Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

All things Rugby
Ulsters Red Hand
Posts: 11626
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2014 1:18 pm

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by Ulsters Red Hand »

Floppykid wrote:Going to Storeys funeral in IRA uniform goes a bit beyond "having a private life".
Think of all the pupils, parents, staff, governors etc that look to that man for answers and to set an “example”
Mullet 2

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by Mullet 2 »

crouchy wrote:Is Calleary a farmer? Or know anything about agriculture?

:lol: :lol:

Was Simon Harris a doctor? What's your point?
User avatar
crouchy
Posts: 5298
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2015 11:34 am

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by crouchy »

Mullet 2 wrote:
crouchy wrote:Is Calleary a farmer? Or know anything about agriculture?

:lol: :lol:

Was Simon Harris a doctor? What's your point?
Wasn't Harris involved in health charities etc and his wife is a nurse?

It's a straightforward enough question, does Calleary have any background at all in agriculture?

Do you think Calleary was even considered at any point for agriculture when Martin was picking his cabinet?
User avatar
Duff Paddy
Posts: 39887
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by Duff Paddy »

Mullet 2 wrote:
crouchy wrote:Is Calleary a farmer? Or know anything about agriculture?

:lol: :lol:

Was Simon Harris a doctor? What's your point?
Bertie was an accountant
MunsterMan!!!!!
Posts: 5205
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by MunsterMan!!!!! »

crouchy wrote:
Mullet 2 wrote:
crouchy wrote:Is Calleary a farmer? Or know anything about agriculture?

:lol: :lol:

Was Simon Harris a doctor? What's your point?
Wasn't Harris involved in health charities etc and his wife is a nurse?

It's a straightforward enough question, does Calleary have any background at all in agriculture?

Do you think Calleary was even considered at any point for agriculture when Martin was picking his cabinet?

Why does that does that matter? This is some very simplistic thinking. The only relevant experience question that could be put to them, is their policy formation experience and leadership qualities. Given me a politician that understand policy creation and their repercussion any day of the week.
User avatar
CM11
Posts: 63177
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by CM11 »

nardol wrote:
danthefan wrote:
anonymous_joe wrote:
danthefan wrote:
Mullet 2 wrote:That Danish git should be made answer for this.

This fake 14 billion has poisoned discourse for years now based on nothing.
Surely she must consider her position. She's gotten it horrendously wrong. How can anyone have confidence in her now?
This played very well abroad.
Losing?
Going after massive multinationals that avoid the ahit out of tax.

I support her Politically, even if there was no legal basis for her action
You support her trying to get Apple to pay tax in a jurisdiction where it's not due? Do you also support piracy?

Not a lot to disagree with here, even though I'm sure Apple use every tax trick in the book to reduce their tax burden.
"We are pleased they have annulled the Commission’s case. This case was not about how much tax we pay, but where we are required to pay it. We’re proud to be the largest taxpayer in the world as we know the important role tax payments play in society. Apple has paid more than $100 billion in corporate income taxes around the world in the last decade and tens of billions more in other taxes.

"Changes in how a multinational company’s income tax payments are split between different countries require a global solution, and Apple encourages this work to continue."
User avatar
Blackrock Bullet
Posts: 15691
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: #68

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by Blackrock Bullet »

Wonderful news on Apple. The loony left need to be asked why they are so gung ho about stealing money from poorer Americans weeks after claiming to support the BLM movement.
User avatar
Blackrock Bullet
Posts: 15691
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: #68

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by Blackrock Bullet »

The Sun God wrote:
CM11 wrote:Calleary in.

Chambers new Whip.
There is already money going on a late September election....
Idle FFers would be crazy to do that

Varadkar is already acting like co Taoiseach. He’s in the press nearly as much talking about government policy and has had a popularity bump. Fianna Fáil look like a mess and not a governing party, even if they hate Martin’s leadership, they need a few months doing work to make them look competent.
Mullet 2

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by Mullet 2 »

crouchy wrote:
Mullet 2 wrote:
crouchy wrote:Is Calleary a farmer? Or know anything about agriculture?

:lol: :lol:

Was Simon Harris a doctor? What's your point?
Wasn't Harris involved in health charities etc and his wife is a nurse?

It's a straightforward enough question, does Calleary have any background at all in agriculture?

Do you think Calleary was even considered at any point for agriculture when Martin was picking his cabinet?

Does he need to be a fisherman too?

Shut the fúck up Nordy :lol:
ticketlessinseattle
Posts: 9464
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: the Confederacy of Dunces

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by ticketlessinseattle »

Duff Paddy wrote:
sewa wrote:
Duff Paddy wrote:
Floppykid wrote:https://twitter.com/tconnellyrte/status ... 6577830924

Through gritted teeth. 8)
If Member States give certain multinational companies tax advantages not available to their rivals, this harms fair competition in the EU.
Hilarious
But there is no reason why competitor companies such as Samsung or Nokia couldn't get the exact same deal. I am sure Ireland inc would approve it
Christ that is stupid - there was no special deal you bloody eejit
well, lets not get too carried away here now ; I'm all for yippeee team Ireland Inc but to say that there's no possibility of a wink wink nudge nudge if and when how much "royalties" were paid by Apple Ireland Inc to Apple Caymans Inc was decided.....I dont think anyone but a handful of people can say for certain one way or the other ; the Business Post, not exactly some leftie rag said the same thing ages back
User avatar
The Sun God
Posts: 13279
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Best country in the world.

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by The Sun God »

crouchy wrote:
Mullet 2 wrote:
crouchy wrote:Is Calleary a farmer? Or know anything about agriculture?

:lol: :lol:

Was Simon Harris a doctor? What's your point?
Wasn't Harris involved in health charities etc and his wife is a nurse?

It's a straightforward enough question, does Calleary have any background at all in agriculture?

Do you think Calleary was even considered at any point for agriculture when Martin was picking his cabinet?
Was Cowen an offshore sailor or part-time trawler-man ?.... No, didn't think so.
User avatar
nardol
Posts: 20456
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by nardol »

[quote="CM11"]

I support efforts to have companies like apple that avoid tax psy more. The political part.

Piracy is illegal and that does have a basis in law so action would be successful. Need to come up with a better illustration of your argument.
User avatar
The Sun God
Posts: 13279
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Best country in the world.

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by The Sun God »

Duff Paddy wrote:
Mullet 2 wrote:
crouchy wrote:Is Calleary a farmer? Or know anything about agriculture?

:lol: :lol:

Was Simon Harris a doctor? What's your point?
Bertie was an accountant
And a grad of the LSE, i'll have you know.
User avatar
PornDog
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by PornDog »

sewa wrote:
Ulsters Red Hand wrote:Heard there was a principal of a school from West Belfast attending Storey’s funeral in his IRA uniform. What plum
Are teachers not entitled to a private life
Aye, and if they behave like f**king pond scum in that private life then the rest of society gets to call them a plum in our private life. If they are in a position to influence children the its right that their behaviour, and any undue corrupting influence, be investigated.
User avatar
crouchy
Posts: 5298
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2015 11:34 am

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by crouchy »

Mullet 2 wrote:
crouchy wrote:
Mullet 2 wrote:
crouchy wrote:Is Calleary a farmer? Or know anything about agriculture?

:lol: :lol:

Was Simon Harris a doctor? What's your point?
Wasn't Harris involved in health charities etc and his wife is a nurse?

It's a straightforward enough question, does Calleary have any background at all in agriculture?

Do you think Calleary was even considered at any point for agriculture when Martin was picking his cabinet?

Does he need to be a fisherman too?

Shut the fúck up Nordy :lol:
You're a sensitive little soul these days Mully, it was a straightforward question. "No" was all you had to say.
Nolanator
Posts: 39559
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Dublin

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by Nolanator »

I don't think a minister needs to be experienced in the field of their portfolio. As long as they have a good team of advisers who are, and the minister is actually intelligent and competent at management, I'd be happy.
User avatar
sewa
Posts: 22087
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by sewa »

PornDog wrote:
sewa wrote:
Ulsters Red Hand wrote:Heard there was a principal of a school from West Belfast attending Storey’s funeral in his IRA uniform. What plum
Are teachers not entitled to a private life
Aye, and if they behave like f**king pond scum in that private life then the rest of society gets to call them a plum in our private life. If they are in a position to influence children the its right that their behaviour, and any undue corrupting influence, be investigated.
I fully expected to whoosh the other two but I thought you'd have more sense
User avatar
crouchy
Posts: 5298
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2015 11:34 am

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by crouchy »

Nolanator wrote:I don't think a minister needs to be experienced in the field of their portfolio. As long as they have a good team of advisers who are, and the minister is actually intelligent and competent at management, I'd be happy.
Fair point Nolanator.
User avatar
nardol
Posts: 20456
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by nardol »

Nolanator wrote:I don't think a minister needs to be experienced in the field of their portfolio. As long as they have a good team of advisers who are, and the minister is actually intelligent and competent at management, I'd be happy.
I would go further.

If its reform you want you explicitly need an outsider.


Law/justice/legal profession

And the HSe/health come to mind
User avatar
camroc1
Posts: 43362
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by camroc1 »

ticketlessinseattle wrote:
Duff Paddy wrote:
sewa wrote:
Duff Paddy wrote:
Floppykid wrote:https://twitter.com/tconnellyrte/status ... 6577830924

Through gritted teeth. 8)
If Member States give certain multinational companies tax advantages not available to their rivals, this harms fair competition in the EU.
Hilarious
But there is no reason why competitor companies such as Samsung or Nokia couldn't get the exact same deal. I am sure Ireland inc would approve it
Christ that is stupid - there was no special deal you bloody eejit
well, lets not get too carried away here now ; I'm all for yippeee team Ireland Inc but to say that there's no possibility of a wink wink nudge nudge if and when how much "royalties" were paid by Apple Ireland Inc to Apple Caymans Inc was decided.....I dont think anyone but a handful of people can say for certain one way or the other ; the Business Post, not exactly some leftie rag said the same thing ages back
Nope. Here is what the Court found :
The General Court said on Wednesday that the commission “incorrectly concluded, in its primary line of reasoning, that the Irish tax authorities granted ASI and AOE an advantage” by not allocating Apple Group intellectual property licences to the Irish branches.

In addition, the court said the commission “did not succeed in demonstrating” in its second strand argument that the method used for allocating taxable profits to the Irish branches was flawed.
https://www.irishtimes.com/business/eco ... -1.4305044

That is, firstly Ireland neither bent it's tax laws, nor gave any favourable treatment or "advantage" to Apple; and secondly Apple paid the correct amount of taxes in Ireland under Irish law.

It's a slam dunk of a decision, and really paints Verstager as a grandstanding activist rather than a European Commissioner. She really should resign.

AS the case was taken under the umbrella of the trade commissioner, does that mean that Phil Hogan will have a big say in whether the EU bother to appeal, especially as they can only appeal on a point of law, and not just launch an appeal against the decision. Also afaicr the ECJ backs the General Court (formerly the Court of First Instance) decisions something like (off the top of my head) 80%+ times.
Anyone ? AJ ? got actual figures for successful appeals to the ECJ against General Court decisions ?
User avatar
CM11
Posts: 63177
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by CM11 »

Ticketless, the tax was due in the US. Irish schemes allowed Apple to avoid this but it was never ours to claim and we never gave any competitive advantage over any other company.

Nardol, US have changed their tax laws to make sure they do so I'm sure you're happy there. Ireland could have closed the loophole earlier than they did but that is also gone as a factor so double happy?
User avatar
camroc1
Posts: 43362
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by camroc1 »

CM11 wrote:Ticketless, the tax was due in the US. Irish schemes allowed Apple to avoid this but it was never ours to claim and we never gave any competitive advantage over any other company.

Nardol, US have changed their tax laws to make sure they do so I'm sure you're happy there. Ireland could have closed the loophole earlier than they did but that is also gone as a factor so double happy?
The tax was due in the US, but US tax law specifically allowed US MNCS to keep their profits from non US activity offshore. So that's what Apple did: funnelled their non US profits to tax havens in the Caribbean. Trump brought in an amnesty whereby such offshored monies would be taxed at something like 20% instead of the standard US corporation tax of 35%. So Apple onshored the profits and paid the tax where it was due, in the US.

The rest: double Irish, Dutch sandwich etc. etc. is flim flam. The money was not Irelands, nor at the time the profit was generated any other EU country's to tax in the first place. Tax was due in the US.

And the court decision has just vindicated this.
User avatar
Blackrock Bullet
Posts: 15691
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: #68

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by Blackrock Bullet »

ticketlessinseattle wrote:
Duff Paddy wrote:
sewa wrote:
Duff Paddy wrote:
Floppykid wrote:https://twitter.com/tconnellyrte/status ... 6577830924

Through gritted teeth. 8)
If Member States give certain multinational companies tax advantages not available to their rivals, this harms fair competition in the EU.
Hilarious
But there is no reason why competitor companies such as Samsung or Nokia couldn't get the exact same deal. I am sure Ireland inc would approve it
Christ that is stupid - there was no special deal you bloody eejit
well, lets not get too carried away here now ; I'm all for yippeee team Ireland Inc but to say that there's no possibility of a wink wink nudge nudge if and when how much "royalties" were paid by Apple Ireland Inc to Apple Caymans Inc was decided.....I dont think anyone but a handful of people can say for certain one way or the other ; the Business Post, not exactly some leftie rag said the same thing ages back
Irrespective of the rights or wrongs, there is a lot of hindsight to this. The deal was in the early 90s, when Apple were on a downward spiral. This was an issue because it was Apple and their success.
ticketlessinseattle
Posts: 9464
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: the Confederacy of Dunces

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by ticketlessinseattle »

camroc1 wrote:
CM11 wrote:Ticketless, the tax was due in the US. Irish schemes allowed Apple to avoid this but it was never ours to claim and we never gave any competitive advantage over any other company.

Nardol, US have changed their tax laws to make sure they do so I'm sure you're happy there. Ireland could have closed the loophole earlier than they did but that is also gone as a factor so double happy?
The tax was due in the US, but US tax law specifically allowed US MNCS to keep their profits from non US activity offshore. So that's what Apple did: funnelled their non US profits to tax havens in the Caribbean. Trump brought in an amnesty whereby such offshored monies would be taxed at something like 20% instead of the standard US corporation tax of 35%. So Apple onshored the profits and paid the tax where it was due, in the US.

The rest: double Irish, Dutch sandwich etc. etc. is flim flam. The money was not Irelands, nor at the time the profit was generated any other EU country's to tax in the first place. Tax was due in the US.

And the court decision has just vindicated this.
I agree with the highlighted bit ; the double Irish/dutch sandwich was a system whereby many companies including apple set up an Irish company registered in a zero corp tax jurisdiction such as the Cayman Islands and transferred their IP there - the Irish irish company paid a royalty to the Cayman irish company for the right to use their IP ; this was a tax allowable deduction in Ireland ; it was revenue in the Cayman irish company except there is no corporation tax in the Cayamans ; as of 2015 this loophole is now grandfathered out by end of 2020
rfurlong

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by rfurlong »

Floppykid wrote:Does this have a realistic chance of being reversed on appeal do we reckon?
Zero chance

If anything the full transcript of the judgement is going to be utterly damning in terms of Vestagers role here. There simply isn't a case to answer ....

The scheme Apple availed of was open to all-comers = no special treatment
The profits they shifted offshore will get taxed upon repatriation = no evasion
The repatriation will happen (if it hasn't already) in the US = no taxable amounts for any EU country
The apple taxes due in Ireland have been paid in full in Ireland at c.14% effective rate = no question of Ireland giving them a 0.05% tax rate
The tax affairs of Ireland are sovereign = no remit or mandate for Vestager to get involved in the first instance

Her hubris is the only thing that brought the case this far

She's fvcking toast hopefully.
User avatar
Jim Lahey
Posts: 9875
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 8:29 pm

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by Jim Lahey »

Whats the normal corporation tax rate (before any shenanigans) down Mexico way?
rfurlong

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by rfurlong »

ticketlessinseattle wrote:
Duff Paddy wrote:
sewa wrote:
Duff Paddy wrote:
Floppykid wrote:https://twitter.com/tconnellyrte/status ... 6577830924

Through gritted teeth. 8)
If Member States give certain multinational companies tax advantages not available to their rivals, this harms fair competition in the EU.
Hilarious
But there is no reason why competitor companies such as Samsung or Nokia couldn't get the exact same deal. I am sure Ireland inc would approve it
Christ that is stupid - there was no special deal you bloody eejit
well, lets not get too carried away here now ; I'm all for yippeee team Ireland Inc but to say that there's no possibility of a wink wink nudge nudge if and when how much "royalties" were paid by Apple Ireland Inc to Apple Caymans Inc was decided.....I dont think anyone but a handful of people can say for certain one way or the other ; the Business Post, not exactly some leftie rag said the same thing ages back
you think the revenue commissioners are doing backhanders with companies now?
Nolanator
Posts: 39559
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Dublin

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by Nolanator »

Jim Lahey wrote:Whats the normal corporation tax rate (before any shenanigans) down Mexico way?
12.5
rfurlong

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by rfurlong »

nardol wrote:
CM11 wrote:
I support efforts to have companies like apple that avoid tax psy more. The political part.

Piracy is illegal and that does have a basis in law so action would be successful. Need to come up with a better illustration of your argument.

we're all a bit stooopider after reading your post nardol

well done
User avatar
Jim Lahey
Posts: 9875
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 8:29 pm

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by Jim Lahey »

Nolanator wrote:
Jim Lahey wrote:Whats the normal corporation tax rate (before any shenanigans) down Mexico way?
12.5
Spicy :thumbup:
Reckon the shinners will jack it up when they eventually get their grubby hands on power?
rfurlong

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by rfurlong »

ticketlessinseattle wrote:
camroc1 wrote:
CM11 wrote:Ticketless, the tax was due in the US. Irish schemes allowed Apple to avoid this but it was never ours to claim and we never gave any competitive advantage over any other company.

Nardol, US have changed their tax laws to make sure they do so I'm sure you're happy there. Ireland could have closed the loophole earlier than they did but that is also gone as a factor so double happy?
The tax was due in the US, but US tax law specifically allowed US MNCS to keep their profits from non US activity offshore. So that's what Apple did: funnelled their non US profits to tax havens in the Caribbean. Trump brought in an amnesty whereby such offshored monies would be taxed at something like 20% instead of the standard US corporation tax of 35%. So Apple onshored the profits and paid the tax where it was due, in the US.

The rest: double Irish, Dutch sandwich etc. etc. is flim flam. The money was not Irelands, nor at the time the profit was generated any other EU country's to tax in the first place. Tax was due in the US.

And the court decision has just vindicated this.
I agree with the highlighted bit ; the double Irish/dutch sandwich was a system whereby many companies including apple set up an Irish company registered in a zero corp tax jurisdiction such as the Cayman Islands and transferred their IP there - the Irish irish company paid a royalty to the Cayman irish company for the right to use their IP ; this was a tax allowable deduction in Ireland ; it was revenue in the Cayman irish company except there is no corporation tax in the Cayamans ; as of 2015 this loophole is now grandfathered out by end of 2020
a longwinded way of saying you're wrong
User avatar
nardol
Posts: 20456
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by nardol »

rfurlong wrote:
nardol wrote:
CM11 wrote:
I support efforts to have companies like apple that avoid tax psy more. The political part.

Piracy is illegal and that does have a basis in law so action would be successful. Need to come up with a better illustration of your argument.

we're all a bit stooopider after reading your post nardol

well done

Christ you are a tedious bore
rfurlong

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by rfurlong »

Jim Lahey wrote:
Nolanator wrote:
Jim Lahey wrote:Whats the normal corporation tax rate (before any shenanigans) down Mexico way?
12.5
Spicy :thumbup:
Reckon the shinners will jack it up when they eventually get their grubby hands on power?
thats why they'll never get in as the lead party ...... hopefully

it just seems that despite the state of Irish twitter, there are just too many semi intelligent people down here who will never vote shinner for fear of what they'd do to the economy
rfurlong

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by rfurlong »

nardol wrote:
rfurlong wrote:
nardol wrote:
CM11 wrote:
I support efforts to have companies like apple that avoid tax psy more. The political part.

Piracy is illegal and that does have a basis in law so action would be successful. Need to come up with a better illustration of your argument.

we're all a bit stooopider after reading your post nardol

well done

Christ you are a tedious bore
you're a fvcking moron though, so thats us quits
ticketlessinseattle
Posts: 9464
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: the Confederacy of Dunces

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by ticketlessinseattle »

rfurlong wrote:
ticketlessinseattle wrote:
well, lets not get too carried away here now ; I'm all for yippeee team Ireland Inc but to say that there's no possibility of a wink wink nudge nudge if and when how much "royalties" were paid by Apple Ireland Inc to Apple Caymans Inc was decided.....I dont think anyone but a handful of people can say for certain one way or the other ; the Business Post, not exactly some leftie rag said the same thing ages back
you think the revenue commissioners are doing backhanders with companies now?
not now but when we had 18% unemployment and were bursting our bollix to get FDI in then I'd hope we were all wearing the green jersey ! (fcuk it, it might be time again !)
User avatar
nardol
Posts: 20456
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by nardol »

rfurlong wrote:
Jim Lahey wrote:
Nolanator wrote:
Jim Lahey wrote:Whats the normal corporation tax rate (before any shenanigans) down Mexico way?
12.5
Spicy :thumbup:
Reckon the shinners will jack it up when they eventually get their grubby hands on power?
thats why they'll never get in as the lead party ...... hopefully

it just seems that despite the state of Irish twitter, there are just too many semi intelligent people down here who will never vote shinner for fear of what they'd do to the economy
They got about a fifth / quarter of the vote. Makes coalition process a ballache.

They got their result on a manefesto of spend more tax less. Not even hiding that fact. God help us all.
User avatar
CM11
Posts: 63177
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by CM11 »

Can you all edit your posts to have nardol's comments properly attributed to him, thanks.
Adetroy
Posts: 1365
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by Adetroy »

rfurlong wrote:
Jim Lahey wrote:
Nolanator wrote:
Jim Lahey wrote:Whats the normal corporation tax rate (before any shenanigans) down Mexico way?
12.5
Spicy :thumbup:
Reckon the shinners will jack it up when they eventually get their grubby hands on power?
thats why they'll never get in as the lead party ...... hopefully

it just seems that despite the state of Irish twitter, there are just too many semi intelligent people down here who will never vote shinner for fear of what they'd do to the economy
12.5%. In one of the great ironies it was the Charlie Haughey Government of the late 80’s that wanted to reduce corporation tax for domestic companies only. It was the European commission that forced the government to apply the reduced rate equally!
User avatar
nardol
Posts: 20456
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by nardol »

rfurlong wrote:
nardol wrote:
rfurlong wrote:
nardol wrote:
CM11 wrote:
I support efforts to have companies like apple that avoid tax psy more. The political part.

Piracy is illegal and that does have a basis in law so action would be successful. Need to come up with a better illustration of your argument.

we're all a bit stooopider after reading your post nardol

well done

Christ you are a tedious bore
you're a fvcking moron though, so thats us quits
You can call me stupid about many things but a political opinion wanting corporations, large ones, to pay more tax (in Europe) is not one of them.

Its an opinion for start.
Nolanator
Posts: 39559
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Dublin

Re: Rugby NAMA thread Revisited Rugby

Post by Nolanator »

Jim Lahey wrote:
Nolanator wrote:
Jim Lahey wrote:Whats the normal corporation tax rate (before any shenanigans) down Mexico way?
12.5
Spicy :thumbup:
Reckon the shinners will jack it up when they eventually get their grubby hands on power?
No, because they'll see the way the books are balanced and shit the bed at the thought of companies who employ terms of thousands leaving.
Post Reply