Who owns the actual rolling stock? Would we have to buy all that or replace it if we reclaim the franchise?
The trains are not owned by the Train Operating Companies (TOCs). They are all leased from rolling stock owners, so as the rail franchises expire, new leases are negotiated
Thatcher did it primarily for idealogical reasons while Wilson did it for economic reasons. Not that it really matters; there is no going back to dirty fuel, whatever Trump may have told the US ekectorate. King Coal is dead, but it was those mining communities Mrs Thatcher was intent on killing.
Wilson did it with the agreement of the unions and the ncb. Ref Thatcher , I posted this as a way of poitnting out there are two sides to every story . Yes imho she did it to destroy the unions , the fact it ruined whole communities , I doubt she even thought about that for a nano second .
I wonder what will happen when corporation tax is increased? Enough of the bastards don't pay as it is. Vicious circle, sadly
Small businesses like ours (six jobs created in seven years, another to come in March) will be unable to avoid it. So we, the growing companies, will be hit. We'll have less money to invest so the growth in our job (and profit) creation will slow. I do love how politicians who feel that increasing corporation tax won't have an effect switch off their brains to get to that conclusion. Meanwhile, large companies that, just like us, reap all the benefits of tax (roads, police, enforceable laws, etc) will shift money around and suffer no losses. One thing I do know is that increasing the corporation tax rate is not soaking the rich. Vin
Well then surely it is the duty of government to equip HMRC with the tools they need to pursue those large companies who are trying to avoid paying their dues, and to close the legal loopholes being exploited?
Of course it is, but my point was what will happen when they do? These guys will either find more loop holes or go elsewhere. Either way we won't win and the wrong ones will be hit hardest. Again.
These are the same threats that get trotted out every time taxation or regulation get mentioned. Tax or regulate us and we'll go elsewhere; of course it depends on the nature of the business, but if those companies are making profits in the UK then it ought to be possible to ensure they pay tax in the UK, wherever they happen to be domiciled. An example would be the betting industry. All but one (take a bow Stoke City sponsors, Bet365) of the major betting firms moved their online businesses to Gibralter, the Isle of Man, and Malta in order to avoid paying tax in the UK. The UK government recently changed the law to ensure those bookmakers had to pay tax on all the profit they generate from taking bets on UK sporting events. It ought to be possible to tax firms like Amazon, Starbucks, Uber etc on their UK profits in the same way.
Jasper, see the history lesson from the indomitable Imps above. Or not, of course. But my post is part of a conversation with Imps, in which he humbled me with his superior knowledge. Not the first time, and doubtless not the last.
This is why the solution for Labour might just be not to raise the corporation tax rate (their stated policy). That affects the (mainly smaller) businesses that are UK domiciled. Why not allocate some effort to closing loopholes used by international corporations to avoid paying any tax. Let's face it, Amazon wouldn't care if the UK corporation tax rate was 99% as they don't declare profits here. Unfortunately, raising corporation tax rates is much easier. It's also popular (soak the evil capitalists - the only effect it'll have is to stop Vin buying a new top hat, frock coat and carriage this winter). But it doesn't hurt the people who take the p*ss out of the system. That's difficult to do and thus it receives a tiny part of any government's efforts and seems to be out of Labour's line of sight. Vin
If Corbyn's conference speech wasn't just empty words, he recognises the vital part small businesses play in the economy Vin. Most people with a fragment of common sense know where the real targets are, hence Labour's response during the election to the question "Where's the Magic Money Tree?", which was of course: "In the Tax Evasion Forest!" So it definitely is in Labour's line of sight, they just need to find a way of making it happen. They could start with Amber Rudd's husband...
I wouldn't want to deprive you of a new frock coat and topper mate. In fact I'd try and manage a trip to the boozer just to witness that. Hopefully a Labour government in power would expend their energies going after the big fish. Gordon Brown was pretty cute at doing that. In fact he had a decent record of securing the co-operation of big players in, for example, the banking and finance sector, who payed tax willingly in return for a light regulatory touch. Maybe we shouldn't dwell too long on how that turned out though.
From before the last election: "LONDON (Reuters) - Britain’s opposition Labour Party said on Wednesday it would raise corporation tax to 26 percent from 19 percent if it wins a June 8 election, seeking to win over sceptical voters with a promise to spend the proceeds on education." Vin
Tax loopholes will never be closed by MPs who are benefiting financially, through personal/family/friend investment or salaried secondary jobs in the companies that are exploiting said tax loopholes. As suggested above, profits made in this country should be taxable in this country, irrespective of where a company may have it’s home base and irrespective of how big the company is.
The 26% tax rate only applies to companies with annual profits greater than £300,000. Small businesses will have a "small profits" tax rising initially from the current 19% to 20%, and then later to 21%.
Sadly the one sniff of influence the Lib-Dems had they got distracted by shiny things and blew it. Their big failure wasn't student fees (sneaky though that was) but not getting some form of PR as a price for their propping up the Conservatives.
Unfortunately the wrong people are in charge of the whole system. When you have an organisation run by Juncker now taking on companies that have taken advantage of rules Juncker put in place in his former job then alarm bells should be ringing.
