Cyrus wrote: » there will still be transfer pricing arrangements.
brisan wrote: » Childcare gets cheaper as it disappears Nephew drops the child to school and picks him up Before it was to a childminder at 8 and picked up at 6 with the child minder doing the school runs They both work around it Transport at least 30 a week PP on leap card No work clothes required Most women I know would have a separate wardrobe of work clothes which would be updated regularly
cnocbui wrote: » You mean tax avoidance.
Cyrus wrote: » i dont get this notion that childcare is no longer a requirement if you are working from home, you are either working and the children need care, or you are defrauding your employer and not doing a full days work, which isnt sustainable and falls apart at mid terms and over the summer. unlimited dart or bus is a net cost of 70 a month per person if you have a tax saver ticket and pay the marginal rate of tax, anyone paying any more should examine their spending. the only women i know well enough to comment on her clothes spending has replaced spending on work clothes with spending on non work clothes. anyone this is a totally different point im not sure what we are debating. the main saving anyone can make is on childcare and im suspicious at how significant savings can be made if people arent taking the proverbial.
Danzy wrote: » You haven't really experience in this.
Cyrus wrote: » its actually the opposite.
Newspapers use the phrase "transfer pricing" as shorthand for multinational corporations shifting profits to tax havens to avoid tax in developed countries. ... Non-governmental organizations argue that transfer pricing deleteriously affects the budgets of developing countries that lack the administrative resources to fight with well-represented multinationals. Christian Aid estimates that developing countries lose $160 billion of tax revenue annually to transfer pricing.
cnocbui wrote: » No it isn't.https://www.forbes.com/2010/06/24/tax-finance-multinational-economics-opinions-columnists-lee-sheppard.html#4550bd186346
Cyrus wrote: » the effect of transfer pricing on mnc's is that you pay tax in every jurisdiction that you have a taxable presence in. Obviously you will ensure that you pay the most tax in lower tax locations but you still have to pay a certain amount in higher tax jurisdictions within the frameworks that exist. Your group transfer pricing policy can be challenged and scrutinised by any of the jurisdictions so it makes sense to have such that it will stand up to such scrutiny. so despite what newspapers might say thats the reality.
cnocbui wrote: » So it's tax avoidance under the guise of misusing the phrase 'tax minimisation'. There was an absolute classic in the UK papers a few years ago. They mentioned Starbucks had paid a thimbulfull of tax on a bathtub full of income - the first tax they had paid in the UK in over ten years. All achieved by 'buying' their beans from their subsidiary in Switzerland at sky high prices. Despite being technically insolvent for over a decade, it then mentioned the company was looking to open 300 or so new outlets in the UK. Which of course is what every insolvent company does. Pull the other one, it plays Money, by the Flying Lizards.
Cyrus wrote: » those days are effectively over or on their way out with the advent of CbCR and Bepshttps://www.oecd.org/tax/beps/about/https://www.businessinsider.com/the-european-division-of-starbucks-paid-28-uk-tax-last-year-2018-9?r=US&IR=T#:~:text=Starbucks'%20UK%20headquartered%20businesses%20paid,UK%20for%20its%20tax%20affairs.
awec wrote: » https://twitter.com/RTENewsAtOne/status/1316003421443497984
Dwarf.Shortage wrote: » How on earth are they going to build units for €52k a piece
brisan wrote: » I think a multinational company with billions in sales and manufacturing bases all over the world can afford accountants who know their way around these tax laws better than anybody on here will
fliball123 wrote: » I tell you one thing the government are not cutting anything and are doubling down all of those saying the place is going to plummet into Armageddon and property prices with it will not be happy with this budget
Ministers and high-level officials from 76 countries signed, or formally expressed their intention to sign, the multilateral convention designed to reduce the opportunity for tax avoidance by multinational enterprises. Notably, the United States is not a signatory to the Convention.
cnocbui wrote: » The US didn't sign the BEPS agreement and probably never will.https://rsmus.com/what-we-do/services/tax/international-tax-planning/multilateral-convention-on-treaty-measures-to-prevent-beps-is-si.html
Cyrus wrote: » whats your point?
Dwarf.Shortage wrote: » If the US aren't aboard it will struggle to become the accepted western standard for accounting/tax calculating.
Kasey_Don wrote: » Housing crisis started in 2013. Nearly 8 years later and this is the state of the housing market. A new build in Leixlip for ****ing 385k.https://www.daft.ie/kildare/new-homes-for-sale/barnhall-meadows-leixlip-kildare-156467/ It's an absolute disgrace what FG have done to this country and it's young people. Only the rich can avail of the help to buy. I really hate FG. They have ****ed young peoples lives for nearly a decade.
Kasey_Don wrote: » They may be nice but Leixlip is a nothing town. The best thing is that it's close to other towns. I assumed they're not finished or furnished so you'll have to spend another 10-20k on it.
Dwarf.Shortage wrote: » Is there any way of finding out about developments due on stream in 2021 or is it a case of checking MyHome etc regularly?
Cyrus wrote: » very few houses, new or second hand will come furnished.
Kasey_Don wrote: » Only the rich can avail of the help to buy.
Bubbaclaus wrote: » Can you explain what this means? Help to buy only applies to properties under 500k, which I doubt the "rich" have any interest in buying for their first home.
