If we vote for Brexit what happens

gfplux

Thrugelmir wrote: »

I seem to be missing your point I'm afraid to say. As seems to be a case of cutting off the nose to spite the face. This isn't about Tax Law but underhand arrangements between Governments and Companies. Longer term the loss of income will hurt.

My point is I agree with you.

However don't think that Macdo and others wont want some "special" treatment from HMRC. You will recall that HMRC came to some "curious" decisions when negotiating with some big tax payers over their back taxes a few years ago.
Unfortunately I recall the controversy but don't recall the company's involved.

Britain competes with many Country's in the Tax game. Some Brexiteers have suggested that when Britain is out of the EU they want Banking regulations loosened don't you imagine that looser tax regulations for Banks and multi nationals with go along with this.

The EU is trying (very slowly and haltingly) to TIGHTEN the rules. Britain will have to decide on which side they are.

I found this article about Google in the FT that explains how HMRC can be used by Government to cosy up to multinationals.
https://www.ft.com/content/d50ad5f4-c125-11e5-9fdb-87b8d15baec2

setmefree2

Andy Burnham suggests UK may need to leave single market to rebuild North of England

Mr Burnham criticised politicians whose “sole focus after Brexit is to preserve access to the single market”, accusing them of trying to “rerun the referendum campaign”.
And he said: “If that means we can’t get some flexibility on state aid rules well, maybe that’s not necessarily going to be right for the North.

“I think the North needs to adopt a very different approach now in terms of the way we create the industry of the future. It’s about becoming more interventionist.”
Mr Burnham backed a recommendation for a “Brexit negotiating committee of the North” to be set up, to push the region’s different industrial priorities and to examine the "trade off" with single market membership.

It is the second time this week that Mr Burnham has sparked controversy, after his call to end free movement of people because it was “undermining the cohesion of our communities and the safety of our streets”. On that row, he is on the side of a growing number of Labour backbenchers who want their party to accept immigration curbs – in the teeth of opposition from Mr Corbyn.

Totally agree with him on this. I've watched a number of documentaries that bear him out in his conclusions - that is that working class communities are under threat. The absolute best thing about being brought up working class is the fantastic sense of community - it makes up for having less material stuff. Take that away from the working classes and what are they left with?

He's heading in the right direction with these arguments imho. Good on ya mate.

Both immigration restrictions and a more interventionist industrial policy are likely to play well in next May’s election to be Greater Manchester’s first “metro-mayor”. The role would make Mr Burnham one of Britain’s most powerful elected figures, with the devolution to the city-region of powers over health, transport, housing, planning, policing and skills

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-single-market-andy-burnham-labour-north-england-industry-uk-eu-a7466181.html

And I make it quite plain I would quite like to have the ability, if I’m the mayor of Greater Manchester, to say I am going to prioritise Greater Manchester companies for public contracts and public investment.”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/andy-burnham-calls-hard-brexit-9427554

setmefree2

Irish GDP surged ahead in three months following Brexit

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/reuters/article-4016838/Irish-GDP-surged-ahead-three-months-following-Brexit.html

gfplux

Tromking wrote: »

I think gfplux's point is that Luxembourg doing illegal sweetheart deals with corporations is the legitimate action for a nation that has a "huge financial services industry" but if a corporation moves its affairs to the UK with competitively priced tax law then its because we're akin to a "shady tax haven" ��.

Perfect Tromking that's exactly what I mean.
Remember Britains financial industry is one of the largest in the world. Luxembourg has been called a shady Tax haven so what is wrong in saying Britain wants to strike some sweetheart deals of it own.

Conrad

setmefree2 wrote: »

He's heading in the right direction with these arguments imho. Good on ya mate.

His is, but the problem is he's said this before only to then flip-flop back to the standard defending of FOM and mass immigration. I don't get why he does this flip-flopping as it undermines his credulity

Conrad

setmefree2 wrote: »

More Metropolitan, Liberal Elite Crap - Muswell Hill is like Richmond Park - full to the brim with Britain's Richest white people....

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/racist-really-british-store-hit-by-brexit-backlash-122428432.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38265064

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/12/08/really-british-shop-selling-uk-memorabilia-accused-racism/


This is actually a form of snobbery. (Read Chavs). The working classes are seen as being patriotic - so the rich reject patriotism.

Yes we were discussing this in Discussion Time yesterday. If you're interested I have a thread about the demise of the liberal left which I essentially put down to their propensity for identity politics (Indentarians highlight difference) and an arrogant, pompous self assurance that presupposes lefty liberalism is the orthodoxy and beyond challenge.


Liberals assert that anyone with a differing view must be suffering from that age old ailment; false consciousness, the cure to which is a spot of re-education.


Notice now their latest patter - they start out saying they wish to understand working class concerns, but then quickly revert to their re-education prose (working class people are thick and need the benefits of enrichment explained to them)

CKhalvashi

Thrugelmir wrote: »

I was thinking totally the opposite. The attractions of London are enormous now that the veil has been lifted on the shady deals.

You're claiming there's very little dodgy money in London?

I'd suggest you're very much mistaken......

Tromking

gfplux wrote: »

Perfect Tromking that's exactly what I mean.
Remember Britains financial industry is one of the largest in the world. Luxembourg has been called a shady Tax haven so what is wrong in saying Britain wants to strike some sweetheart deals of it own.

In this case is it a Luxembourger style sweetheart deal they're after or a large corporation realising the illegal salad days are over and opting for a country where a soon to be 17% corporation tax rate is available?

Thrugelmir

CKhalvashi wrote: »

You're claiming there's very little dodgy money in London?

I'd suggest you're very much mistaken......

Nothing of the kind. We are discussing Government to Business relationships. Where to attract a Company to locate or invest the Government has in essence offered state aid. Which of course the EU frowns upon. Without the benefit of these deals the attraction of remaining in certain locations no longer exists. London of course being one of the best commercial centres in the world with an array of expertise covering many fields. Ultimately companies look after themselves and their shareholders there's no loyalty to a country.

So while Companies could have tax to repay. The EU could equally fine the Country concerned.

Shakethedisease

It's all about the money ?

Poll suggests public will not accept a Brexit that leaves them worse off

Surveys from YouGov and Which? point to a growing worry that Brexit will leave the UK poorer

The British public will not accept a Brexit deal that leaves them worse off financially, a new poll suggests. In a sign that a majority of the public would be unwilling to accept an economically damaging hard Brexit, half of those who voted to leave the EU in June, including 62% of Labour voters and 59% of those in the north, would not be willing to lose any money at all as a consequence of Britain’s withdrawal.

Just one in 10 would be willing to lose more than £100 a month. Pollster Peter Kellner, the former president of YouGov, said the results suggested that Theresa May “could have real difficulty in delivering a Brexit that satisfies those who voted for it”.

He added: “This is the first poll to look specifically at whether leave voters are willing to accept any financial loss as a result of Brexit. The answer is that few are prepared to.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/10/poll-public-will-not-accept-brexit-worse-off-tim-farron-ukip-lib-dem-yougov?CMP=twt_gu