Org Mobile Site
Thread: The Panama Papers
Apparently, in an unexpected twist, leaked documents from a large law firm in Panama revealed that the firm managed an extensive network of offshore firms to help a lot of rich people hide their money from being taxed or other scrutiny.
Apparently what they did is not even technically illegal, it's just a convenient way to avoid being taxed or to do business indirectly without exposing your name (which may be illegal in some cases, just having the account is not).
http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016...money-offshore
https://projects.icij.org/panama-papers/power-players/
So should this just be an ethically accepted practice because otherwise the poor people would rip off the job creators or should something be done about it and if yes, what?
Apparently what they did is not even technically illegal, it's just a convenient way to avoid being taxed or to do business indirectly without exposing your name (which may be illegal in some cases, just having the account is not).
http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016...money-offshore
Originally Posted by :
The hidden wealth of some of the world’s most prominent leaders, politicians and celebrities has been revealed by an unprecedented leak of millions of documents that show the myriad ways in which the rich can exploit secretive offshore tax regimes.
[...]
Though there is nothing unlawful about using offshore companies, the files raise fundamental questions about the ethics of such tax havens – and the revelations are likely to provoke urgent calls for reforms of a system that critics say is arcane and open to abuse.
https://panamapapers.icij.orgThe hidden wealth of some of the world’s most prominent leaders, politicians and celebrities has been revealed by an unprecedented leak of millions of documents that show the myriad ways in which the rich can exploit secretive offshore tax regimes.
[...]
Though there is nothing unlawful about using offshore companies, the files raise fundamental questions about the ethics of such tax havens – and the revelations are likely to provoke urgent calls for reforms of a system that critics say is arcane and open to abuse.
https://projects.icij.org/panama-papers/power-players/
So should this just be an ethically accepted practice because otherwise the poor people would rip off the job creators or should something be done about it and if yes, what?
The only thing government can do to prevent this is to sieze assets off of places like google and amazon etc. and I'd they don't pay up is to court order their website to be taken down and their warehouses etc. Seized. Don't pay you can't play! If you do not pay your taxes as an ordinary person bailiffs come round etc and if you refuse you go to jail.
See you 6th of april :)
Originally Posted by Fragony:
See you 6th of april :)
Never thought a referendum takes that long.See you 6th of april :)
Originally Posted by Gilrandir:
Never thought a referendum takes that long.
Long enough to already have been sneaking parts of it in without a whisper. We are both already screwed by the EU economically, especially you. But backing the military parts of the association-treaty is going to be a tough signature to sign. Most don't want the EU meddling with Russia here.Never thought a referendum takes that long.
It will of course be ignored, something meaningless will be removed, it will get another name, we have seen it before
Originally Posted by Fragony:
We are both already screwed by the EU economically, especially you.
We are both already screwed by the EU economically, especially you.
I'm sure the current economic crisis of Ukraine is due to political events WITHIN the country and the war with Russia. EU economy has nothing to do with it, moreover, it seems to display no interest in wanting to have anything to do with Ukraine's economy.Originally Posted by Fragony:
But backing the military parts of the association-treaty is going to be a tough signature to sign.
I have already linked to the document. There is mentioning of any military side to it. It is a strawman of Russian make.But backing the military parts of the association-treaty is going to be a tough signature to sign.
Article 10, what socalled quality-media never mentions. Just trade yeahright
And economically, it's not going to benefit you at all, just a few
And economically, it's not going to benefit you at all, just a few
Originally Posted by Fragony:
And economically, it's not going to benefit you at all, just a few
Like that were ever any different....And economically, it's not going to benefit you at all, just a few
You can see Poroshenko in the last link in the OP.
Originally Posted by Husar:
Like that were ever any different....
You can see Poroshenko in the last link in the OP.
Was never any different but the people there are poor enough as it is. Country is also deeply devided, it's going to be an even bigger mess. It isn't good for Europeans either because it's going to cost A LOT. As if the north has tits enough for the garlic-zon, who just print new money, to suck on, let's have more trouble yay. The EU is a blue wrecking ball with stars.Like that were ever any different....
You can see Poroshenko in the last link in the OP.
Originally Posted by Fragony:
Article 10, what socalled quality-media never mentions. Just trade yeahright
The source, please.Article 10, what socalled quality-media never mentions. Just trade yeahright
Originally Posted by Fragony:
Country is also deeply devided, it's going to be an even bigger mess.
As the events of the last two years have shown, the so called division of the country is greatly exaggerated. "Extant regional differences" is much closer to the mark, but that is true of many countries.Country is also deeply devided, it's going to be an even bigger mess.
Originally Posted by Gilrandir:
The source, please.
http://ukraine-eu.mfa.gov.ua/en/page/open/id/2900The source, please.
Have a nice 250 pages, glad some inquisitive people actually read it
Originally Posted by Husar:
You can see Poroshenko in the last link in the OP.
Today he said that when he was elected president he "relegated operating his assets to the respective consulting and law firms. I expect them to provide exhaustive explanations to the Ukrainian and world media."You can see Poroshenko in the last link in the OP.
Originally Posted by Fragony:
http://ukraine-eu.mfa.gov.ua/en/page/open/id/2900
Have a nice 250 pages, glad some inquisitive people actually read it
It is the very link that I provided a couple of months ago. And I saw no "article 10" nor any other mentioning of any military aspects of the agreement.http://ukraine-eu.mfa.gov.ua/en/page/open/id/2900
Have a nice 250 pages, glad some inquisitive people actually read it
Originally Posted by Fragony:
Google translate will get you far enough http://www.geenstijl.nl/mt/archieven...rtikel_10.html
I don't need to translate it if you mean this one:Google translate will get you far enough http://www.geenstijl.nl/mt/archieven...rtikel_10.html
ARTICLE 10
Conflict prevention, crisis management and military-technological cooperation
1. The Parties shall enhance practical cooperation in conflict prevention and crisis management,
in particular with a view to increasing the participation of Ukraine in EU-led civilian and military
crisis management operations as well as relevant exercises and training activities, including those
carried out in the framework of the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP).
2. Cooperation in this field shall be based on modalities and arrangements between the EU and
Ukraine on consultation and cooperation on crisis management.
3. The Parties shall explore the potential of military-technological cooperation. Ukraine and the
European Defence Agency (EDA) shall establish close contacts to discuss military capability
improvement, including technological issues.
Can't see anything in it having a binding nature that you are so much afraid of. The USA, the UK and France (and Russia, btw) have signed the Budapest memorandum in which they promised to ensure territorial integrity of Ukraine - and ignored it twenty odd years later. This one has even more vague commitments, so it has all chances of being ignored.
So you could just find it. You will find in the same link (in Dutch) why this is incredibly stupid
I also posted a link on your profile page a few days ago of why this treaty is bad for you economically by the way, read it if you haven't already
As for not devided, in random polls in eastern Ukraine 96% hopes we block this
I also posted a link on your profile page a few days ago of why this treaty is bad for you economically by the way, read it if you haven't already
As for not devided, in random polls in eastern Ukraine 96% hopes we block this
http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016...droidApp_Email
Several German criminals and famous people have also had or still have accounts there, though so far it seems no politicians. Well, it may also not be the only offshore company in this business...
Apparently Iceland has the largest protest every seen by a random policeman.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/w...ster/82622674/
Originally Posted by :
David Cameron’s father ran an offshore fund that avoided ever having to pay tax in Britain by hiring a small army of Bahamas residents – including a part-time bishop – to sign its paperwork.
The fund was founded in the early 1980s with help from the prime minister’s late father and still exists today. The Guardian has confirmed that in 30 years Blairmore has never paid a penny of tax in the UK on its profits.
True patriots.David Cameron’s father ran an offshore fund that avoided ever having to pay tax in Britain by hiring a small army of Bahamas residents – including a part-time bishop – to sign its paperwork.
The fund was founded in the early 1980s with help from the prime minister’s late father and still exists today. The Guardian has confirmed that in 30 years Blairmore has never paid a penny of tax in the UK on its profits.
Several German criminals and famous people have also had or still have accounts there, though so far it seems no politicians. Well, it may also not be the only offshore company in this business...
Apparently Iceland has the largest protest every seen by a random policeman.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/w...ster/82622674/
Originally Posted by :
About 10,000 people declared that they went to protest at Austurvöllur Square, according to the event's Facebook page. Police estimated the crowd at 8,000 people, which duty officer Arnar Runar Marteinsson said is the largest protest he had ever seen in Reykjavik, the Associated Press reported.
Iceland Prime Minister Sigmundur David Gunnlaugsson faces a possible no confidence vote in parliament over allegations that he deliberately hid vast holdings in troubled Icelandic banks in a complicated web of deceit that includes his wife.
Apparently the second most important topic is the size of the protest:About 10,000 people declared that they went to protest at Austurvöllur Square, according to the event's Facebook page. Police estimated the crowd at 8,000 people, which duty officer Arnar Runar Marteinsson said is the largest protest he had ever seen in Reykjavik, the Associated Press reported.
Iceland Prime Minister Sigmundur David Gunnlaugsson faces a possible no confidence vote in parliament over allegations that he deliberately hid vast holdings in troubled Icelandic banks in a complicated web of deceit that includes his wife.
Originally Posted by :
National Security Agency whistle-blower Edward Snowden tweeted Monday afternoon about the Iceland protest, questioning if it was the "largest protest by percentage of population in history." The nation has a population of nearly 330,000.
I'm curious what the fallout will be, it could be huge or just be forgotten and swept under the rug. National Security Agency whistle-blower Edward Snowden tweeted Monday afternoon about the Iceland protest, questioning if it was the "largest protest by percentage of population in history." The nation has a population of nearly 330,000.
I suppose the greatest wuestion any of us can have is: was it anyone I know?
Originally Posted by Fragony:
So you could just find it. You will find in the same link (in Dutch) why this is incredibly stupid
I also posted a link on your profile page a few days ago of why this treaty is bad for you economically by the way, read it if you haven't already
I PMed you back. If you didn't see or it didn't reach you: the article was about Free Trade Agreement, not about Association agreement. The latter is rather a framework for more specialized treaties to be signed later if needs be.So you could just find it. You will find in the same link (in Dutch) why this is incredibly stupid
I also posted a link on your profile page a few days ago of why this treaty is bad for you economically by the way, read it if you haven't already
Originally Posted by Fragony:
As for not devided, in random polls in eastern Ukraine 96% hopes we block this
The source, please. As for not devided, in random polls in eastern Ukraine 96% hopes we block this
Eastern Ukraine is too vague a definition. If the poll was held in DPR/LPR it is not to be wondered at.
When you've got Prime ministers and their families hiding their tax, you know there needs to be serious reform for example britain has a 40 percent tax if you earn £42,386 which is disgusting.
Countries need to get rid off income tax, and replace everything with a low flat tax.
Countries need to get rid off income tax, and replace everything with a low flat tax.
And I suppose we should pay our bills with dreams and pixie dust? At this level of government responsibility a tax of 40% for incomes over 40K is low.
You are foolish and have 0 knowledge thats low you say, the 40 percent comes in way too low the threshold should be much higher if you really want 40 percent people are just going to evade it simple as or pay their employees less like 42,385 instead, Football players create a company in their name and pay corporation tax for which is 20 percent. It should be a flat rate tax a man paying a flat tax of 5 percent of 500 grand still pays more in than a man who earns 50 grand more tax stifles economy harms entrepeuners scaling up people end up doing cash in hand etc. Government needs to get rid off Aid it just goes to corrupt governemnts and also ends up back in British Banks as they are in debt to them, welfare system should only be for disabled, A government should only be there to protect your borders i.e army, police schools and maybe hospitals and collecting your garbage. All feasible with a flat tax. Austerity and High taxes doesnt improve the economy. Way too many MP's theyve got a tax for everything. You do not evne need income tax if you watch this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsqGR31zoVA
The welfare state will be destroyed by its own demise
The welfare state will be destroyed by its own demise
Well, increasing the tax from 20% to 40% in one single step surely seems a bit....harsh?
Then agains I don't really understand the German formula at first sight: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einkom...nd)#Tarif_2016
Either way, to claim income tax is the problem here seems pretty crazy considering that
a) politicians who are responsible for taxation are involved themselves
b) most people who make so much money are still rich even if they give 40% away
c) if it weren't so easy for rich people to pay very low or no taxes, maybe the tax burden on the poorer strata could be eased up?
Then agains I don't really understand the German formula at first sight: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einkom...nd)#Tarif_2016
Either way, to claim income tax is the problem here seems pretty crazy considering that
a) politicians who are responsible for taxation are involved themselves
b) most people who make so much money are still rich even if they give 40% away
c) if it weren't so easy for rich people to pay very low or no taxes, maybe the tax burden on the poorer strata could be eased up?
The main take-away from the issue: it takes money to save money
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/pana...nald-1.3520491
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/pana...nald-1.3520491
The way the panama papers were presented etc. The website seems like there was a Bella lot of funding behind it, didn't seem organic and spontaneous and apparently the leak was funded and re was nothing !
John McAfee has analysed it and was a smear campaign by US goverment there's no American politician no american person involved which is BS because Panama is known to be frequented by the wealthy of America..
http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/20...y-2792847.html
It could be legal and legitmiate having an offshore account,
I bet Gilrandir would love it if they found anything on Putin but Nope zilch Didily squat! Media's trying to connect it to him
International Consortium of Investigative Journalists the ones responsible for the leak A trip to its web page reveals its support and funding sources: the Open Society Foundations (a George Soros outfit), the Ford Foundation and a host of other foundations. Soros’ anti-Russian obsession is well-known. Less well-known is the fact the Ford Foundation is connected to the CIA and has specialized in international cultural propaganda since the end of the Second World War.
Seems like there's always more than meets the eye
John McAfee has analysed it and was a smear campaign by US goverment there's no American politician no american person involved which is BS because Panama is known to be frequented by the wealthy of America..
http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/20...y-2792847.html
It could be legal and legitmiate having an offshore account,
I bet Gilrandir would love it if they found anything on Putin but Nope zilch Didily squat! Media's trying to connect it to him
International Consortium of Investigative Journalists the ones responsible for the leak A trip to its web page reveals its support and funding sources: the Open Society Foundations (a George Soros outfit), the Ford Foundation and a host of other foundations. Soros’ anti-Russian obsession is well-known. Less well-known is the fact the Ford Foundation is connected to the CIA and has specialized in international cultural propaganda since the end of the Second World War.
Seems like there's always more than meets the eye
Originally Posted by Lizardo:
The way the panama papers were presented etc. The website seems like there was a Bella lot of funding behind it, didn't seem organic and spontaneous and apparently the leak was funded and re was nothing !
John McAfee has analysed it and was a smear campaign by US goverment there's no American politician no american person involved which is BS because Panama is known to be frequented by the wealthy of America..
http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/20...y-2792847.html
It could be legal and legitmiate having an offshore account,
I bet Gilrandir would love it if they found anything on Putin but Nope zilch Didily squat! Media's trying to connect it to him
International Consortium of Investigative Journalists the ones responsible for the leak A trip to its web page reveals its support and funding sources: the Open Society Foundations (a George Soros outfit), the Ford Foundation and a host of other foundations. Soros’ anti-Russian obsession is well-known. Less well-known is the fact the Ford Foundation is connected to the CIA and has specialized in international cultural propaganda since the end of the Second World War.
Seems like there's always more than meets the eye
40% tax rate is disgusting, you are adorable. I take it you get paid by the letter for your posts, but the question is do they pay you in dollars, rubels or in krokodill?The way the panama papers were presented etc. The website seems like there was a Bella lot of funding behind it, didn't seem organic and spontaneous and apparently the leak was funded and re was nothing !
John McAfee has analysed it and was a smear campaign by US goverment there's no American politician no american person involved which is BS because Panama is known to be frequented by the wealthy of America..
http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/20...y-2792847.html
It could be legal and legitmiate having an offshore account,
I bet Gilrandir would love it if they found anything on Putin but Nope zilch Didily squat! Media's trying to connect it to him
International Consortium of Investigative Journalists the ones responsible for the leak A trip to its web page reveals its support and funding sources: the Open Society Foundations (a George Soros outfit), the Ford Foundation and a host of other foundations. Soros’ anti-Russian obsession is well-known. Less well-known is the fact the Ford Foundation is connected to the CIA and has specialized in international cultural propaganda since the end of the Second World War.
Seems like there's always more than meets the eye
What do you think the tax rate is in Russia?
Originally Posted by Lizardo:
You are foolish and have 0 knowledge thats low you say, the 40 percent comes in way too low the threshold should be much higher if you really want 40 percent people are just going to evade it simple as or pay their employees less like 42,385 instead, Football players create a company in their name and pay corporation tax for which is 20 percent. It should be a flat rate tax a man paying a flat tax of 5 percent of 500 grand still pays more in than a man who earns 50 grand more tax stifles economy harms entrepeuners scaling up people end up doing cash in hand etc. Government needs to get rid off Aid it just goes to corrupt governemnts and also ends up back in British Banks as they are in debt to them, welfare system should only be for disabled, A government should only be there to protect your borders i.e army, police schools and maybe hospitals and collecting your garbage. All feasible with a flat tax. Austerity and High taxes doesnt improve the economy. Way too many MP's theyve got a tax for everything. You do not evne need income tax if you watch this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsqGR31zoVA
The welfare state will be destroyed by its own demise
Your reading comprehension is as awful as your sentance structure and your predeliction to insult anyone who diagrees with you will serve you poorly.You are foolish and have 0 knowledge thats low you say, the 40 percent comes in way too low the threshold should be much higher if you really want 40 percent people are just going to evade it simple as or pay their employees less like 42,385 instead, Football players create a company in their name and pay corporation tax for which is 20 percent. It should be a flat rate tax a man paying a flat tax of 5 percent of 500 grand still pays more in than a man who earns 50 grand more tax stifles economy harms entrepeuners scaling up people end up doing cash in hand etc. Government needs to get rid off Aid it just goes to corrupt governemnts and also ends up back in British Banks as they are in debt to them, welfare system should only be for disabled, A government should only be there to protect your borders i.e army, police schools and maybe hospitals and collecting your garbage. All feasible with a flat tax. Austerity and High taxes doesnt improve the economy. Way too many MP's theyve got a tax for everything. You do not evne need income tax if you watch this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsqGR31zoVA
The welfare state will be destroyed by its own demise
Employers do not care about the tax rate of their employees: they dont automatically get to cut wages if the tax rate goes down, nor are they forced to increase them if it goes up.
Now, when consdering tax avoidance the structure of tax is largely irrelevant. It is the amount of tax that determines if people dodge and the amount of dodging is directly proportionate. If the government cannot pay the bills with the tax rate it has now it most certainly wont be able to at a lower one unless that proportionate decrease in tax dodging can cover the difference and then some. That is something that you would need to prove as currently such an increase in revenue is optimistic bordering on naiive.
I assume by your subscription to it that flat tax that it will somehow make a significant difference in the rate of tax avoidance. You will have to explain that one; all I can see that is fundamentally different is that the lack of incremental increase at different incomes, which is something we dont do because it hurts the lowest bracket. A rich man can survive on a lot smaller fraction of his income than a poor man and on the lowest rung a 5% can be the difference between a warm bed and freezing on the street.
Getting rid of foreign aid only covers 11.6 Billion of the current 73.5 billion lost each year and the good will generated from that aid is worth more than what we pay, though that is my opinion. Still, how will you cover the rest?
Welfare only for the disabled? Tell me how else but welfare will the 1.68 million unemployed avoid starvation? There arent enough jobs available, a lot that are require over a years worth of the unpaid preparation that we call education and there arent enough supportive families or generous donations to go around. Crime is the only profession that has enough openings and low requirements to cover them all, do I need to explain how that is a bad thing?
Army, police, schools, hospitals, garbage collection. I assume infrastructure can go straight to hell then? Why stop there? Who cares if some cant afford to educate their kids, or heal their wounds, or dispose of their trash, or protect their property?
Originally Posted by :
Well, increasing the tax from 20% to 40% in one single step surely seems a bit....harsh?
I agree it should be a gentler increse with more stages, as it stands at the 40 grand mark a pay increase for the employer turns into a cut for the employee.Well, increasing the tax from 20% to 40% in one single step surely seems a bit....harsh?
Originally Posted by Greyblades:
I agree it should be a gentler increse with more stages, as it stands at the 40 grand mark a pay increase for the employer turns into a cut for the employee.
Good post overall and I agree with it generally. But surely when you increase the tax % at the 40 grand mark that tax rate only applies to income above the 40 grand mark. So it is not a pay-cut, but the take home from the raise will be lower than the take home for the salary below 40k.I agree it should be a gentler increse with more stages, as it stands at the 40 grand mark a pay increase for the employer turns into a cut for the employee.
Yes you are right, I'm not sure why I thought it worked like that for the less than £10,000 bracket and not the more than £40,000 one.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO