Chat Forum
It is currently Mon Sep 24, 2018 5:00 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 82488 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 1631, 1632, 1633, 1634, 1635, 1636, 1637 ... 2063  Next

Whether you can or can't actually vote IRL, In, or Out
In 60%  60%  [ 246 ]
Out 40%  40%  [ 164 ]
Total votes : 410
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 8:01 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 52336
camroc1 wrote:
bimboman wrote:
https://www.independent.ie/business/technology/google-hits-5000-employee-level-in-dublin-now-one-of-capitals-biggest-employers-31480103.html


Google employs 5,000 not 7,000 , 1/2 of them contractors, it wouldn't change your argument about the business to be honest.

Quote:
Google's expansion in Ireland has continued over the past year, with the company revealing today that it now employs 7,000 people here.


https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2017/1 ... workforce/

Whether one is employed in a permanent capacity, or on a fixed term contract, by a company, one is still employed by the same company.



One news source or both is plucking numbers from their arses. My link includes contractor breakdowns. Irish news sources being inaccurate shocker.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 389
bimboman wrote:
One news source or both is plucking numbers from their arses. My link includes contractor breakdowns. Irish news sources being inaccurate shocker.

The 5000 number is from a company announcement in August 2015, in June 2016 they announced it they had reached 6000 and in November 2017, it hit 7000. These were all official Google press releases. This would have been clear if you actually read any of the stories instead of blaming the Irish media for your comprehension fail.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:19 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 52336
derriz wrote:
bimboman wrote:
One news source or both is plucking numbers from their arses. My link includes contractor breakdowns. Irish news sources being inaccurate shocker.

The 5000 number is from a company announcement in August 2015, in June 2016 they announced it they had reached 6000 and in November 2017, it hit 7000. These were all official Google press releases. This would have been clear if you actually read any of the stories instead of blaming the Irish media for your comprehension fail.


:thumbup: , I blame using Bing for the story search. I read the story but missed the date.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:20 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 42494
bimboman wrote:
camroc1 wrote:
bimboman wrote:
https://www.independent.ie/business/technology/google-hits-5000-employee-level-in-dublin-now-one-of-capitals-biggest-employers-31480103.html


Google employs 5,000 not 7,000 , 1/2 of them contractors, it wouldn't change your argument about the business to be honest.

Quote:
Google's expansion in Ireland has continued over the past year, with the company revealing today that it now employs 7,000 people here.


https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2017/1 ... workforce/

Whether one is employed in a permanent capacity, or on a fixed term contract, by a company, one is still employed by the same company.



One news source or both is plucking numbers from their arses. My link includes contractor breakdowns. Irish news sources being inaccurate shocker.

How about the Official IDA Ireland Press Release, Bimbo ?

https://www.idaireland.com/newsroom/tao ... st-offices

Quote:
Taoiseach Officially Opens Google’s newest offices in Dublin

Thursday, 8th February 2018. Taoiseach Leo Varadkar TD today officially opened Google’s newest offices in Dublin that will serve as a home to Google’s growing Enterprise and Cloud teams in Dublin. Located in the Velasco Building on Dublin’s Grand Canal, the teams will play a strategic role in helping to grow Google’s cloud and enterprise business across Europe, the Middle East and Africa. Velasco will also be home to an Advanced Solutions Lab where Google Cloud’s enterprise customers can co-create and develop customised solutions for their business on-site in conjunction with Google Cloud experts.

This new investment in Velasco, which has 51,000 sq ft of space brings total investment in Ireland by Google to €809m. Google’s EMEA HQ now employs over 7,000 people and the company is now recruiting new roles for its cloud and enterprise business.

With this new building and the teams occupying it, Google continues its investment in Ireland and its focus on growing its EMEA sales operation from start-up, which today supports publishers, users, developers and businesses in over 60 countries.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:21 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 52336
camroc1 wrote:
bimboman wrote:
camroc1 wrote:
bimboman wrote:
https://www.independent.ie/business/technology/google-hits-5000-employee-level-in-dublin-now-one-of-capitals-biggest-employers-31480103.html


Google employs 5,000 not 7,000 , 1/2 of them contractors, it wouldn't change your argument about the business to be honest.

Quote:
Google's expansion in Ireland has continued over the past year, with the company revealing today that it now employs 7,000 people here.


https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2017/1 ... workforce/

Whether one is employed in a permanent capacity, or on a fixed term contract, by a company, one is still employed by the same company.



One news source or both is plucking numbers from their arses. My link includes contractor breakdowns. Irish news sources being inaccurate shocker.

How about the Official IDA Ireland Press Release, Bimbo ?

https://www.idaireland.com/newsroom/tao ... st-offices

Quote:
Taoiseach Officially Opens Google’s newest offices in Dublin

Thursday, 8th February 2018. Taoiseach Leo Varadkar TD today officially opened Google’s newest offices in Dublin that will serve as a home to Google’s growing Enterprise and Cloud teams in Dublin. Located in the Velasco Building on Dublin’s Grand Canal, the teams will play a strategic role in helping to grow Google’s cloud and enterprise business across Europe, the Middle East and Africa. Velasco will also be home to an Advanced Solutions Lab where Google Cloud’s enterprise customers can co-create and develop customised solutions for their business on-site in conjunction with Google Cloud experts.

This new investment in Velasco, which has 51,000 sq ft of space brings total investment in Ireland by Google to €809m. Google’s EMEA HQ now employs over 7,000 people and the company is now recruiting new roles for its cloud and enterprise business.

With this new building and the teams occupying it, Google continues its investment in Ireland and its focus on growing its EMEA sales operation from start-up, which today supports publishers, users, developers and businesses in over 60 countries.



Yeah already posted above, trigger as always. I wonder how many are British contractors ?

Edit, must be nice for you to get one right occasionally.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:24 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 42494
bimboman wrote:
camroc1 wrote:
bimboman wrote:
camroc1 wrote:
bimboman wrote:
https://www.independent.ie/business/technology/google-hits-5000-employee-level-in-dublin-now-one-of-capitals-biggest-employers-31480103.html


Google employs 5,000 not 7,000 , 1/2 of them contractors, it wouldn't change your argument about the business to be honest.

Quote:
Google's expansion in Ireland has continued over the past year, with the company revealing today that it now employs 7,000 people here.


https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2017/1 ... workforce/

Whether one is employed in a permanent capacity, or on a fixed term contract, by a company, one is still employed by the same company.



One news source or both is plucking numbers from their arses. My link includes contractor breakdowns. Irish news sources being inaccurate shocker.

How about the Official IDA Ireland Press Release, Bimbo ?

https://www.idaireland.com/newsroom/tao ... st-offices

Quote:
Taoiseach Officially Opens Google’s newest offices in Dublin

Thursday, 8th February 2018. Taoiseach Leo Varadkar TD today officially opened Google’s newest offices in Dublin that will serve as a home to Google’s growing Enterprise and Cloud teams in Dublin. Located in the Velasco Building on Dublin’s Grand Canal, the teams will play a strategic role in helping to grow Google’s cloud and enterprise business across Europe, the Middle East and Africa. Velasco will also be home to an Advanced Solutions Lab where Google Cloud’s enterprise customers can co-create and develop customised solutions for their business on-site in conjunction with Google Cloud experts.

This new investment in Velasco, which has 51,000 sq ft of space brings total investment in Ireland by Google to €809m. Google’s EMEA HQ now employs over 7,000 people and the company is now recruiting new roles for its cloud and enterprise business.

With this new building and the teams occupying it, Google continues its investment in Ireland and its focus on growing its EMEA sales operation from start-up, which today supports publishers, users, developers and businesses in over 60 countries.



Yeah already posted above, trigger as always. I wonder how many are British contractors ?

There'll be quite a few, but lots more French, Dutch, Nordic, Spanish, Italian, in fact, from all over.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:51 pm
Posts: 1276
Google, Facebook, Apple - I wonder what attracts all these US tech companies to 'look the other way' Ireland? :uhoh:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 1:55 am
Posts: 3796
Location: Newport, Gwent
Chips wrote:
Google, Facebook, Apple - I wonder what attracts all these US tech companies to 'look the other way' Ireland? :uhoh:

The craic.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4420
bessantj wrote:
Chips wrote:
Google, Facebook, Apple - I wonder what attracts all these US tech companies to 'look the other way' Ireland? :uhoh:

The craic.

And being part of the EU.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 40640
Location: Dublin
iarmhiman wrote:
EU demands 2.7bn euros of 'unpaid customs duty' from UK

Quote:
he European Commission has written to the UK government saying the UK owes €2.7bn (£2.4bn) in customs duties on shoes and textiles imported from China.

The UK is accused of doing too little to prevent fraud after it was warned about the problem by the EU's watchdog Olaf in 2017.

It begins a legal process which could end at the European Court of Justice.

HM Revenue and Customs said it did not recognise the commission's estimate of what it owed.

The Olaf investigation said the UK was a "significant hub" for so-called undervaluation fraud - where importers can profit from evading customs duties and related taxes.

The investigation found organised crime groups had been using fake invoices to undervalue goods being imported from China - many of which were destined for the black market in other parts of the EU, investigators claimed.

Olaf have said they had warned HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) a number of times.

But a government spokesman said: "We do not recognise the European Commission's estimate of alleged duty loss.

"We take customs fraud very seriously, and we continue to evolve our response as new threats emerge.

"We will carefully examine the formal notice from the commission and respond in due course.

"The UK intends to continue to work closely with Olaf and the commission on customs fraud.

"HMRC has a very strong track record for tackling evasion and rule-breaking of all kinds, securing a record £28.9bn last year that would otherwise have gone unpaid."

HMRC said the commission's methodology overestimated UK import values and was not suitable to produce an estimate of alleged customs duty undervaluation.

It said the estimate was based on EU average prices and failed to take into account the "substantial growth in the low-value end of the UK clothing market".


http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-43328398

So the UK a hub for valuation fraud????


bump.

I see this was conveniently ignored despite the usual suspects lecturing us on our tax deals.

Fraud??? Awful


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:47 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 52336
iarmhiman wrote:
iarmhiman wrote:
EU demands 2.7bn euros of 'unpaid customs duty' from UK

Quote:
he European Commission has written to the UK government saying the UK owes €2.7bn (£2.4bn) in customs duties on shoes and textiles imported from China.

The UK is accused of doing too little to prevent fraud after it was warned about the problem by the EU's watchdog Olaf in 2017.

It begins a legal process which could end at the European Court of Justice.

HM Revenue and Customs said it did not recognise the commission's estimate of what it owed.

The Olaf investigation said the UK was a "significant hub" for so-called undervaluation fraud - where importers can profit from evading customs duties and related taxes.

The investigation found organised crime groups had been using fake invoices to undervalue goods being imported from China - many of which were destined for the black market in other parts of the EU, investigators claimed.

Olaf have said they had warned HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) a number of times.

But a government spokesman said: "We do not recognise the European Commission's estimate of alleged duty loss.

"We take customs fraud very seriously, and we continue to evolve our response as new threats emerge.

"We will carefully examine the formal notice from the commission and respond in due course.

"The UK intends to continue to work closely with Olaf and the commission on customs fraud.

"HMRC has a very strong track record for tackling evasion and rule-breaking of all kinds, securing a record £28.9bn last year that would otherwise have gone unpaid."

HMRC said the commission's methodology overestimated UK import values and was not suitable to produce an estimate of alleged customs duty undervaluation.

It said the estimate was based on EU average prices and failed to take into account the "substantial growth in the low-value end of the UK clothing market".


http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-43328398

So the UK a hub for valuation fraud????


bump.

I see this was conveniently ignored despite the usual suspects lecturing us on our tax deals.

Fraud??? Awful



you're equating criminal activity with Irish regulated activity, that's terrible.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:44 pm
Posts: 47240
Location: In the Centre/left wing
iarmhiman wrote:
iarmhiman wrote:
EU demands 2.7bn euros of 'unpaid customs duty' from UK

Quote:
he European Commission has written to the UK government saying the UK owes €2.7bn (£2.4bn) in customs duties on shoes and textiles imported from China.

The UK is accused of doing too little to prevent fraud after it was warned about the problem by the EU's watchdog Olaf in 2017.

It begins a legal process which could end at the European Court of Justice.

HM Revenue and Customs said it did not recognise the commission's estimate of what it owed.

The Olaf investigation said the UK was a "significant hub" for so-called undervaluation fraud - where importers can profit from evading customs duties and related taxes.

The investigation found organised crime groups had been using fake invoices to undervalue goods being imported from China - many of which were destined for the black market in other parts of the EU, investigators claimed.

Olaf have said they had warned HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) a number of times.

But a government spokesman said: "We do not recognise the European Commission's estimate of alleged duty loss.

"We take customs fraud very seriously, and we continue to evolve our response as new threats emerge.

"We will carefully examine the formal notice from the commission and respond in due course.

"The UK intends to continue to work closely with Olaf and the commission on customs fraud.

"HMRC has a very strong track record for tackling evasion and rule-breaking of all kinds, securing a record £28.9bn last year that would otherwise have gone unpaid."

HMRC said the commission's methodology overestimated UK import values and was not suitable to produce an estimate of alleged customs duty undervaluation.

It said the estimate was based on EU average prices and failed to take into account the "substantial growth in the low-value end of the UK clothing market".


http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-43328398

So the UK a hub for valuation fraud????


bump.

I see this was conveniently ignored despite the usual suspects lecturing us on our tax deals.

Fraud??? Awful

It's how the gov't roll these days.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:51 pm
Posts: 1276
themaddog wrote:
bessantj wrote:
Chips wrote:
Google, Facebook, Apple - I wonder what attracts all these US tech companies to 'look the other way' Ireland? :uhoh:

The craic.

And being part of the EU.




I'm sure all the countries in the EU that sell Apple products are chuffed to bits to have Ireland looking out for them. :thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:59 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 42494
themaddog wrote:
bessantj wrote:
Chips wrote:
Google, Facebook, Apple - I wonder what attracts all these US tech companies to 'look the other way' Ireland? :uhoh:

The craic.

And being part of the EU.

This, and also developing as a hub for hi-tech. The more successful hi-tech ( a very loose term I admit) companies set up in Dublin/Ireland, the more are likely to set up. This is due to a combination of the copycat effect (if Google/Facebook/HubSpot, DogPatch etc are there, so should we), the availability of people demonstrably skilled in doing hi-tech, the presence of managers in the newcos who previously have worked in Dublin/Ireland operations of MNCs, the presence of support law firms, accountants, engineers etc who are experienced in the field the newco works in, and the fact that the IDA have had an office in Palo Alto since the early eighties whose raison d'etre is to shake hands with every established company and let every newco know what Ireland offers.

The tax rate (which we've had since 1958 btw, it is no Johnny come lately) may be what initially attracts some, but it's not why they stay and grow their offices here.

How the fúck do you think that London developed as a banking hub ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:02 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 52336
https://tradingeconomics.com/ireland/corporate-tax-rate

Quote:
The tax rate (which we've had since 1958 btw, it is no Johnny come lately) may be what initially attracts some, but it's not why they


2002 is the new 1958.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:51 pm
Posts: 1276
camroc1 wrote:
How the fúck do you think that London developed as a banking hub ?



Because London was the busiest trading hub in the world?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 40640
Location: Dublin
Chips wrote:
camroc1 wrote:
How the fúck do you think that London developed as a banking hub ?



Because London was the busiest trading hub in the world?


Oh squeeky clean the City of London is.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:51 pm
Posts: 1276
iarmhiman wrote:
Chips wrote:
camroc1 wrote:
How the fúck do you think that London developed as a banking hub ?



Because London was the busiest trading hub in the world?


Oh squeeky clean the City of London is.




The mercantile development of London was a bit more sophisticated than Cork.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:10 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 42494
bimboman wrote:
https://tradingeconomics.com/ireland/corporate-tax-rate

Quote:
The tax rate (which we've had since 1958 btw, it is no Johnny come lately) may be what initially attracts some, but it's not why they


2002 is the new 1958.


Bimbo showing yet again that Google is the limit of his knowledge of Ireland and its history.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:15 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 52336
camroc1 wrote:
bimboman wrote:
https://tradingeconomics.com/ireland/corporate-tax-rate

Quote:
The tax rate (which we've had since 1958 btw, it is no Johnny come lately) may be what initially attracts some, but it's not why they


2002 is the new 1958.


Bimbo showing yet again that Google is the limit of his knowledge of Ireland and its history.



Quote:
In the 1998 Budget (in December 1997) Finance Minister, Charlie McCreevy[5] introduced the legislation for a new regime of corporation tax that led to the introduction of the 12.5% rate of corporation tax for trading income from 1 January 2003. The legislation was contained in section 71 of the Finance Act 1999 and provided for a phased introduction of the 12.5% rate from 32% for the financial year 1998 to 12.5% commencing from 1 January 2003. A higher rate of corporation tax of 25% was introduced for passive income, income from a foreign trade and some development and mining activities. Manufacturing relief, effectively a 10% rate of corporation tax, was ended on 31 December 2002. For companies that were claiming this relief before 23 July 1998 it would still be available until 31 January 2010. The 10% rate for IFSC activiites ended on 31 December 2005 and after this date these companies moved to the 12.5% rate provided their trade qualified as an Irish trading activity


Is this wrong then ?

Here's an article from 1998 Irish times predicting the cut:

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/cor ... 3-1.150440


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:23 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 42494
bimboman wrote:
camroc1 wrote:
bimboman wrote:
https://tradingeconomics.com/ireland/corporate-tax-rate

Quote:
The tax rate (which we've had since 1958 btw, it is no Johnny come lately) may be what initially attracts some, but it's not why they


2002 is the new 1958.


Bimbo showing yet again that Google is the limit of his knowledge of Ireland and its history.



Quote:
In the 1998 Budget (in December 1997) Finance Minister, Charlie McCreevy[5] introduced the legislation for a new regime of corporation tax that led to the introduction of the 12.5% rate of corporation tax for trading income from 1 January 2003. The legislation was contained in section 71 of the Finance Act 1999 and provided for a phased introduction of the 12.5% rate from 32% for the financial year 1998 to 12.5% commencing from 1 January 2003. A higher rate of corporation tax of 25% was introduced for passive income, income from a foreign trade and some development and mining activities. Manufacturing relief, effectively a 10% rate of corporation tax, was ended on 31 December 2002. For companies that were claiming this relief before 23 July 1998 it would still be available until 31 January 2010. The 10% rate for IFSC activiites ended on 31 December 2005 and after this date these companies moved to the 12.5% rate provided their trade qualified as an Irish trading activity


Is this wrong then ?

Here's an article from 1998 Irish times predicting the cut:

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/cor ... 3-1.150440

As ever Bimbo, you can't see the wood for the trees.

Have a read :

https://www.independent.ie/business/iri ... 56641.html


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:44 pm
Posts: 47240
Location: In the Centre/left wing
Pmsl :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 40640
Location: Dublin
:lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:28 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 52336
camroc1 wrote:
bimboman wrote:
camroc1 wrote:
bimboman wrote:
https://tradingeconomics.com/ireland/corporate-tax-rate

Quote:
The tax rate (which we've had since 1958 btw, it is no Johnny come lately) may be what initially attracts some, but it's not why they


2002 is the new 1958.


Bimbo showing yet again that Google is the limit of his knowledge of Ireland and its history.



Quote:
In the 1998 Budget (in December 1997) Finance Minister, Charlie McCreevy[5] introduced the legislation for a new regime of corporation tax that led to the introduction of the 12.5% rate of corporation tax for trading income from 1 January 2003. The legislation was contained in section 71 of the Finance Act 1999 and provided for a phased introduction of the 12.5% rate from 32% for the financial year 1998 to 12.5% commencing from 1 January 2003. A higher rate of corporation tax of 25% was introduced for passive income, income from a foreign trade and some development and mining activities. Manufacturing relief, effectively a 10% rate of corporation tax, was ended on 31 December 2002. For companies that were claiming this relief before 23 July 1998 it would still be available until 31 January 2010. The 10% rate for IFSC activiites ended on 31 December 2005 and after this date these companies moved to the 12.5% rate provided their trade qualified as an Irish trading activity


Is this wrong then ?

Here's an article from 1998 Irish times predicting the cut:

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/cor ... 3-1.150440

As ever Bimbo, you can't see the wood for the trees.

Have a read :

https://www.independent.ie/business/iri ... 56641.html



Yeah but you're posting and talking total bollocks you stupid c unt :

Quote:
The importance of these special low corporate tax rates in a
global environment was critical for Ireland as, for various reasons, the regular corporate tax rate was very high – for example, it hit 50% in the years from 1982 to 1988 (Martyn & Reck, 2014, pp. C-61). All companies ended up paying tax at a variety of rates and the application of the reliefs led to much complexity and some unexpected results (see, for example, Charles McCann Ltd v S O’Culachain (Inspector of Taxes): III ITR 304 as to whether ripening bananas was ‘manufacturing’, or Cronin (Inspector of Taxes)
v Strand Dairy Ltd: III ITR 441 whether the pasteurisation and bottling of milk was manufacturing). However it is also important to understand that for many companies 1981/1990 resulted in a, well- agged, tax increase (as it did again in 2003/2010).
The 10% effective tax rate then fell foul of EU rules in 1998 and,
in turn, was replaced by a general 12.5% tax rate that applied to company trading pro ts (a 25% tax rate applied to non-trading pro ts, and the capital gains tax rate applied to corporate chargeable gains, currently 33% but then 20%). In 1999 imputation was removed and the Irish tax system became a classical system for the rst time. The 12.5% general tax rate rst applied on 1 January 2003.


The source of the quote is this EY report for the Irish state posted with an Irish budget

http://www.budget.gov.ie/Budgets/2015/D ... on_Tax.pdf


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 40640
Location: Dublin
Bimbo at the moment:

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:32 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 42494
We dig, dig, dig....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HI0x0KYChq4


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:44 pm
Posts: 47240
Location: In the Centre/left wing
One can only worry about posters of very low intelligence who time and time again call others stupid or dim randomly.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:36 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 52336
iarmhiman wrote:
:lol:


How wrong can you be all the time ? :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:51 pm
Posts: 1276
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-2923_en.htm

Quote:
"Member States cannot give tax benefits to selected companies – this is illegal under EU state aid rules. The Commission's investigation concluded that Ireland granted illegal tax benefits to Apple, which enabled it to pay substantially less tax than other businesses over many years. In fact, this selective treatment allowed Apple to pay an effective corporate tax rate of 1 per cent on its European profits in 2003 down to 0.005 per cent in 2014."



:shock:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 40640
Location: Dublin
c69 wrote:
One can only worry about posters of very low intelligence who time and time again call others stupid or dim randomly.


He calls people "thick" or "fick" as pronounced in Essex.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 40640
Location: Dublin
bimboman wrote:
iarmhiman wrote:
:lol:


How wrong can you be all the time ? :lol:


Wrong that you make me laugh????

Sure


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:38 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 52336
camroc1 wrote:



You stupid c unt, the article you posted states the Tax is 50 years old not the RATE , the rate has been as high as 50% as per all the legitimate sources I've posted .


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:38 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 42494
Chips wrote:
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-2923_en.htm

Quote:
"Member States cannot give tax benefits to selected companies – this is illegal under EU state aid rules. The Commission's investigation concluded that Ireland granted illegal tax benefits to Apple, which enabled it to pay substantially less tax than other businesses over many years. In fact, this selective treatment allowed Apple to pay an effective corporate tax rate of 1 per cent on its European profits in 2003 down to 0.005 per cent in 2014."



:shock:

Incorrect.

See my post on 07.03.18 at 17.15 on page 1629.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 40640
Location: Dublin
camroc1 wrote:
Chips wrote:
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-2923_en.htm

Quote:
"Member States cannot give tax benefits to selected companies – this is illegal under EU state aid rules. The Commission's investigation concluded that Ireland granted illegal tax benefits to Apple, which enabled it to pay substantially less tax than other businesses over many years. In fact, this selective treatment allowed Apple to pay an effective corporate tax rate of 1 per cent on its European profits in 2003 down to 0.005 per cent in 2014."



:shock:

Incorrect.

See my post on 07.03.18 at 17.15 on page 1629.


:lol: :thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:39 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 52336
camroc1 wrote:
Chips wrote:
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-2923_en.htm

Quote:
"Member States cannot give tax benefits to selected companies – this is illegal under EU state aid rules. The Commission's investigation concluded that Ireland granted illegal tax benefits to Apple, which enabled it to pay substantially less tax than other businesses over many years. In fact, this selective treatment allowed Apple to pay an effective corporate tax rate of 1 per cent on its European profits in 2003 down to 0.005 per cent in 2014."



:shock:

Incorrect.

See my post on 07.03.18 at 17.15 on page 1629.



Go on post that article againn which you think states the corpration tax rate in Ireland was introduced in 1958'at 12:5%... Thicko mc thicko.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 40640
Location: Dublin
camroc1 wrote:


That song is in my head now. :x


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:41 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 52336
iarmhiman wrote:
bimboman wrote:
iarmhiman wrote:
:lol:


How wrong can you be all the time ? :lol:


Wrong that you make me laugh????

Sure



Is Cammy right or wrong that the corpration tax rate was always 12.5% ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:41 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 42494
bimboman wrote:
camroc1 wrote:



You stupid c unt, the article you posted states the Tax is 50 years old not the RATE , the rate has been as high as 50% as per all the legitimate sources I've posted .

C69 wrote:
One can only worry about posters of very low intelligence who time and time again call others stupid or dim randomly.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 40640
Location: Dublin
bimboman wrote:
iarmhiman wrote:
bimboman wrote:
iarmhiman wrote:
:lol:


How wrong can you be all the time ? :lol:


Wrong that you make me laugh????

Sure



Is Cammy right or wrong that the corpration tax rate was always 12.5% ?


I'm an engineer. This is not my place to make any comments on finance.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:44 pm
Posts: 47240
Location: In the Centre/left wing
iarmhiman wrote:
c69 wrote:
One can only worry about posters of very low intelligence who time and time again call others stupid or dim randomly.


He calls people "thick" or "fick" as pronounced in Essex.

It's a tactic to denigrate people's intellect and make them less than they are.
Nasty deliberate and time and time again done deliberately to make posters feel worthless.
He knows what he is doing :(


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 82488 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 1631, 1632, 1633, 1634, 1635, 1636, 1637 ... 2063  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bimboman, Bing [Bot], BokJock, camroc1, canuckles, Google Adsense [Bot], Jensrsa, Margin_Walker, NickC, penguin, rfurlong, Rinkals, Rumham, SamShark, Santa, tabascoboy, Winnie, zt1903 and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group