BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
Yeah, some were not, but the majority of remainers screamed 'We have a veto' to deny that scope creep would occurrjsterry said:
Or rather some of us remainers are just not that worried about federalisation.coopster_the_1st said:
The EU has no jurisdiction over Corporate tax rates but somehow is increasing its scope to control them...kingstongraham said:
My point is as quoted above, replying to you accusing me of wanting to start a "cosy cartel between countries".Stevo_666 said:
State aid is only small part of the tax puzzle. It is not necessarily in itself tax relief.kingstongraham said:
They are in charge of ensuring a level playing field. Not allowing state aid is part of that. They are the "cosy cartel" you are talking about.Stevo_666 said:
Me? Yes, but the EU is not responsible for levying or collecting these taxes, so how are they relevant to the points I am making above?kingstongraham said:You have heard of the EU?
Seems reasonable to try to ensure some degree of level playing field within the EU, and to try to stop countries taking the proverbial.
In this case the court decided that there was no illegal state aid, so your point is what?
The fact that the court decided that there was no illegal state aid in this case could be why the EU is looking to change things to stop countries distorting markets in other EU countries. I understand that you disagree with that.
Remainers said this would never happen because of veto's. They were lying. I suspect remainers will now try and re-write history so hide that they were said this.0 -
Don't they need unanimity to make that change?0
-
-
No, hence they are looking at QMV articles as a way to circumvent national veto's.kingstongraham said:Don't they need unanimity to make that change?
0 -
Why?rick_chasey said:
That argument would be wrong.Stevo_666 said:
It can be argued that they provide services and levy a fee.rick_chasey said:People have the weirdest understanding of what tax is.
Governments are not companies, and they are not in a marketplace for good or services.
In any event, tax competition between governments/nations does happen as I have demonstrated above. This is regardless of whether you think this is a special case.
Don't forget to read the bit starting 'in any event...' so you can see the reality of the situation."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
The two are linked because the profit is taxed where it falls, so to say.TheBigBean said:Can I just repeat that the argument is about profit shifting not tax. The Irish government can tax Irish profits however it likes without distorting the single market.
However as Apple themselves have said, the case is about where they are taxed rather than how much. I agree that this does not distort the single market."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
If they are looking at it then they have not found the way around it yet, but in any case, who cares? It's all stuff happening somewhere else now. If you feel justified in shouting "told you so", go for it.coopster_the_1st said:
No, hence they are looking at QMV articles as a way to circumvent national veto's.kingstongraham said:Don't they need unanimity to make that change?
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
As mentioned above there is no distortion here. And in any event, Apple won the case.kingstongraham said:
My point is as quoted above, replying to you accusing me of wanting to start a "cosy cartel between countries".Stevo_666 said:
State aid is only small part of the tax puzzle. It is not necessarily in itself tax relief.kingstongraham said:
They are in charge of ensuring a level playing field. Not allowing state aid is part of that. They are the "cosy cartel" you are talking about.Stevo_666 said:
Me? Yes, but the EU is not responsible for levying or collecting these taxes, so how are they relevant to the points I am making above?kingstongraham said:You have heard of the EU?
Seems reasonable to try to ensure some degree of level playing field within the EU, and to try to stop countries taking the proverbial.
In this case the court decided that there was no illegal state aid, so your point is what?
The fact that the court decided that there was no illegal state aid in this case could be why the EU is looking to change things to stop countries distorting markets in other EU countries. I understand that you disagree with that."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Nevertheless the EU is free to try to change its rules if it feels that they are not achieving the desired aims.Stevo_666 said:
As mentioned above there is no distortion here. And in any event, Apple won the case.kingstongraham said:
My point is as quoted above, replying to you accusing me of wanting to start a "cosy cartel between countries".Stevo_666 said:
State aid is only small part of the tax puzzle. It is not necessarily in itself tax relief.kingstongraham said:
They are in charge of ensuring a level playing field. Not allowing state aid is part of that. They are the "cosy cartel" you are talking about.Stevo_666 said:
Me? Yes, but the EU is not responsible for levying or collecting these taxes, so how are they relevant to the points I am making above?kingstongraham said:You have heard of the EU?
Seems reasonable to try to ensure some degree of level playing field within the EU, and to try to stop countries taking the proverbial.
In this case the court decided that there was no illegal state aid, so your point is what?
The fact that the court decided that there was no illegal state aid in this case could be why the EU is looking to change things to stop countries distorting markets in other EU countries. I understand that you disagree with that.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Good one.Stevo_666 said:
However as Apple themselves have said, fne case is about where they are taxed rather than how much.0 -
Legally that is true, as the case hinged on the tax residence of one of the companies - which determines the country that has taxing rights.kingstongraham said:
Good one.Stevo_666 said:
However as Apple themselves have said, fne case is about where they are taxed rather than how much."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
They probably will try. It's what usually happens when they can't win fair and square, same with national governments and tax cases.rjsterry said:
Nevertheless the EU is free to try to change its rules if it feels that they are not achieving the desired aims.Stevo_666 said:
As mentioned above there is no distortion here. And in any event, Apple won the case.kingstongraham said:
My point is as quoted above, replying to you accusing me of wanting to start a "cosy cartel between countries".Stevo_666 said:
State aid is only small part of the tax puzzle. It is not necessarily in itself tax relief.kingstongraham said:
They are in charge of ensuring a level playing field. Not allowing state aid is part of that. They are the "cosy cartel" you are talking about.Stevo_666 said:
Me? Yes, but the EU is not responsible for levying or collecting these taxes, so how are they relevant to the points I am making above?kingstongraham said:You have heard of the EU?
Seems reasonable to try to ensure some degree of level playing field within the EU, and to try to stop countries taking the proverbial.
In this case the court decided that there was no illegal state aid, so your point is what?
The fact that the court decided that there was no illegal state aid in this case could be why the EU is looking to change things to stop countries distorting markets in other EU countries. I understand that you disagree with that."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Happy coincidence then.0
-
Oh come on. There's no such thing as fair and square. Court is just another way to try to get what you want.Stevo_666 said:
They probably will try. It's what usually happens when they can't win fair and square, same with national governments and tax cases.rjsterry said:
Nevertheless the EU is free to try to change its rules if it feels that they are not achieving the desired aims.Stevo_666 said:
As mentioned above there is no distortion here. And in any event, Apple won the case.kingstongraham said:
My point is as quoted above, replying to you accusing me of wanting to start a "cosy cartel between countries".Stevo_666 said:
State aid is only small part of the tax puzzle. It is not necessarily in itself tax relief.kingstongraham said:
They are in charge of ensuring a level playing field. Not allowing state aid is part of that. They are the "cosy cartel" you are talking about.Stevo_666 said:
Me? Yes, but the EU is not responsible for levying or collecting these taxes, so how are they relevant to the points I am making above?kingstongraham said:You have heard of the EU?
Seems reasonable to try to ensure some degree of level playing field within the EU, and to try to stop countries taking the proverbial.
In this case the court decided that there was no illegal state aid, so your point is what?
The fact that the court decided that there was no illegal state aid in this case could be why the EU is looking to change things to stop countries distorting markets in other EU countries. I understand that you disagree with that.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
True. I think you'll find that the EU brought the Apple case thoughrjsterry said:
Oh come on. There's no such thing as fair and square. Court is just another way to try to get what you want.Stevo_666 said:
They probably will try. It's what usually happens when they can't win fair and square, same with national governments and tax cases.rjsterry said:
Nevertheless the EU is free to try to change its rules if it feels that they are not achieving the desired aims.Stevo_666 said:
As mentioned above there is no distortion here. And in any event, Apple won the case.kingstongraham said:
My point is as quoted above, replying to you accusing me of wanting to start a "cosy cartel between countries".Stevo_666 said:
State aid is only small part of the tax puzzle. It is not necessarily in itself tax relief.kingstongraham said:
They are in charge of ensuring a level playing field. Not allowing state aid is part of that. They are the "cosy cartel" you are talking about.Stevo_666 said:
Me? Yes, but the EU is not responsible for levying or collecting these taxes, so how are they relevant to the points I am making above?kingstongraham said:You have heard of the EU?
Seems reasonable to try to ensure some degree of level playing field within the EU, and to try to stop countries taking the proverbial.
In this case the court decided that there was no illegal state aid, so your point is what?
The fact that the court decided that there was no illegal state aid in this case could be why the EU is looking to change things to stop countries distorting markets in other EU countries. I understand that you disagree with that.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
If you believe those with Brexit derangement syndrome, Sir Ian Botham is to be made a Lord because of his support of Brexit, while at no point mentioning his decades of high profile charity work, and mentioning his sporting achievements as an afterthought.
With his upbringing he should bring much needed balance to the chamber.0 -
Get with the program, this was clearly done to enrage the libscoopster_the_1st said:If you believe those with Brexit derangement syndrome, Sir Ian Botham is to be made a Lord because of his support of Brexit, while at no point mentioning his decades of high profile charity work, and mentioning his sporting achievements as an afterthought.
With his upbringing he should bring much needed balance to the chamber.0 -
Might be wrong but sounds like a Cummings way to undermine the point of the HoL which he hates anyway.surrey_commuter said:
Get with the program, this was clearly done to enrage the libscoopster_the_1st said:If you believe those with Brexit derangement syndrome, Sir Ian Botham is to be made a Lord because of his support of Brexit, while at no point mentioning his decades of high profile charity work, and mentioning his sporting achievements as an afterthought.
With his upbringing he should bring much needed balance to the chamber.0 -
If they really wanted to do that, a knighthood for Cummings would be much more effective. Combined with replacing the 'Angel of the North' with a massive statue of him.surrey_commuter said:
Get with the program, this was clearly done to enrage the libscoopster_the_1st said:If you believe those with Brexit derangement syndrome, Sir Ian Botham is to be made a Lord because of his support of Brexit, while at no point mentioning his decades of high profile charity work, and mentioning his sporting achievements as an afterthought.
With his upbringing he should bring much needed balance to the chamber."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Any great difference from Baroness Heyhoe Flint?
0 -
No idea."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0
-
I mean I'm not bothered, but I guess it's been briefed as this:
0 -
Class in this country is ridiculous. How many footballers have made it into the HoL?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sportsperson-politicians#United_Kingdom
This list is just embarrassing.0 -
I don't really like Sir Lord Beefy as a commentator, and he seems to have hardly been the role model player, but I have heard him speak about Leukemia at a drinks event. On this he really has made a difference and deserves to be recognised, and on that basis he gets a pass from me.rick_chasey said:Class in this country is ridiculous. How many footballers have made it into the HoL?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sportsperson-politicians#United_Kingdom
This list is just embarrassing.
0 -
John Redwood Conservative MP for Wokingham should that be in the irony thread.0
-
-
So the Russia report re-Brexit basically says "the government actively sought to avoid looking into the issue of Russian interference in the EU referendum despite the fact it was on the security radar since 2014"0
-
