If we vote for Brexit what happens

Conrad

Think the north and the poor caused Brexit? Think again

Zoe Williams
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/07/north-poor-brexit-myths


The prevailing assumption is that the vote was one in the eye for metropolitan elites, and that the white working classes, the disenfranchised and unheeded, the voters hidden on estates, had finally given a message to the Westminster bubble that knew nothing and cared less about their concerns. In fact, most leave voters were in the south: the south-east, south-west – indeed the entire south apart from London voted leave.

They did so by slightly smaller margins – though it is interesting to note that Wales, apparently the hotbed of a self-sabotaging leave movement, driven by a deprivation that only the EU was interested in alleviating, voted out by a smaller margin than the south-west. Yet southerners voted in greater numbers; their votes were decisive. Furthermore, most leave voters are middle class, or at least were of the generation whose housing and pension windfalls put them squarely in the category of wealth.

Herzlos

CLAPTON wrote: »

companies who make profits usually pay the profits out to shareholders (their owners); sometimes these are rich fat cats and sometimes boring old pension funds, saving schemes etc

Most of them keep enormous off-shore cash reserves, and most of the money given to the major shareholders goes offshore too.

Sure, some of the money will trickle back into the economy through pension payments and the spending of savings, but percentage wise it's a lot lower than benefit frausters (where nearly all of it goes back into the economy - some of it will go to people who'll hide it offshore).

Are you trying to argue that corporate tax fraud is better for the economy than benefits fraud?

cells

Conrad wrote: »

Quite the opposite, vastly under estimated.


If I wanted to know what the life of an RNLI boatman was like, I'd speak to one with long service, same with a wildlife cameraman. Same with an Australian Aborigine, indeed Ray Mears often sits transfixed learning of their lives in the bush.


But somehow when it comes to my 25 years public facing experience, all of a sudden 'that doesn't count, it's just anecdote'. Also note I obviously have spent huge amounts of time with others in my line of work and also letting agents (to include one that worked from my own office here for years), and we all know the same reality of what really goes on in peoples personal financial lives.


Any of you with long service in a sector will have a detailed understanding of the daily reality you face, and I would not presume to dismiss this in favour of the musing of an academic that supposedly knows your daily reality better than you do.


Academics are usually far removed from the landscapes they seek to understand and time and again in life we learn these people are the last to know. For example an academic expert in child protection was likely very late to know what was going on in the mass 15yr child abuse scandals in Rotherham and elsewhere -BUT A COPPER OR PARENT ON THE GROUND WOULD HAVE KNOWN

The stats show the black market to be a little above 10% of GDP. Seeing as government is not far off half of GDP that would mean the non government part 20% of them are in the black and grey markets. So yes a very significant portion. However that money isn't all gravy it's often people subsisting eg prostitues criminals or even the cash tradesmen

Your observations is PRE selected before they visit you. That is to say if 1/10 are doing v.well those are the ones that come through your door the ones working for £5ph don't bother. In the same way an estate agent might conclude everyone earns a lot because everyone he deals with earns a lot when its in fact only people who earn well that walk through his door

CLAPTON

Herzlos wrote: »

Most of them keep enormous off-shore cash reserves, and most of the money given to the major shareholders goes offshore too.

I don't know the facts and figures but I believe that every single company, partnerships, self employed persons and most individuals, use legal tax avoidance.

But aggressive tax aoidance is ill defined but certainly true for the Guardian and other moral bastions.
Of course Juncker cheated the other member of the EU on an industrial scale when he was PM of Luxenbourg by illegal tax measures.


Do you have figures to show that legal tax avoidance goes off shore any more than other profits?

Sure, some of the money will trickle back into the economy through pension payments and the spending of savings, but percentage wise it's a lot lower than benefit frausters (where nearly all of it goes back into the economy - some of it will go to people who'll hide it offshore).


Are you trying to argue that corporate tax fraud is better for the economy than benefits fraud?

I believe that fraud should be prosecuted and the offenders go to jail; simple as that.

buglawton

It's true that the govt leaves loopholes big enough to drive a double-decker bus through and seems to encourage an industry of tax advisers around this. Seems almost a way of life.

It would help a lot IMO if the UK govt, post Brexit more than ever, would get down to basic principles on tax, a 'Tax Constitution'.

- What is the objective of collecting it
- How much is needed
- How it's to be collected
- What's the point of exponentially taxing the rich, complex codes and refunds, and of all the cliff-edge thresholds?

It might mean rethinking the balance between income, consumption, corporate taxes.

And state transparently how it gets used. E.g. do or don't annual car tax revenues go into roads, do speed camera revenues go into road safety, etc.

As much as the govt needs to clamp down on tax fraud, it needs to earn back the publics trust that taxes are not being raised just to bloat the coffers for pet projects that benefit few. HS2 anyone?

CLAPTON

buglawton wrote: »

It's true that the govt leaves loopholes big enough to drive a double-decker bus through and seems to encourage an industry of tax advisers around this. Seems almost a way of life.

It would help a lot IMO if the UK govt, post Brexit more than ever, would get down to basic principles on tax, a 'Tax Constitution'.

- What is the objective of collecting it
- How much is needed
- How it's to be collected
- What's the point of exponentially taxing the rich, complex codes and refunds, and of all the cliff-edge thresholds?

It might mean rethinking the balance between income, consumption, corporate taxes.

And state transparently how it gets used. E.g. do or don't annual car tax revenues go into roads, do speed camera revenues go into road safety, etc.

As much as the govt needs to clamp down on tax fraud, it needs to earn back the publics trust that taxes are not being raised just to bloat the coffers for pet projects that benefit few. HS2 anyone?

The porblem as I see it is totally to do with the difficulty of defining the tax law.
Whilst that's easy for PAYE people, it's not so easy for businesses.

The labyrinthine complexity doesn't help of course

Thrugelmir

Herzlos wrote: »

Most of them keep enormous off-shore cash reserves, and most of the money given to the major shareholders goes offshore too.

Ever thought why the need to keep the money offshore. Perhaps it's to do with US tax regulations. Apple may have a big cash pile but also has a huge pile of debt. As borrows money to fund dividends.

Crashy_Time

Brexit is only one part of the EZ story though, but it is a convenient scapegoat for the mess that will unfold in the EZ soon and for UK politicians if our economy tanks.

mayonnaise

Nissan demands Brexit compensation for new UK investment

Carlos Ghosn, Nissan’s chief executive said: “If I need to make an investment in the next few months and I can’t wait until the end of Brexit, then I have to make a deal with the UK government. If there are tax barriers being established on cars, you have to have a commitment for carmakers who export to Europe that there is some kind of compensation.”

The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders echoed his warning and said Theresa May’s government should step in to preserve the mainly foreign-owned industry. SMMT estimates about 814,000 people rely on the sector for employment.

....

Toyota’s executive vice-president said on Thursday it would be tough for its UK plant if Britain failed to achieve an unfettered free-trade deal with European nations.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/sep/30/nissan-hard-brexit-compensation-new-uk-investment-tariffs
Decision time coming nearer....are we going to finish off our car industry just to satisfy the 'hard-brexit' headbangers? Time will tell.

Thrugelmir

mayonnaise wrote: »

Decision time coming nearer....are we going to finish off our car industry just to satisfy the 'hard-brexit' headbangers? Time will tell.

There's only Morgan left of the UK car industry.

Everything else is under some form of foreign ownership.