The Consequences of Brexit [part 5] Read 1st post before posting

[tzijlstra 11]

Well, the fundamental problem with your objective and that particular BAE story, is that it’s only “positive” for BAE shareholders, not for “the U.K.”: the ship-building and -fitting jobs, the ecosystem of services and consumption which these jobs support, and the income and indirect taxes borne by the lot, are all going to “Australia”.

 

At best, all that “the U.K.” will see from this, is whatever corporate tax BAE ends up paying on the profits of that contract, that it’s accountants can’t manage to hide away. Given that this is the armaments industry we’re talking about, I wouldn’t bank on a windfall in that respect just yet.

 

It’s a good example of ‘globalisation’ of trade (which has always existed, really; only it was called “international trade” then), and a good illustration of BAE’s global competitiveness amongst arms manufacturers. But it’s got sod all relevance to ‘Brexit’, even from afar.

 

I disagree, the jobs created from this contract off-set well against the investment in R&D by the government. These are high-end engineering jobs being funded by that 'discount' and that is good for the country. But then I believe in no corporate taxation because I am one of the few remaining market-liberals out there.

 

I do agree wholeheartedly that this is nothing to do with Brexit though.

[Magilla 510]

We’ve seen this week what it is all about: profit for traders and disaster capitalists.

 

For Brexiters, seems the best isn't always British

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/brexit-ashcroft-rees-mogg_uk_5b34e37be4b0b745f17bbbf8

[melthebell 864]

For Brexiters, seems the best isn't always British

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/brexit-ashcroft-rees-mogg_uk_5b34e37be4b0b745f17bbbf8

You just cant make it up

[mafya 250]

For Brexiters, seems the best isn't always British

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/brexit-ashcroft-rees-mogg_uk_5b34e37be4b0b745f17bbbf8

 

From the link=

 

Lord Ashcroft, a prominent Brexiter who donated £500,000 to Theresa May’s election campaign last year, has said that British firms need to base themselves in Malta after Brexit, highlighting its “advantageous tax system”.

 

my bold=

Nothing wrong with that, it’s called being business savvy. Basing your head office in another country for tax reasons has been going on for donkey years.

[altus 540]

Mary Creagh at PMQs on Wednesday:

Will the PM join me in congratulating the Foreign Secretary in expressing so pithily what her hard Brexit will do to British jobs and British businesses?

[I1L2T3 10]

From the link=

 

Lord Ashcroft, a prominent Brexiter who donated £500,000 to Theresa May’s election campaign last year, has said that British firms need to base themselves in Malta after Brexit, highlighting its “advantageous tax system”.

 

my bold=

Nothing wrong with that, it’s called being business savvy. Basing your head office in another country for tax reasons has been going on for donkey years.

 

Your argument is called clutching at straws

 

Brexiters have always argued that an economic hit is worth it, I suspect though without ever really thinking it will happen.

 

Now we are seeing all the signs of what it means. Enjoy your economic hit. You said you wanted it.

[Sidonica 10]

From the link=

 

 

 

my bold=

Nothing wrong with that, it’s called being business savvy. Basing your head office in another country for tax reasons has been going on for donkey years.

 

Is this what you would like to do then?

 

Unfortunately, a lot of us are not in a position to take advantage of things like this, I am retired and never had my own business. We are stuck with the mess that will leave us and our children and grandchildren a lot poorer. I don't suppose you give a flying fig about that do you?

[Top Cats Hat 10]

 

Nothing wrong with that, it’s called being business savvy. Basing your head office in another country for tax reasons has been going on for donkey years.

 

So Amazon, Starbucks, Google, Vodafone and Top Shop pay much less tax than they would if they were based in the UK yet their wage costs are subsidised by the UK tax payer through tax credits.

 

And you think that's OK?

[I1L2T3 10]

Is this what you would like to do then?

 

Unfortunately, a lot of us are not in a position to take advantage of things like this, I am retired and never had my own business. We are stuck with the mess that will leave us and our children and grandchildren a lot poorer. I don't suppose you give a flying fig about that do you?

 

On the days around the referendum I made a few grand on some investments. I didn’t plan it that way but it happened.

 

Profits have been used up since. We’re already supporting one of our kids studying abroad and another is going this summer. The poor exchange rate is meaning we have to find more in pounds each month to convert. As a family we’ve already spent a couple of grand documenting status and getting dual citizenship sorted.

 

Brexiters seem to have forgotten that many U.K. families live their lives across different EU countries. There may be 5 million people (perhaps way more) in that situation.

 

Still I’m glad at least a couple of my kids are out of this mess. I feel sorry for the others who are kind of stuck here, and of course kids in other families having opportunities stolen from them.

Edited June 30, 2018 by I1L2T3

[Magilla 510]

From the link=

 

Lord Ashcroft, a prominent Brexiter who donated £500,000 to Theresa May’s election campaign last year, has said that British firms need to base themselves in Malta after Brexit, highlighting its “advantageous tax system”.

 

OK, I'll bite, why is it so "advantageous" now rather than before Brexit?

 

my bold=

Nothing wrong with that, it’s called being business savvy. Basing your head office in another country for tax reasons has been going on for donkey years.

 

And yet none were saying that in regard to Malta *before* Brexit?

 

Could it be that being part of the EU has significant advantages?...... sure sounds like it.

 

---------- Post added 30-06-2018 at 12:53 ----------

 

Your argument is called clutching at straws

 

Yep, desperate stuff.

Edited June 30, 2018 by Magilla

[mafya 250]

So Amazon, Starbucks, Google, Vodafone and Top Shop pay much less tax than they would if they were based in the UK yet their wage costs are subsidised by the UK tax payer through tax credits.

 

And you think that's OK?

 

Tax credits was introduced way before brexit....

[Top Cats Hat 10]

Tax credits was introduced way before brexit....

 

That's not what I was asking.

 

Amazon, Starbucks, Google, Vodafone and Top Shop are avoiding paying millions of pounds in UK tax by being located outside the UK while at the same time UK taxpayers are spending millions of pounds subsidising their low paid workers through tax credits.

 

Do you think that is OK?