Glastonbury - "Bono pay up"

ejmaztec

There have been many Bono threads on Boards regarding his "saintly" nature, most of them involving criticicism of his "contribution" towards Irish tax coffers, and it seems that an organisation called Art Uncut is having a bit of a do at Glastonbury to remind him that he should pay a lot more tax.

Art Uncut have decided to make weekend June 24/25 'Bono Pay Up!' weekend.

On Saturday 25 June, there will be a 'Bono Pay Up!' night of music, comedy and short talks at the Bull and Gate in Kentish town, with talks by John Christensen, Director of Tax Justice Network, and Maurice Glasman, leading proponent of the 'Blue Labour' movement.
On Friday 24 June we hope to organise a mass demonstration at U2's headline gig at Glastonbury, to send a message to U2 that their approach to tax is not acceptable (for more info on U2's tax avoidance, see our recent blog entry 'It's crucial we send a message to Bono that what he is doing is wrong'.

http://artuncut.org.uk/events/

Jesus Wept

That's pathetic.

Hondo75

its in the Guardian today.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2011/jun/03/u2-glastonbury-tax-protesters

Reg'stoy

The-Rigger wrote: »

That's pathetic.

Why so (I presume you mean the protest and not bono), do you feel the same about people wanting developers paying their due yet avoiding it.

Jesus Wept

He pays all the taxes that he must do legally, same as most people. Do any of any of the people involved over pay the tax man?

Mr X11

Cringeworthy stuff. Of all the good causes out there why the hell would anyone care about what Bono does. Jesus wept.

unreggd

The OP is clearly Adele

Reg'stoy

The-Rigger wrote: »

He pays all the taxes that he must do legally, same as most people. Do any of any of the people involved over pay the tax man?

This is the same person who advocates the writing off of debts of certain third world countries yet takes a course of action that reduces his own personal tax liabilites. He is of course only doing what any other good rich person would do to keep an extra couple of million in the bank, the same as what the banks who lent money to third world countries at high interest rates are doing; yes that's right doing all they can legally to get an extra few million in their share holders bank accounts.

I personally donate a fixed amount monthly to charity and every year sign over any tax savings I would incur due to my donations back to the same charity. I don't mention this as a "look at how good I am" I'm simply saying how much money does he need. You say "legally" I say he has more money than he can possibily spend yet still is not happy.

Let him do like the Gates and give some money to charity not don some ****ty sunglasses and bleat on about world debt. I'm not asking him to live in a three bedroom semi D, he has earned his money through hard work and talent and entitled to enjoy the fruits of his labour. Millions of normal Irish people do live in three bedroom semi's and also work hard (a lot harder than he does now) and have no choice in paying their societal dues. So bono don't bleat on about debt and then move your company office to Holland to exploit tax laws. Do a Micheal O'Leary and be happy with your tens of millions and pay taxes in Ireland.

I have nothing against the wealthy using legal loop holes to avoid taxes, I may not like it but thats the system. Bono is like the pushy shiny happy people who stop you on the street asking you "to give money to..... by direct debit" yet fail to mention that they get a 'finders fee'.

The only way world banks will write off debt is when they have wrung enough blood from the stone.

Jesus Wept

I imagine he donates to charity, probably considerably and he likely sees that as going to better use than over paying his taxes, which is what he would be doing.

ejmaztec

unreggd wrote: »

The OP is clearly Adele

The-Rigger wrote: »

I imagine he donates to charity, probably considerably and he likely sees that as going to better use than over paying his taxes, which is what he would be doing.

Two imaginative posters.:pac:

Jesus Wept

Should have put that in inverted commas.

Degsy

Bono is a scumbag..a hypocritical multimillionaire anti-poverty campaigner.

jayteecork

When's Bono organising a "drop the debt" campaign for Ireland like he did for those African countries?

JustAddWater

Art Uncut have decided to make weekend June 24/25 'Bono Shut Up!' weekend.

FYP!

Bens

I hate Bono the whiney little sh1t. But, ....Let he who pays more tax than Bono cast the first stone. Otherwise fcuk off.

Reg'stoy

Bens wrote: »

I hate Bono the whiney little sh1t. But, ....Let he who pays more tax than Bono cast the first stone. Otherwise fcuk off.

In a direct comparision to my yearly pay and percentage of same which I pay in both direct and indirect tax and bono and his yearly income and percentage of which he pays tax on that income, I reckon I win hands down. So duck bono ...........



Well over a third of my income is gone before I can even think about moving it offshore, so I reckon I'll hang around.

Oh and if we're talking about actual amounts of money let him do the same as Bill Gates or maybe not and hopefully he'll fcuk off as you so eloquently put it (oops that's right he already has)

Even Mr McGuinness admits that "Like any other business, U2 operates in a tax-efficient manner." which when you read between the lines, means as little as we can get away with.

So bono can't really pontificate about banks who are also businesses and simply acting in a business like manner, when they charge third world countries the rates they do; after all it's only business.

Bens

Reg'stoy wrote: »

In a direct comparision to my yearly pay and percentage of same which I pay in both direct and indirect tax and bono and his yearly income and percentage of which he pays tax on that income, I reckon I win hands down. So duck bono ...........



Well over a third of my income is gone before I can even think about moving it offshore, so I reckon I'll hang around.

Oh and if we're talking about actual amounts of money let him do the same as Bill Gates or maybe not and hopefully he'll fcuk off as you so eloquently put it (oops that's right he already has)

Even Mr McGuinness admits that "Like any other business, U2 operates in a tax-efficient manner." which when you read between the lines, means as little as we can get away with.

So bono can't really pontificate about banks who are also businesses and simply acting in a business like manner, when they charge third world countries the rates they do; after all it's only business.

So after all that what you are saying is you pay a tiny fraction of the tax Bono pays.

I love the way people can pretend they are paying a lot of tax just by using the % sign. Try using the € sign instead.

Reg'stoy

Bens wrote: »

So after all that what you are saying is you pay a tiny fraction of the tax Bono pays.

I love the way people can pretend they are paying a lot of tax just by using the % sign. Try using the € sign instead.

Oh dear is that the best riposte you can come up with. Really if you want to argue a point don't make the 'thats the why' or 'I told so' or my personal favorite 'because' bad parent reply, given when asked a question by a child that they can't answer.

Of course I pay a smaller amount of tax than bono, because I well; earn less D'oh. Micheal O'Leary pays more tax than bono and he told me "that bono doesn't fly Ryanair so he's a bollox"* *(I may have misheard him) ok so he didn't mention taxes as he said amounts paid were a moot point, cheers Micheal.

The OP opened the thread in reference to the planned protest re U2's tax status. I asked if people would be similarly indignant if protests were held re developers paying their due's. The legality of U2's tax status was posted and like most who can afford the services of good accountants; I would say yes they are legalily if not morally above board.

The protest planned makes reference to world banks and the morally unjustifiable if legally correct rates they charge on third world debt. Bono as we know has been very outspoken on this same debt. The group who will make the protest are pointing out the hypocrisy of bono's protestations on third world debt while the U2 business moves to Holland to avail of it's better tax regime.

Bono is like the Roman God Janus, from one face he accuses World Banks of being immoral in doing the business they do, which is maximising their profits. This drive by World Banks to maximise profits (all companies and businesses do this) robs third world exchequers of vital money by charging them exorbitant interest rates; all of which is done legally. This term 'legally' tends to be used when businesses are questioned about the morality of some of their business decisions.

All this protest by bono would be laudable, but for the fact that with his other face (his U2 business face) he/U2 asks his/their tax accountants to reduce their tax liabilities and so maximise their business profits and so rob the exchequer of what ever country they should be paying their taxes.

I personally have nothing against bono, he is a musician and so like to seem/heard. But really how much money does he want or need, surely to God he must look at his bank balance and even fleetingly think "wow I have more money than I can ever spend".

The arguements that U2 the business employ x amount of people around the world and that they contribute etc etc to their home exchequers have been extolled. I would say in response that U2 employ these people to maximise U2's profits not out of some egalitarian business model.

Bens don't fall into the trap that because wealthy individuals pay (by amount) more tax than you or I, that they are somehow better and more entitled to plaudits. Take a few minutes and think about the huge number of individual members of our society who take care of family members and thereby saving the state huge amounts of money or those employed or volunteer (those of you reading this, please if you can donate to this charity manned by truely special heroic people) to care and improve the quality of life of complete strangers. You probably know a few (but they don't shout about it).

Now bens think about the amount of money that U2 the 'business' saved by moving to Holland and just imagine what C.A.M.P. could do with it.

The above charity is very dear to my heart because once you see the joy on another human beings face because they were able to....... I'm sorry I may have gone off point but I just get so annoyed when people say "that insert celebrity name is just great" because they did nothing more than what thousands of people do everyday without reward.

Bens

oh dear. That soapbox must be creaking.

Reg'stoy

Tut Tut

onemorechance

Reg'stoy wrote: »

Of course I pay a smaller amount of tax than bono, because I well; earn less D'oh.

onemorechance

Reg'stoy wrote: »

the planned protest re U2's tax status

onemorechance

Bono Pay Up!

to send a message to U2 that their approach to tax is not acceptable

So the aim is for Bono to pay on behalf of all U2?

Art Uncut is committed to the following three principles:
1. The cuts currently being imposed by the Conservative-led UK government are unnecessarily severe, unfairly distributed, and potentially harmful to the UK economy.
2. Post-2008 it is idiotic to think that leaving everything to the markets is a good way to run an economy.
3. Especially at a time of austerity, we cannot afford to tolerate tax dodging (whether legal or not).

http://artuncut.org.uk/

ejmaztec

onemorechance wrote: »

So the aim is for Bono to pay on behalf of all U2?



http://artuncut.org.uk/

I think it's very charitable of our brothers and sisters at Art Uncut to speak up for the Irish tax-payers in this situation, and they're to be commended for promoting international friendship and harmony.

They probably even know how to use the multi-quote option on bulletin boards.:P

onemorechance

ejmaztec wrote: »

I think it's very charitable of our brothers and sisters at Art Uncut to speak up for the Irish tax-payers in this situation,

Charitable, exactly, they are going to Glastonbury to beg on the behalf of the Irish nation

ejmaztec wrote: »

and they're to be commended for promoting international friendship and harmony.

Communism is what they are trying to promote.

ejmaztec wrote: »

They probably even know how to use the multi-quote option on bulletin boards.:P

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmEBBskGizY

Reg'stoy

onemorechance wrote: »

Look instead of posting pictures for some reason or other, why not debate the subject. After hours is this direction -> if you want to post pictures or at least put some thought into them.

If you are against the protest fair enough but don't just give a "thats the why" reply. The idea of protest is to highlight the rights or wrongs of an issue and look at how much exposure this planned protest has gotten and therefore rightly or wrongly they are correct in doing it.

The ironic thing is that at some stage during their set, bono will no doubt broach the subject of world debt and your posted picture will be very apt then.

Please, defend your position by agruement not by histrionics.

ejmaztec

onemorechance wrote: »

Charitable, exactly, they are going to Glastonbury to beg on the behalf of the Irish nation

Communism is what they are trying to promote.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmEBBskGizY

:pac: Communism :pac:

onemorechance

Reg'stoy wrote: »

Look instead of posting pictures for some reason or other, why not debate the subject. After hours is this direction -> if you want to post pictures or at least put some thought into them.

If you are against the protest fair enough but don't just give a "thats the why" reply. The idea of protest is to highlight the rights or wrongs of an issue and look at how much exposure this planned protest has gotten and therefore rightly or wrongly they are correct in doing it.

The ironic thing is that at some stage during their set, bono will no doubt broach the subject of world debt and your posted picture will be very apt then.

Please, defend your position by agruement not by histrionics.

They are begging for money, thus the pic is apt.

They want to promote a communist agenda, I don't think communism is what we need in Ireland.

People can't get over their hate of Bono to admit that he, as an individual Irish person, has done more good in the world than any of them ever have or are likely to. Call it pontificating, whatever you like, but he doesn't just talk, however arrogant is may come across, he follows it up with action. He would be more appreciated in Ireland it seems had he put out a few albums and then turned to drugs.

http://www.makepovertyhistory.org/takeaction/

http://www.live8live.com/

http://www.one.org/data/

To sum up, Bono has done more than you, whether it's contributing to the Irish economy or to charitable work world wide.

onemorechance

ejmaztec wrote: »

:pac: Communism :pac:

Cannot help you see it if you can't already.

I'm something of a small 'c' conservative Marxist.

http://artuncut.org.uk/blog/#blog-13

Maybe a quote from one of the protesters beggars will help, but he's only a little communist, for now . . .

All animals are equal

but some animals are more equal than others.

Reg'stoy

onemorechance wrote: »

To sum up, Bono has done more than you, whether it's contributing to the Irish economy or to charitable work world wide.

Reg'stoy wrote: »

I personally have nothing against bono, he is a musician and so like to seem/heard. But really how much money does he want or need, surely to God he must look at his bank balance and even fleetingly think "wow I have more money than I can ever spend".

Bens onemorechance don't fall into the trap that because wealthy individuals pay (by amount) more tax than you or I, that they are somehow better and more entitled to plaudits. Take a few minutes and think about the huge number of individual members of our society who take care of family members and thereby saving the state huge amounts of money or those employed or volunteer (those of you reading this, please if you can donate to this charity manned by truely special heroic people) to care and improve the quality of life of complete strangers. You probably know a few (but they don't shout about it).

Now bens onemorechance think about the amount of money that U2 the 'business' saved by moving to Holland and just imagine what C.A.M.P. could do with it.

The above charity is very dear to my heart because once you see the joy on another human beings face because they were able to....... I'm sorry I may have gone off point but I just get so annoyed when people say "that insert celebrity name is just great" because they did nothing more than what thousands of people do everyday without reward.

Reg'stoy wrote: »

I personally donate a fixed amount monthly to charity and every year sign over any tax savings I would incur due to my donations back to the same charity. I don't mention this as a "look at how good I am" I'm simply saying how much money does he need.

Let him do like the Gates and give some money to charity not don some ****ty sunglasses and bleat on about world debt. I'm not asking him to live in a three bedroom semi D, he has earned his money through hard work and talent and entitled to enjoy the fruits of his labour. Millions of normal Irish people do live in three bedroom semi's and also work hard (a lot harder than he does now) and have no choice in paying their societal dues. So bono don't bleat on about debt and then move your company office to Holland to exploit tax laws. Do a Micheal O'Leary and be happy with your tens of millions and pay taxes in Ireland.

I have nothing against the wealthy using legal loop holes to avoid taxes, I may not like it but thats the system. Bono is like the pushy shiny happy people who stop you on the street asking you "to give money to..... by direct debit" yet fail to mention that they get a 'finders fee'.

You have no idea who I am, so why the personal attack I made no derogatory comments about you so please don't insult me by insinuating that I am somehow a lesser person than bono because unlike him I can't afford to buy indulgences.

I was, when I first saw you had replied going to click thanks because whether or not I agreed with you; at least you were attempting to debate the issue. But then you had to insult me, and as we know insults are the last refuge of the out-argued.

ejmaztec

onemorechance wrote: »

Cannot help you see it if you can't already.



http://artuncut.org.uk/blog/#blog-13

Maybe a quote from one of the protesters beggars will help, but he's only a little communist, for now . . .

All animals are equal

but some animals are more equal than others.

One comment from a blogger member doesn't make Art Uncut a department of the Politburo.

Anyway, you say we don't need communism, but I'm sure we could do with some of what the Chinese have got.

onemorechance

Reg'stoy wrote: »

You have no idea who I am, so why the personal attack I made no derogatory comments about you so please don't insult me by insinuating that I am somehow a lesser person than bono because unlike him I can't afford to buy indulgences.

I was, when I first saw you had replied going to click thanks because whether or not I agreed with you; at least you were attempting to debate the issue. But then you had to insult me, and as we know insults are the last refuge of the out-argued.

You are a lesser person because you say someone, Bono, who has done so much, more than you, should do even more. He has earned his indulgences by his success. Your lack of comparative success and your comparative donations are your business, I just don't like your bitterness towards Bono and ignorance of the good he has done.

onemorechance

ejmaztec wrote: »

One comment from a blogger member doesn't make Art Uncut a department of the Politburo.

Anyway, you say we don't need communism, but I'm sure we could do with some of what the Chinese have got.

Such as the one child / forced abortion policy helping to reduce child benefit payments?

ejmaztec

onemorechance wrote: »

Such as the one child / forced abortion policy helping to reduce child benefit payments?

Note that I did say "some" of what the Chinese have got.

onemorechance

ejmaztec wrote: »

Note that I did say "some" of what the Chinese have got.

Just some communism so, I wonder how some communism works out . . .

ejmaztec

onemorechance wrote: »

Just some communism so, I wonder how some communism works out . . .

All regimes have their good and bad points, but this is nothing to do with Bono being a tax-avoiding hypocrite.

In After Hours, I replied to one of your posts as follows:

onemorechance wrote: »

They never stopped contributing taxes in Ireland, they employ people here.

onemorechance wrote: »

They just decided that they could pay a few million less than the many millions they have already paid in tax in Ireland, thanks to the EU laws which allows foreign companies benefit from Ireland's low corporation tax.

You obviously know nothing about the Artists' Exemption. Before the business was transferred to Holland, there was no tax due in Ireland because the relevant income was exempt from tax. The reason for the move to Holland was due to a restriction being placed on the Artists' Exemption, which would have meant the business paying tax for the first time.

So, we're left with a few employees in Ireland paying a bit of PAYE? Chickenfeed!

There's nothing wrong with tax avoidance because it's perfectly legal, albeit immoral. No-one really complains about it.

All of the monies available to world leaders arises from the taxation collected in their respective countries. If the world was full of Bonos, then none of those countries would have enough left over to donate to anyone, let alone to the third world.

Whenever Bono stands up and makes a speech, this is all I can hear :"I'm not paying tax to any tax authority, because I've successfully avoided it, but you lot had better get your tax-payers to hand over big chunks to help the poor"

Your posts are consistent, in that they show an inflated view of Bono's worth to society as a whole, not to mention an uber-inflated idea of the amount of tax that he and U2 have paid into the Irish coffers.

Reg'stoy

onemorechance wrote: »

Just some communism so, I wonder how some communism works out . . .

onemorechance wrote: »

Not everyone is a fan of U2 or Bono's attitude but if everyone in Ireland was lucky enough to be able to contribute a tenth of what U2 have contributed to Irish society as a whole, we would be living in the greatest utopian society on the planet.

When you said Utopian Society on another thread did you understand quite what you were talking about.

onemorechance wrote: »

You are a lesser person because you say someone, Bono, who has done so much, more than you, should do even more. He has earned his indulgences by his success. Your lack of comparative success and your comparative donations are your business, I just don't like your bitterness towards Bono and ignorance of the good he has done.

Reg'stoy wrote: »

I'm not asking him to live in a three bedroom semi D, he has earned his money through hard work and talent and entitled to enjoy the fruits of his labour. Millions of normal Irish people do live in three bedroom semi's and also work hard (a lot harder than he does now) and have no choice in paying their societal dues. So bono don't bleat on about debt and then move your company office to Holland to exploit tax laws. Do a Micheal O'Leary and be happy with your tens of millions and pay taxes in Ireland.

Reg'stoy wrote: »

The OP opened the thread in reference to the planned protest re U2's tax status........All this protest by bono would be laudable, .........
I personally have nothing against bono, he is a musician and so like to seen/heard..............

So once again onemorechance (apt user name), this thread is about the protest against bono and U2 in their choice of tax shelter while he as a member of U2 talks out about world debt. I may not like the persona of bono, the person Paul Hewson might be completely different. Others including myself have pointed out the dichotomy of his advocation on the cancellation of third world debt (which I happen to agree with) and how his stance on this subject is somewhat muddied by his and U2's business choices.

I am also intrigued why you yet again feel you ave to make personal attacks

Reg'stoy wrote: »

Of course I pay a smaller amount of tax than bono, because I well; earn less D'oh.

onemorechance wrote: »

onemorechance wrote: »

. Your lack of comparative success

Why the dig at my earnings and so called "lack of comparative success" are you really so shallow as to judge the success of people by their financial worth.

So come on and post on the thread with some modicum of creativity rather than relying on trite, stale and stereotypical, bono is great replies. The salient point of this thread is; are the protests against U2 justified considering their business decision to move to Holland.

So onemorechance, is bono's position on the cancellation of third world debt justified, he is after all asking Nation States to cancel this debt (bearing in mind that this cancellation will have to be absorbed by the tax payer citizens of these same States) while he, in fairness legally, saves millions in tax (your quote).

onemorechance

ejmaztec wrote: »

All regimes have their good and bad points, but this is nothing to do with Bono being a tax-avoiding hypocrite.

In After Hours, I replied to one of your posts as follows:


Your posts are consistent, in that they show an inflated view of Bono's worth to society as a whole, not to mention an uber-inflated idea of the amount of tax that he and U2 have paid into the Irish coffers.

You obviously have no idea of the scale, duration and diversity of U2's contribution to the Irish economy due do your blinded and uber-deflated view of Bono's worth to society.

I am not even a fan but I don't share your attitude of begrudgery towards Bono or his obligation to the Irish nation. He does talk too much but at least he acts on what he says. Yours is also a typical attitude where your dislike, even hate of Bono, allows you to only see what you don't like and dismiss his multifaceted achievements.

Since you don't know the difference between reduce and avoid, I can understand your difficulty with all this.

onemorechance

Reg'stoy wrote: »

When you said Utopian Society on another thread did you understand quite what you were talking about.

I did, you did not. I said utopian society, not utopian socialism, which is what you linked to.

Reg'stoy wrote: »

So once again onemorechance (apt user name), this thread is about the protest against bono and U2 in their choice of tax shelter while he as a member of U2 talks out about world debt. I may not like the persona of bono, the person Paul Hewson might be completely different. Others including myself have pointed out the dichotomy of his advocation on the cancellation of third world debt (which I happen to agree with) and how his stance on this subject is somewhat muddied by his and U2's business choices.

I am also intrigued why you yet again feel you ave to make personal attacks

You have also attempted to make personal attacks. In your most recent post you questioned my understanding of what I wrote, that's an attack on intellect! Commenting on how my username is apt is meant as a slur!

Reg'stoy wrote: »

Why the dig at my earnings and so called "lack of comparative success" are you really so shallow as to judge the success of people by their financial worth.

I judge people on what they do and I'm not so shallow as to dismiss all that Bono has done and say that he needs to bail-out this country by a lump-sum donation of tax which U2 have not avoided, just legitimately reduced.

Reg'stoy wrote: »

So come on and post on the thread with some modicum of creativity rather than relying on trite, stale and stereotypical, bono is great replies. The salient point of this thread is; are the protests against U2 justified considering their business decision to move to Holland.

So onemorechance, is bono's position on the cancellation of third world debt justified, he is after all asking Nation States to cancel this debt (bearing in mind that this cancellation will have to be absorbed by the tax payer citizens of these same States) while he, in fairness legally, saves millions in tax (your quote).

Yes it is, bearing in mind that these United Nations countries have for centuries, and continue to do so, exploit these third world countries for their own gain, so yes the tax-payers of those countries should take the hit, especially considering that they have more than benefited from the years of exploitation of those countries.

Reg'stoy

onemorechance wrote: »

I did, you did not. I said utopian society, not utopian socialism, which is what you linked to.

You have also attempted to make personal attacks. In your most recent post you questioned my understanding of what I wrote, that's an attack on intellect! Commenting on how my username is apt is meant as a slur!

Utopia by it's very nature is a perceived idealised perfect society, where everyone is equal and brought to its natuaral evolution, some would even say money or material goods are not required as everyone works for the betterment of their society. Does this remind you of any socio political ideology, hence my reference to Utopian Socialism.

As for a personal attack, I was attacking your post (if that did not come across I'm sorry) as in the hypocrisy of you questioning another posters supposed communist leanings when you yourself wished for a 'Utopian Society'. I am not as crass as to personally insult someone directly. In saying that I would like to think the adult thing for you to do is apologise for some of the more personal remarks you made in particular the 'lesser' remarks most annoyed me.

My using your username in the manner I did, was simply me asking you to answer the salient point of the thread which you have now (thank you).

I might not agree with your answer as I'm sure the poorer sections of those nation states would either. That arguement though is for another thread.

Incidentally I have always in my postings agreed that what U2 and bono are doing is legal, morally I don't agree and I have never asked him or U2 to make any ex-gratia payments. I did however wonder why like Micheal O'Leary was he not happy with his millions and so like he; pay tax to this exchequer.

Yahew

A few points:

1) Bono is resident in Ireland and pays his income tax. He ( and other members of U2) are one of the very few rock stars to stay resident in Ireland. At the time most people emigrated to the UK if they wanted to become famous - then the UK had much lower personal tax rates.
2) It is U2 the company, not Bono, which has some of it's interests in Holland. Bono is not a majority member in that company, and is one of - at least - 5 shareholders. Therefore saying Bono is not paying tax is a bit like saying that I am not paying tax because I invest in Google who pay taxes in Holland ( and Ireland) not the US. Whatever dividends he gets are taxed in Ireland. Thats a massive contribution to the Irish economy.
3) The company U2 does pay taxes in Ireland, and Holland. Holland happens to have lower corporation tax, which is their decision. Doing this is no more a 'tax dodge" than Google being in Ireland rather than the US. Corporations will go where they can pay the least tax, and since they are all global, there is nothing immoral or illegal about it. America no more own Google, than Ireland owns U2. The shareholders own both and in all cases shareholders pay where they reside.
4) It is really not the business of UK uncut - someone should tell them that the Empire is over.

Yahew

ejmaztec wrote: »

One comment from a blogger member doesn't make Art Uncut a department of the Politburo.

Anyway, you say we don't need communism, but I'm sure we could do with some of what the Chinese have got.

Which is the most capitalistic state on the planet, despite the name.

onemorechance

Reg'stoy wrote: »

Utopia by it's very nature is a perceived idealised perfect society, where everyone is equal and brought to its natuaral evolution, some would even say money or material goods are not required as everyone works for the betterment of their society. Does this remind you of any socio political ideology, hence my reference to Utopian Socialism.

Some would say, wikipedia would say, I would not and it reminds me of communist Russia. I am more talking of a society where financial constraints don't prevent access to medical care, education etc. and people could have the material goods should they choose.

Reg'stoy wrote: »

As for a personal attack, I was attacking your post (if that did not come across I'm sorry) as in the hypocrisy of you questioning another posters supposed communist leanings when you yourself wished for a 'Utopian Society'. I am not as crass as to personally insult someone directly. In saying that I would like to think the adult thing for you to do is apologise for some of the more personal remarks you made in particular the 'lesser' remarks most annoyed me.

You are that crass and you attempt to disguise it badly, by saying things like "you're not as crass"!

Reg'stoy wrote: »

My using your username in the manner I did, was simply me asking you to answer the salient point of the thread which you have now (thank you).

I might not agree with your answer as I'm sure the poorer sections of those nation states would either. That arguement though is for another thread.

Incidentally I have always in my postings agreed that what U2 and bono are doing is legal, morally I don't agree and I have never asked him or U2 to make any ex-gratia payments. I did however wonder why like Micheal O'Leary was he not happy with his millions and so like he; pay tax to this exchequer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMGUn9IbQzk

ejmaztec

onemorechance wrote: »

You obviously have no idea of the scale, duration and diversity of U2's contribution to the Irish economy due do your blinded and uber-deflated view of Bono's worth to society.

I am not even a fan but I don't share your attitude of begrudgery towards Bono or his obligation to the Irish nation. He does talk too much but at least he acts on what he says. Yours is also a typical attitude where your dislike, even hate of Bono, allows you to only see what you don't like and dismiss his multifaceted achievements.

Since you don't know the difference between reduce and avoid, I can understand your difficulty with all this.

You’re coming up with nothing new here, even juggling with my wording for some peculiar reason.

The middle paragraph is a bit of fantasising, and as for the final paragraph, I never mentioned the word “reduce”, so why you mentioned the word is a bit of a mystery.

...and it would seem that anyone not sharing your viewpoint has a difficulty in understanding? That's very condescending, which is in keeping with most of your posts on this topic.



In parting, I don’t hate Bono, I just don’t have any respect for him.

onemorechance

ejmaztec wrote: »

You’re coming up with nothing new here, even juggling with my wording for some peculiar reason.

The middle paragraph is a bit of fantasising, and as for the final paragraph, I never mentioned the word “reduce”, so why you mentioned the word is a bit of a mystery.

...and it would seem that anyone not sharing your viewpoint has a difficulty in understanding? That's very condescending, which is in keeping with most of your posts on this topic.



In parting, I don’t hate Bono, I just don’t have any respect for him.

Mentioned reduce as that is what U2 have done, rather than avoid, as you and the failed protesters like to fantasize about.

ejmaztec

onemorechance wrote: »

Mentioned reduce as that is what U2 have done, rather than avoid, as you and the failed protesters like to fantasize about.

No, avoidance is definitely the word you're looking for. Had I used the word "reduction", that would have implied that tax was actually paid in the first place, when due to the previous Artists' exemption it wouldn't have been. You can't reduce a tax bill from zero to zero.

Yahew

ejmaztec wrote: »

onemorechance wrote: »

Mentioned reduce as that is what U2 have done, rather than avoid, as you and the failed protesters like to fantasize about.

No, avoidance is definitely the word you're looking for. Had I used the word "reduction", that would have implied that tax was actually paid in the first place, when due to the previous Artists' exemption it wouldn't have been. You can't reduce a tax bill from zero to zero.

They pay tax on non-royalty revenues.

onemorechance

ejmaztec wrote: »

No, avoidance is definitely the word you're looking for. Had I used the word "reduction", that would have implied that tax was actually paid in the first place, when due to the previous Artists' exemption it wouldn't have been. You can't reduce a tax bill from zero to zero.

U2 Ltd. paid nearly E1 000 000 in tax in IRELAND in 2006. They have since reduced that.

ejmaztec

onemorechance wrote: »

U2 Ltd. paid nearly E1 000 000 in tax in IRELAND in 2006. They have since reduced that.

Bono's share must be minuscule, and he's the one under the microscope.

Yahew

ejmaztec wrote: »

onemorechance wrote: »

U2 Ltd. paid nearly E1 000 000 in tax in IRELAND in 2006. They have since reduced that.

Bono's share must be minuscule, and he's the one under the microscope.

Why? What exemptions do you think he is claiming. He is resident in Ireland. If U2 saves royalty taxes in holland payments to Bono are increased so he would pay tax on that.

onemorechance

Great stuff!

U2 prove no stick in the mud
Despite worries of being outside their comfort zone, U2 triumphed on the main stage, writes Ken Sweeney in Glastonbury

Saturday June 25 2011

LAST night U2 left their comfort zone of the highest-grossing tour in history to play to their toughest audience yet at the UK's Glastonbury music festival.

In front of a crowd who are traditionally suspicious of 'stadium rock', it could have gone either way.

But U2's debut performance at Worthy Farm turned into a triumph as the band abandoned their 360 tour setlist to perform a 'greatest hits' package, which, when you're U2, is some songbook to draw on.

The band opened with their hit 'Even Better Than The Real Thing' followed by 'The Fly'.

Meanwhile, a much-hyped protest by anti-capitalists proved to be a damp squib and failed to disrupt the performance.

Protestors from direct action group Art Uncut attempted to steal the limelight as they unveiled a 20ft balloon emblazoned with the message "U Pay Your Tax 2" just as the band struck up their third song.

The message was intended to draw attention to U2's controversial 2006 decision to move part of their business to the Netherlands. The group accused the band of engaging in tax avoidance in Ireland.

But moments later it was deflated by a team of security guards and taken away.

There had been confusion the previous night when some protesters turned up to what they mistakenly thought was an anti-U2 gathering in Glastonbury's Pilton Palais Cinema Tent.

However, 'Killing Bono' turned out to be a screening of the 2010 film comedy based on the memoirs of Bono's schoolmate Neil McCormick, rather than a meeting of plotters.

U2 had been due to play Glastonbury last year but had to pull out at the last minute after Bono injured his back and required emergency surgery.

"We're sorry we had to phone in sick last year," he told the 50,000-strong crowd last night.

"But this is a great occasion for us. A pilgrimage, almost."

"It could be the ley lines, it could be the jetlag, but it's a special feeling being here," he said before launching into 'One'.

But with so much material to choose from, inevitably there were disagreements about how to approach their headlining slot.

"There were an awful lot of opinions," said drummer Larry Mullen. "Everyone had a view about how it should go.

"There were the 'Where The Streets Have No Name' camp and then the more subtle approach, the 'Achtung Baby' dynamic approach, where you build slowly.

Then there were those who thought we should open with '40' (from U2's 1983 album 'War'). We went through a number of combinations."

Part of U2's success is that Bono knows how to play the role of rock star with all the panache it demands. And Glastonbury was no different, with the band's singer breathing new life into some of U2's best- known hits as if he were singing them for the first time.

At his side, The Edge delivered the distinctive chiming guitar sound that has become the signature of U2's music.

Although logistics meant the group couldn't bring their now famous stage 'The Claw' to Glastonbury, they did have some strong visuals representing different parts of their career -- from War to Zoo TV, to light up the vast stage at Worthy Farm.

Watching U2 last night among the massive crowd were thousands of Irish music fans who had travelled over for the festival.

Some -- like Bono's old pal Gavin Friday -- came to see U2, but many others came to see the hundreds of artists who are performing at Europe's biggest music festival over the weekend.

Irish Independent

http://www.independent.ie/entertainment/music/u2-prove-no-stick-in-the-mud-2805788.html