EVEL' provisions (English votes for English laws) - some of which thankfully include tax
Conversely, a vote for the Tories would certainly give them the impression that they can continue to behave they have been.
If the public don't give MPs and parties a kicking for being badly behaved and bad leaders and generally sh!t, what else is there to stop sh!t governance?
Currently evaluating stated Labour tax policy to see what we can plan for/mitigate. Hope for the best, plan for the worst etc.
No indeed.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:
Currently evaluating stated Labour tax policy to see what we can plan for/mitigate. Hope for the best, plan for the worst etc.
Why don't you tell just say not to worry, you've consigned Labour to electoral oblivion?0 -
KingstonGraham wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:
Currently evaluating stated Labour tax policy to see what we can plan for/mitigate. Hope for the best, plan for the worst etc.
Why don't you tell just say not to worry, you've consigned Labour to electoral oblivion?
With the current disenchantment with Westminster, and the inevitable low turnout at the next GE, electoral oblivion might not be enough to keep them out of power.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
A startling claim for the potential US-UK trade deal from Pence.The president often says the US has the biggest economy in the world and we truly believe that a free trade agreement between the United States and the UK could increase trade between our country by three or four times.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
If he is offered one. If he votoes then the EU cannot offer him an extension; So he will have nothing to say yes to.KingstonGraham wrote:darkhairedlord wrote:
The UK is still in the EU and still has a veto, so Boris can Veto his own request for an extension.
The bill says he has to inform the President of the European Council that he accepts the extension.0 -
darkhairedlord wrote:
If he is offered one. If he votoes then the EU cannot offer him an extension; So he will have nothing to say yes to.KingstonGraham wrote:darkhairedlord wrote:
The UK is still in the EU and still has a veto, so Boris can Veto his own request for an extension.
The bill says he has to inform the President of the European Council that he accepts the extension.
That would be in breach of "The Prime Minister must seek to obtain from the European Council an extension", I would say.0 -
KingstonGraham wrote:darkhairedlord wrote:
If he is offered one. If he votoes then the EU cannot offer him an extension; So he will have nothing to say yes to.KingstonGraham wrote:darkhairedlord wrote:
The UK is still in the EU and still has a veto, so Boris can Veto his own request for an extension.
The bill says he has to inform the President of the European Council that he accepts the extension.
That would be in breach of "The Prime Minister must seek to obtain from the European Council an extension", I would say.
No, not at all.
Scenario:
Bj asks EU for extension, EU says "hang on we'll ask everyone and and get back to you".
EU asks its membership; BJ, with his EU hat on says "no!"
EU forced to decline BJ's request as it didn't get a unanomous agreement from member states.0 -
darkhairedlord wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:darkhairedlord wrote:
If he is offered one. If he votoes then the EU cannot offer him an extension; So he will have nothing to say yes to.KingstonGraham wrote:darkhairedlord wrote:
The UK is still in the EU and still has a veto, so Boris can Veto his own request for an extension.
The bill says he has to inform the President of the European Council that he accepts the extension.
That would be in breach of "The Prime Minister must seek to obtain from the European Council an extension", I would say.
No, not at all.
Scenario:
Bj asks EU for extension, EU says "hang on we'll ask everyone and and get back to you".
EU asks its membership; BJ, with his EU hat on says "no!"
EU forced to decline BJ's request as it didn't get a unanomous agreement from member states.
I understand what you are saying, just that the first two put together don't add up to him seeking an extension. We'll see. If he thinks that it is something that he can survive doing, I guess he'd try it, but I can't see it happening without more resignations.0 -
I read earlier today that the Tories see Yorkshire as a big battleground for the next election, with it having a number of Brexit-supporting long-term Labour constituencies with Labour MPs that are all strong Remain advocates. On the flip side, there'll also be threats to normally safe Tory seats where the MPs are strong remainers with a Leave-supporting constituency. Could well be a bunch of constituencies that have the bloodiest fights that haven't really seen much active campaigning for decades because they've traditionally always voted one way, but this time everything will be up for grabs.0
-
Horses for courses really, will vary by sector and company.Rick Chasey wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:
OK, so you'll have an idea of what the role actually entails (although I also look after Treasury, customs and a spot of Brexit for my sins).Rick Chasey wrote:S'ok.
I've placed a few Heads of Tax in the past.
Sure. I've placed more treasurers fwiw. Though usually in those industries the funding side was materially more important, and the control side was much more onerous, so they were always the priorities and tax was quite far down the pecking order.
My background is tax and I have a decent say in the priorities - also for some reason where there is a combined tax and treasury dept, it always seems to be headed up by a tax person. Luckily the board is quite tax aware/sensible and listens to me."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I don't think the EU would ask a leaving member whether it agreed to the extension it had just requested. That would be too absurd even for Brexit.darkhairedlord wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:darkhairedlord wrote:
If he is offered one. If he votoes then the EU cannot offer him an extension; So he will have nothing to say yes to.KingstonGraham wrote:darkhairedlord wrote:
The UK is still in the EU and still has a veto, so Boris can Veto his own request for an extension.
The bill says he has to inform the President of the European Council that he accepts the extension.
That would be in breach of "The Prime Minister must seek to obtain from the European Council an extension", I would say.
No, not at all.
Scenario:
Bj asks EU for extension, EU says "hang on we'll ask everyone and and get back to you".
EU asks its membership; BJ, with his EU hat on says "no!"
EU forced to decline BJ's request as it didn't get a unanomous agreement from member states.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Tom Newton Dunn
@tnewtondunn
·
3m
Boris Johnson says "I'd rather be dead in a ditch” than go to Brussels to ask for an Brexit extension, but doesn't answer
@kateferguson4
's question if that means he’d resign rather than abide by a law that enforces one.“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
Mr Rees-Mogg was announcing Monday's business in the House of Commons when he launched an attack against the consultant neurologist Dr David Nicholl.
It follows after a bitter clash earlier this week when Dr Nicholl, a consultant neurologist with Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust, called an LBC phone-in show and asked the leader of the Commons what mortality rate he would accept if the UK were to leave the EU without a deal.
The Commons Leader said: "I'm afraid it seems to me that Dr David Nichol is as irresponsible as Dr Wakefield.
"What he had to say - I will repeat it - is as irresponsible as Dr Wakefield, in threatening that people will die because we leave the European Union.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politic ... 30011.html“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
TailWindHome wrote:Tom Newton Dunn
@tnewtondunn
·
3m
Boris Johnson says "I'd rather be dead in a ditch” than go to Brussels to ask for an Brexit extension, but doesn't answer
@kateferguson4
's question if that means he’d resign rather than abide by a law that enforces one.
Why is he painting himself into this corner?0 -
he thinks he is Trump,KingstonGraham wrote:TailWindHome wrote:Tom Newton Dunn
@tnewtondunn
·
3m
Boris Johnson says "I'd rather be dead in a ditch” than go to Brussels to ask for an Brexit extension, but doesn't answer
@kateferguson4
's question if that means he’d resign rather than abide by a law that enforces one.
Why is he painting himself into this corner?
Forgets that he is not.0 -
KingstonGraham wrote:TailWindHome wrote:Tom Newton Dunn
@tnewtondunn
·
3m
Boris Johnson says "I'd rather be dead in a ditch” than go to Brussels to ask for an Brexit extension, but doesn't answer
@kateferguson4
's question if that means he’d resign rather than abide by a law that enforces one.
Why is he painting himself into this corner?
What is going to happen to Boris if he does not ask for the extension?
I'm guessing there would be a VONC in him as PM thus triggering a GE.
Remainers need to ask why their side are so scared of putting this decision to the public in a GE and let them decide0 -
Coopster the 1st wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:TailWindHome wrote:Tom Newton Dunn
@tnewtondunn
·
3m
Boris Johnson says "I'd rather be dead in a ditch” than go to Brussels to ask for an Brexit extension, but doesn't answer
@kateferguson4
's question if that means he’d resign rather than abide by a law that enforces one.
Why is he painting himself into this corner?
What is going to happen to Boris if he does not ask for the extension?
I'm guessing there would be a VONC in him as PM thus triggering a GE.
Remainers need to ask why their side are so scared of putting this decision to the public in a GE and let them decide
An actual government made up of disgruntled tories, moderate labour, lib dem and snp gain the confidence of the house, then they either push through a softer withdrawal agreement, or get an extension and go to a GE.You live and learn. At any rate, you live0 -
Coopster the 1st wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:TailWindHome wrote:Tom Newton Dunn
@tnewtondunn
·
3m
Boris Johnson says "I'd rather be dead in a ditch” than go to Brussels to ask for an Brexit extension, but doesn't answer
@kateferguson4
's question if that means he’d resign rather than abide by a law that enforces one.
Why is he painting himself into this corner?
What is going to happen to Boris if he does not ask for the extension?
I'm guessing there would be a VONC in him as PM thus triggering a GE.
Remainers need to ask why their side are so scared of putting this decision to the public in a GE and let them decide
Refusing to do what the law tells him he has to so presumably a charge of misconduct in a public office?0
