I think it is obvious that Trump does not like black people.Any in his hanger ons,except Carson? Nope! But Carson thinks he's white anyway! .........and now......Trump wants to give billionaires a handout and at the same time cut Medicaid and other services for people that are struggling.Go figure! Ironic that many people who voted Trump are among the strugglers...... .......and now......they want to mess with struggling people here in Britain. Must be nice to be a wealthy politician,getting free health services out of the working mans pockets!....in both countries!
In an attempt to get ahead of the negative response to their Dementia Tax (and that's the understatement of the month...) the Tories thought the best approach to get ahead of it would be to buy Google Ads so that the first item that came up whenever someone typed the term "dementia tax" into Google would be a link to an article named "The so-called 'Dementia Tax' - Get the real facts" on their website, rather than the countless articles condemning the policy, making it obvious that they are trying to spin their way out of the hole they dug for themselves. Labour saw what they were up to and played one hell of a trump card: they too bought Google Ads which linked to an article on Labour's website called "The Dementia Tax - get the real facts" - and, as Labour's article places above the Tory one alphabetically, that's the article that is pinned to the top of all Google searches for the term "dementia tax"
Sorry, who paid for these Adwords again? Oh yeah, the tax payer. Not that it's important but that usually happens if they get outbid or have a better "quality score" on the target landing page. Alphabetical order has zero impact. So Labour either spent more to outbid the Tory ads or they used a better PPC manager who knew what he/she was doing.
This is assuming the Tories even paid for them - after all, would you put it past the Tories to suggest that, if they didn't have to pay for their Google Ads, Google could continue dodging tax?
My emetic moments of yesterday afternoon (watching the Terry farce) has returned, listening to the android Leidereen spouting complete bollocks in the Andrew Neil interview. She is in full-on Trump mode - even using the F word (fake). What worries is that she will probably prevail............
Trump's ****ed up, again. That's every day so far, I think. This time he's denied ever mentioning Israel to the Russians when he gave them classified intelligence. What's wrong with that? Nobody said that he had. They said that the information was from Israel and it could be traced back.
Funnily enough, the best response is to say that it takes seconds to Google how much tax Google pay in the US.
cite something actually relevant to the comment that was made (what MNCs will do in response to aggression by a UK govt to try and recover avoided tax due on UK profits) .
Their usual threat is to say they'll take their business out of the country - a threat which never makes more sense, given their argument is "We want to lose millions in revenue to avoid paying tax", which is an argument I can't see going down particularly well with their stockholders.
No, their threat is to say they'll pull out of the UK if they don't get their way, which is why I specifically said it. Amazon and Vodafone have both threatened to do so in the past, but neither has ever threatened to go to a tax tribunal. And let's be honest, their stockholders probably wouldn't be too happy if they tried it, either, because what will hit those stockholders harder: the corporation shutting up and cutting a cheque, or the corporation failing at a tribunal, having to cut a cheque, and having their brand dragged through the mud that could affect consumer confidence? That's the issue with corporations and tax: they play a game of chicken, and no matter if it was Blair, Brown, Cameron or May at the helm, the government always blinks first - and the corporations know it.
Not in public. Formally. But behind the scenes, that is exactly what happens. "That's the issue with corporations and tax: they play a game of chicken, and no matter if it was Blair, Brown, Cameron or May at the helm, the government always blinks first - and the corporations know it." The Inland Revenue always blinks first when it comes to MNCs.
And this takes me right back to my point about why the HMRC should do a better job checking what their counterparts do, for example a few years back the French slapped Amazon with a $252m fine for unpaid taxes, while a couple of years ago managed to drag them out of their hidey hole in Luxembourg to pay sales tax. Meanwhile in the UK they claim to not be based in the UK...even though anyone driving along the M4 can't help but notice that ****ing great big warehouse of theirs outside Reading (which is just one of the thirteen they have on the British mainland), so the HMRC swallowing that line was as baffling as it was maddening.
The idea of Amazon pulling out of the UK is absolutely ridiculous. Not only would they not do it, but it wouldn't matter if they did. There are a ton of companies trying to take their place already. That wouldn't change if they left.
No company that requires physical infrastructure in the UK in order to conduct business can ever do so. Which leaves the Internet-based service businesses such as Google. Their physical infrastructure is overseas. They pose a different problem.
Also all it takes is setting up an account with any overseas Amazon account to get around it. After all, I've got an Amazon US account - and they pay a ****load more tax on that version!
