BrExit?

[boshoku]

 

 

 the issue of corporate taxation is likely to remain a controversial one

ha!

 

đavola kontraverzno - lapaju jer im se može

[bigvlada]

I za to subse tek sada setili Irske i Applea, kako da ne.

 

Zli bezlični evropski komunisti iz EUSSR-a pljačkaju sirotu kompaniju koja samo želi da čini dobro^tm. 

 

Ima još kompanija koje Do no evil^tm a od kojih će neke po mom mišljenju lupiti još gore nego modnu agenciju. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ima tu ihaha primera završenih i istraga u toku. 

 

 

http://www.slideshare.net/lesechos2/2396317

 

 

 

Uzgred, američka "di su naši novci" komisija na čelu sa Džonom Mekkejnom je 2013 došla do istog zaključka, da se Irska ponaša kao ofšor destinacija. Doduše, možda je i on komunista, Vijetnamci su imali vremena da ga prevaspitaju. 

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/q-a-what-exactly-is-at-stake-in-the-apple-tax-issue-1.2771902

 

 

Ono što je smešno i zbog čega ovaj odgovor spada u  ovu temu je ideja bregzitovaca da primame Apple i druge multinacionalke kod sebe iz Irske. Jeste da neće imati pristup EU tržištu ali te nebitne stvari će razraditi u hodu. 

[dragance]

Ajmo opet, sveznalice, zašto se tek sada javlja Irski "problem" sa Appleom, 25 godina kasnije?

[Venom]

Zato sto je pravda spora, ali dostizna.

[Dr Arslanagić]

Zato sto je pravda spora, ali dostizna.

 

+1

 

[Ariel]

Pa koliko sam ja uhvatio, prosto nisu imali podatke do pre par godina, a kada su imali na čemu da izgrade slučaj, počeli su. Dosta jednostavno, i malko plauzibilnije od teorije "saćemo vam pokažemo da ne padne nekom još kakav -xit na pamet!"

 

edit: mada bih rekao da te dve priče nisu međusobno isključive

Edited September 13, 2016 by Ariel

[Anduril]

Ajmo opet, sveznalice, zašto se tek sada javlja Irski "problem" sa Appleom, 25 godina kasnije?

 

Jos jednom, sve je pocelo od svedocenja Tima Kuka pred americkim Senatom...

 

I ne vidim tacno gde je tvoj problem ako se i posle 25 godina utvrdi da 12.5% i 0.005% nisu isto i da to ide na stetu drugih kompanija/firmi.

 

Po meni, i posle 25 godina je to sasvim ispravno a posle toga bi se mogli i pobaviti time zasto se toliko cekalo, tj. mozda bi upravo Epl mogao da pruzi neke informacije o lobiranju u Briselu, preko koga se to radi, kako, itd.

Edited September 13, 2016 by Anduril

[boshoku]

Jos jednom, sve je pocelo od svedocenja Tima Kuka pred americkim Senatom...

 

I ne vidim tacno gde je tvoj problem ako se i posle 25 godina utvrdi da 12.5% i 0.005% nisu isto i da to ide na stetu drugih kompanija/firmi.

 

Po meni, i posle 25 godina je to sasvim ispravno a posle toga bi se mogli i pobaviti time zasto se toliko cekalo, tj. mozda bi upravo Epl mogao da pruzi neke informacije o lobiranju u Briselu, preko koga se to radi, kako, itd.

word

[Budja]

 

Posted on June 9, 2016 in Europe, European Commission, Featured News, Transfer Pricing

In its decision, the Commission concluded that through a 2012 APA, Luxembourg granted a selective tax advantage to Fiat’s financing company, Fiat Finance and Trade (FTT), which provides treasury functions for Fiat group companies based in European countries except for Italy.

 

 

Previously Juncker was Prime Minister of Luxembourg from 1995 to 2013

 

Dobra ta EU, komisija optuzila sopstvenog predsednika za poreske mahinacije, eto, pre tri meseca i nista...

[Prospero]

... mozda bi upravo Epl mogao da pruzi neke informacije o lobiranju u Briselu, preko koga se to radi, kako, itd.

 

 

iFailure: Apple crashes in Brussels

The €13 billion price tag for neglecting to engage Europe.

 

Its founder was a genius. Its customers offer cultish loyalty. Shareholders love it. It not only dominates its market; it created it. In nearly every arena in which it engages, Apple stands for excellence.

 

And yet, on the day the Silicon Valley tech giant was handed a tax bill for up to €13 billion plus interest by the European Commission, the company did not have a single spokesperson in Brussels (either on staff or in a PR agency) to explain its position to the more than 1,000 journalists accredited to cover the decision.

 

 

The absence was symbolic of the dismissive approach the company has taken throughout the Commission’s investigation.

More so than any American company which has tangled with the EU’s hardline competition enforcers, Apple has failed to get to grips with how to lobby Brussels. The consequences can now be counted in cold hard cash.

In fact, Apple failed some of the most basic tests of what it takes to maintain good relationships in Brussels: like showing up.

 

The Apple staff member legally responsible for Apple’s lobbying presence in Brussels is Bruce Sewell. He didn’t show up in Brussels Tuesday.

 

The next most senior staff member, Per Hellstrom, formally joined Apple’s staff less than a year ago, and is prevented from lobbying the EU because of conflicts of interest.

 

Hellstrom is a former EU competition official who from 2007 to 2012 managed competition cases against Apple’s competitors Google and Microsoft, which directly affected the company’s interests. Hellstrom initially joined the Apple team on loan from the European Commission.

That leaves the biggest company in the world with just three staff members who can lobby the EU on a regular basis from its unmarked office on Rue de la Science in Brussels’ EU quarter.

 

Those staff members work with the consultancy FleishmanHillard on public affairs, but not media relations. Apple is not among the agency’s top 10 public affairs clients in Brussels. It paid FleishmanHillard less than €199,000 for its services in 2015.

 

Search the Apple website, and you won’t find any mention of the Commission’s tax ruling or what Apple has to say about it.

The problems for Apple, however, started at the top.

 

When Tim Cook, the company’s CEO, made a surprise visit to Brussels in early 2016 to lobby European Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager, things couldn’t have gone worse.

 

People briefed on the meeting recall Cook as insistent that he was right, and as a poor listener who frequently interrupted Vestager.

 

That meeting set the tone for Apple’s future engagement with the EU.

 

Apple doesn’t do soft power, unless you count its flagship Brussels store on Toison D’Or, opened in 2015. If you circulate in Brussels policy circles, you will not be invited to Apple-hosted drinks, debates or conferences, because they do not exist.

 

Apple’s small Brussels office devotes only half its time to lobbying the EU, according to the company’s entry in the EU Transparency Register.

That means the company employs the equivalent of just 2.5 full-time lobbyists, according to its entry in the transparency register, at a cost of €800,000-€900,000 last year. In contrast, Google has eight people working full time and has spent more than five times as much money, around €4.5 million.

 

The world’s biggest company has a massive footprint in the marketplace, but is nearly invisible in the world’s biggest diplomatic and policy community: the EU.

When Apple does surface, the policy results and the impression it leaves behind are mixed.

 

One MEP staffer noted that Apple rarely sends press releases and other news to MEPs, in contrast to competitors such as Google.

 

A Commission official who worked with both Apple and Google to solve a concern over how the companies labeled “in-app purchases” sold by application vendors in smartphone application stores had praise for the company. “My experience was positive,” the official said. “They solved the problem” by agreeing to remove the word “free” from apps that did in fact require payments in order to enable full functionality.

 

Members of the European Parliament who spoke to POLITICO, however, reported being unimpressed by the company’s outreach.

Aside from occasional engagements on specific policies, Apple has no ongoing involvement in the hundreds of consultative bodies, expert groups and industry forums that both the Commission and Parliament have established to work with stakeholders like Apple.

 

One senior MEP said Apple did a good job at reaching out to the most senior MEPs, but other elected and appointed officials in the Parliament found the company to be largely absent from key debates, and dismissive when present.

 

“It’s obvious that they don’t have a strong presence in the EU,” said Marietje Schaake, a digitally savvy MEP and tech policy expert. “I don’t think they’ve ever lobbied me here. I once made a visit to their headquarters. It struck me that they mostly presented me products rather than talked policy, presenting their latest releases. Companies generally send their policy people to talk. And with Apple that didn’t happen.”

 

One MEP staffer noted that Apple rarely sends press releases and other news to MEPs, in contrast to competitors such as Google.

“With the other tech companies at least I knew who to call,” complained another. “With Apple, I have no idea who works here.”

 

[boshoku]

ima tu nešto kako začudno, tako i intrigantno: i pored toga što su u guglu potrošili, kako piše, 5x više novca i imaju veći staff, to je opet poprilično skromnih 4.5 miliona evra, te broj od osam lobista - laik bi pomislio da su po sredi kako desetine miliona, tako i desetine ljudi, a s obzirom na gargantuanske, retroaktivne poreze koji im vise nad korporativnom glavom, no, naizgled, i epl i gugl, deluju zen-nezainteresovano spram odluka...

[bigvlada]

Ajmo opet, sveznalice, zašto se tek sada javlja Irski "problem" sa Appleom, 25 godina kasnije?

 

Uuu, avanzovao sam od komuniste do sveznalice. Koliko xp-a je potrebno za sledeći nivo?     Zločin ne zastareva. Pravda je spora ali dostižna. -_-  

 

ima tu nešto kako začudno, tako i intrigantno: i pored toga što su u guglu potrošili, kako piše, 5x više novca i imaju veći staff, to je opet poprilično skromnih 4.5 miliona evra, te broj od osam lobista - laik bi pomislio da su po sredi kako desetine miliona, tako i desetine ljudi, a s obzirom na gargantuanske, retroaktivne poreze koji im vise nad korporativnom glavom, no, naizgled, i epl i gugl, deluju zen-nezainteresovano spram odluka...

 

U slučaju jabučara, stvar je jednostavna. 

 

[Prospero]

Joe Lynam BBC Biz ‏@BBC_Joe_Lynam  17h17 hours ago

 

Schäuble offers to send @BorisJohnson Lisbon Treaty + explain in English after Foreign Sec says Single Mkt + Free movement were seperate

 

 

:D

[Friend]

Koliko se taj BJ pravi lud, da li ovi kapiraju da ih podprckuje.

[bigvlada]

Nissan demands Brexit compensation for new UK investment

 

Carmaker fears it could face tariffs to export UK-assembled cars to EU markets in the event of a ‘hard Brexit’

 

Friday 30 September 2016 09.09 BST Last modified on Friday 30 September 2016 11.10 BST

 

 

The trade association for UK carmakers has backed a warning from the boss of Nissan that Brexit threatens Britain’s vehicle manufacturing industry.

 

Carlos Ghosn, Nissan’s chief executive, said he could scrap a potential new investment in the UK’s biggest car plant in Sunderland if the government refuses to pledge compensation for any tariffs that may be imposed after Brexit.

 

Ghosn 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.”

 

Ghosn’s remarks reflect growing concern among global carmakers that Britain could be heading towards a so-called hard Brexit, which would leave them paying tariffs to export UK-assembled cars to EU markets.

 

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.

 

Mike Hawes, SMMT’s chief executive, said: “The government must do all it can to maintain the competitiveness of the UK automotive sector, which has been hugely successful in boosting exports, creating jobs and generating economic growth in recent years.” 

 

Nissan, which builds about a third of Britain’s total car output at its plant in Sunderland, is due to decide early next year on where to build its next Qashqai sport utility vehicle.

 

Another Japanese carmaker, Toyota, has also expressed concerns about Brexit, saying the imposition of duties would make running its English plant “very, very tough”.

 

The result of June’s EU referendum took many investors and chief executives by surprise, triggering political and financial turmoil and the biggest ever one-day fall in sterling against the dollar.

 

May’s government has tried to reassure manufacturers that Britain is open for business and that it will take their views into account during negotiations on new trade relations with the EU.

 

Ghosn said: “The UK government … is talking with all the investors in the UK and saying: ‘OK, where are you concerned? What kind of problems do you have? What would make you stay?’ And we’ve been very clear.

 

“They will take this into consideration, build a policy, and as a function of this policy we will make a decision.”

 

Britain is expected to trigger formal divorce talks from the EU early next year, and the negotiations are expected to last two years. It is unclear whether Britian will have full access to EU markets when it leaves.

 

The British government says it will get the right deal but some businesses, especially those that export most of their finished products to the continent, are worried they may have to pay tariffs to sell goods into EU markets once Britain leaves.

 

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.

 

“The challenge for all of us in the UK is to stay competitive because 85% of our production from the UK plant is exported to continental Europe,” Didier Leroy said.

 

“If 85% has to pay trade duties it will be very, very tough but we want to stay committed to the UK business and our factory in the UK,” he said.

 

Škoda’s chief executive, Bernhard Maier, said it was important for Britain to bring clarity as quickly as possible. “For us it would be very helpful if it were not to become a nail-biter but rather if there were to be concrete decisions that one can really adjust to,” he said.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/sep/30/nissan-hard-brexit-compensation-new-uk-investment-tariffs

 

Pa kada krenu da im traže atest za svaku komponentu u svakom tovaru. Te necarinske barijere će da ih ugrobare.