Posts by All names Taken
368 posts • joined Thursday 8th September 2011 21:03 GMT
Re: Quite
Someone once commented that when guvmints want to be seen to be doing something then a drama is acted out in the media.
When guvmints want to do something about something usually they send in the armed forces.
There ain't no inbetweenies.
Just suppose ...
... all of this goes ahead and some corporations have to pay tax on stuff going back some years.
But how many years?
1? 5? 10?
Or maybe sufficiently many years to invoke embarrassing actions against senior politicians, civil servants, .... ?
Here in the UK we have some wealthy families that allegedly used and maybe still use illegal and/or legal tax evasion/avoidance.
So, on the assumption that some assets are seized by one government or another how far back in history do those parameters extend? And what dirt might be dug up on political/publicly funded politicos?
Well here in the UK some sectors and the workers in those sectors have to compete internationally - in some cases the workers compete but the company just shifts jobs, investment and production overseas.
So you see the poor working wage slave has to compete internationally for his/her job.
Some sectors seem to be privileged and do not have to compete internationally.
For example finance, accountancy and audit firms. Insurance and investment anyone? Of course some of these have long standing arrangements with offshore tax havens (I wonder who dreamed those up. UK by any chance?)
So why should govmints, bankers, lawyers, judges n barristers avoid international competition?
Why?
Business plan?
It sounds as if the guvmint has a business plan of sorts in place to deal with tax havens?
(Often referred to as British Overseas Territories)
Look out Apple - all that tax avoidance money overseas might end up going to the UK Treasury if it has its own way?
Hee Hee intel?
Beat that doodz @ intel :-)
El Reg: Point of order?
Scotland is brilliant because of its people rather than any "thing"?
Company records
It is probably something to do with where a company is registered - it's registered address is a formal and legal thing. If organisations let the formalities slip then they can get into a bit of bother.
Something along lines of memoranda and articles of constitution I think (every organisation has to have a name, an address and someone in charge). I'd guess that in Europe that means one company registration that is respected and upheld across Europe.
The other thing about taxation on income or turnover in countries of Europe is probably a non-starter as most taxes are on profits rather than turnover?
Besides, if a country has the footprint of a regional office then it is probably going to receive quite a bit more in income tax than corporation type taxes?
Hmmm...
... imagine this:
International company directors decide it should do the morally correct thing and pay taxes even though there are known and publicised methods to minimise tax paid. But directors feel morally bound to do the morally correct thing coz they iz soopah-kool doodz innit!
A shareholders extra special general meeting is rapidly put together and the shareholders move to sack the morally correct motivated directors because they are compromising the legal duty of a director to return maximum dish to shareholders.
True?
Doable?
Woopee!
12 beelleeon saved.
Make it 24 by scrapping smart meters Woohoo!
Wageslave PAYE (To overseas readers: Pay As You Earn a UK tax dodge where the taxman overtaxes individuals in receipt of a set wage or salary) to be reduced accordingly?
Yeh but, I mean but, You know no?
Who'l replace hime if he goes?
While SB's charma might be identifiably something else what charma can replace that?
I'd guess:
virt & cloud is a bit like or at east similar to WWW and the internet.
Where both are technology driven one is more content based (I can access my content anywhere) and the other is virtual what? virtual hardware based.
Nomination?
Can we nominate this fell for sainthood or something like that?
Well done Google!
I, for one, think more corporations and more individuals should pay less tax.
The swifter we reach a low tax economy the butter?
For why? (Did I hear you ask?)
Because increased costs of public service coupled with lower standard of services are sufficient key performance indicators to show something is wrong.
"Sir Humphries" might have glossy, atonally sweet words to explain why it is so while maintaining a lavish lifecycle funded by the tax payer (and that increasingly looks like wage slaves on PAYE).
MPs to apologise to Google?
Well, they should and so should Treasury and Whitehall.
Over the years various governments and most of UK (un)civil servantry have had opportunity to make tax system easy to understand, transparent and a doodle to use.
They have chosen to make it complicated.
They have also chosen to let "slight of hand" or "telescope to wrong eye" benefit a few - a very few (probably in path to new post in finance sector after retirement from HMRC/Treasury?)
Google, along with many others it appears, merely used the rules to their advantage and ultimate disadvantage of UK wage slaves?
Contact your elected rep
In the UK that is probably your MP.
Parliament and HMRC and Whitehall concocted present tax system, work present tax system and added lots of elitism to present tax system.
Clearly google cannot belong to the "in" group allowed to minimise tax burden with Whitehall approval (so who does W-I-T-H Whitehall approval - past as well as present)?
Is there life on M'arse?
Well, is there?
Re: No real surprise
UKIP - the solution for the moment?
My take: the other parties are institutionalised
UKIP still has that rawness that challenges the establishment.
In the national interest it should be returned to BLMRA (British Leather Manufacturers Research Association) to get the industry moving and productive again rather than turn a state resource into another museum to non-existing UK enterprise appreciated by its shadow from a previous era (or of a previous error?).
What gets me ...
... is that a tardy, lairy, few individuals get grubby hands on a paltry few meelleeonz and end up on the wrong side of the law.
Another set of tardy, lairy individuals get grubby hands on many beelleeonz and end up lots of additional state sponsorship to ensure that their lifestyles are not compromised
Only solution?
MS to become a tardy, low return, profit poor (exempt?) zone from which it does an Kodak (alright - I really mean the Apple) type rebound into fame, fortune, acceptability and like-ability?
Voting?
Why can't we vote on the articles?
10 /10 for this one
Dear google (hope this helps)
Dear google
There is nothing logical or sensible about UK tax laws. In fact, they are made far too complicated for the multitude to understand and that lets an elitist few (usually UK civil servants)?) in to make a lot of extra dish after they -ahem- "retire" from the firm.
For example: a holding company.
The principle is that all assets are owned by a holding company and all at risk ventures become companies owned by the holding company.
It sounds fine in theory but what happens in practice means that employees of one company are switched to another and yet no formal paperwork exists to say it is so.
UK HMRC knows it is so, lives with the illogical and the inconsistensies and cannot in any measure of the term be considered to act in "altruistic" fashion.
The above comments more or less reflect my own experience in academia.
It certainly is not practical, it certainly is not up to date and it certainly is not cutting edge (academia that is).
It does tend to be biased with whom the fund holder is listening to and some individuals currently attracting funding for many (usually good) reasons.
Perhaps the dosh would be better spent in industry or military research establishments (do we have any of those left now? Or have they all gone bye-byes?)
Maybe a funding model for gov is: money goes to private sector, SLAs put in place, results shared on a secure access "open" platform model (It's open to those with secure access, it does not exist for those without secure access)?
Just wondering ...
It seems fine putting money in to academia to meet a perceived need.
But has any thought been given to provide industry a similar amount of money to train up suitable candidates (standard selection processes to apply?) actually within the front lines themselves?
Re: On the other hand?
I was thinking along lines of:
corporate customer (a business user with some flexible demands on its software users depending upon business)
end user: individual purchasing software for personal use rather than commercial-business related use.
So, for example, I could use my word processing application on an end user type arrangement to reply to my council using their word processing application on a commercial use purchase basis.
Adobe don't usually make mistakes or costly mistakes otherwise it would not have the farm it presently holds?
On the other hand?
Okay - I get the general drift towards negativity in the 4 pages of postings so far.
This is a non-Adobe sponsored attempt to find positive things associated with CC.
Maybe employers/businesses with creative needs cannot be sure how many seats it needs with access to Creative Suite type software.
And sure, wile things are turning down in traditional end of elite market (Europe, USA, Brit empire, ... ) the new emerging areas (BRICK) might find rental solutions better than full product price?
Maybe the rental model is helpful to some and yes! it does seem frustratingly unhelpful to others.
Bring back Creature House Expression (especially the Acrylic betas?)
Just to repeat: I ain't no Adobe payee but something must be behind Adobe's move - maybe marketing to organisations rather than to end users?
Hmmm - I wonder if women perceive men's facial hair much as men perceive women's mammary glands?
The "Foo-waaah look at 'em" reaction?
Nothing to see hear - move along now.
Now!
Isn't it a shame humanity has so much potential both for goodliness and nastiness and breath the same oxygen at the same times.
(No, please don't turn the oxygen off - we are doing a jolly good job of that ourselves no?)
Posted in Movie review: Star Trek Into Darkness
It is good to see Star Trek coming out of its midlife crisis (weren't those middle ones a bit of a s-t-r-a-i-n and d-r-a-i-n?) into creative flamboyance (and equally flamboyant turnover?)
<polite applause to doodz dahn-oondah>
and the moral is ...
... UK Treasury and HMR want your wealth now, immediately and forthwith.
This includes your personal wealth, corporate wealth and the HMRC and Benefits people might add on a bob or two (that is a shilling - dime/dollar to our cousins) (and not harley Davi Bob which although elegant and outstanding is another thing altogether innit)
Yep, UK civil servants wants your dish - all of it and it wants it now!
Re: @reno79
It don't matter at all.
Life is but a dream - all is not what it seam.
But maybe the "innovation" theme with the big A is really and merely: we do what people want technology to do when they did not know it in the first place?
And then it inspired?
Yeh yeh yeh - I know, we all know.
The trouble with exams is that we answered questions that were not asked.
The answers were right but the questions, and the questioners, were wrong!
Had the dream-makers the creative talent of the bean counters perhaps this could have bean avoided?
On the other hand it has potential to be a great strengthening and invigorating cold bath for the big K?
Glad you brought attention to this - iTunes music quality seems pre-1960s.
Maybe ...
... in the daze of yore when baking chips was not quite as precise as it is now with lots of less than standard or sub-standard but working in a way cooked silicon it seemed optimal to go for a universal do-it-all chip that required quite a lot of stuff around it (let's call it a motherboard?) and other bits and pieces that can be plugged in or out of the said mobo.
Hmmm - we better formalise some partnership committees to set standards for all of those bits that can be added (maybe we can call 'em plug n play?)
Anyway, the stroll to universal computing machine continues.
Alternatively: don't want a universal solution that is capable of doing almost everything provided it has a suitably large framework of stuff that can be plugged in or plugged out. Nope.
This one is merely what can we do to optimise/maximise a bit of kit that does stuff very well with low energy requirements with minimal additional support on the circuit board(s)?
Daily Mail?
Morning Star?
Grnadian?
How about: biting the hand that feeds IT
?
Read all 'baht it!
Brit MP cobbled by Whitehall and Whitehall's lust for your cash.
With the economy the way it is senior UK civil servants are worried that there mitt not be enough cash in the Treasury's kitty to reward senior staff with the pension and pension package that they deserve.
It's okay for those former colleagues now seconded into "private" business (know wot I mean 'arry? TUPE n'all that) but the remaining staff still in place as senior civil servants might not be able to get comparable pension packages.
With a bit of influence exerted upon a vulnerable MP the Whitehall mandarin march to greater self-indulgence and jigger you mate continues unabated but slightly less well disguised no?
I am tempted away from the Apple to the Android but I like the idea of a closed shop - it just seems a more secure way of handling my data.
6f or 6n? That is the question.
Whether it is nobler to be owner and user of a fast fairing job or should one aim for the rugged, raw, nakedness of a naked bike?
Is the struggle of nakedness in this wind torn land - and piloting rider were too many peas beaned or improbable tensing of one and all sphincters - or manage airflow with a bit more smoothness as the revolutions per minute increase gastronomically?
(For the uninitiated:
Kawasaki ER 6f
Kawasaki ER 6n
the f is usually taken for fairing and n for naked)
Two wheels are better than four.
Two wheels are better than four.
...
Har dee har har!
My guess is that it is HMRC (Her Majesties Revenues and Customs) and UK Treasury based on it being limited to UK businesses (and I guess individuals too).
Those tax collecting Whitehall bods need all the cash they can get their hands on and if that means granny with her empty bedrooms or one's pension then one's pension will always win!
(Sad innit?)
No apologies El Reg...
... and sorry for usurping this thread, but it has to be said somewhere in this astute journal.
This is a great day to be a US citizen.
It may not seem so especially for those front liners and first responders but you are a great nation and a great people.
God bless you all.
(no apologies offered for usurping this thread)
It depends
If people want to put time, energy and resource into biofuels well that is fine.
If they want to believe that doing the above makes for savings and efficiencies well that is fine too.
In either case good, clear and precise evidence is required?
Maybe SMEs by their very nature form less of a corporate wealth model and more of a personal risk model.
Some SME owners really have to consider the bank and/or creditors seizing personal assets and wealth if the business goes bits up.
Add a dash of envy "We have to work damn hard to make a bit of money never mind profit and these are making billions. Of course it nots right to pirate their stuff but its also not right that they charge us so bl**dy much for using it!" ?
Strange ol' world innit?
The biggest financial turmoil in the history of the world and the people responsible were not responsible.
And while it easy acceptable for the state to bail out bankers with billions of monies, fantastic pensions and continued bonus peaking at eye-watering levels it is okay to tell granny that she has to do without because she has a bedroom or two spare.
Yes!
That is the way to do it!
(or maybe not?)
Did they use a professional photographer opt was it more of an informal arrangement?
I am given to understand that "greed" is not highly regarded in PRC.
Re: Ministry of Truth
It is a tricky area but reductio ad absurda might suggest something like:
expediency = fast track route to fascism (for fascism requires that decisions taken by state officials are not open to being challenged)
primary beneficiary - we receive money from guv'mint to do su'hing But the guv'mint wants some of that money to go to someone else (sometimes called end users). But why and how can the guv'mint do that koz we iz the primary beneficiary so we knows best and we wants all ov the dosh so there!)
UKIP
Here in the UK we have UKIP.
It is only a dream and UKIP will always be subject to the restrictions our civil service places upon it
