TOP STORIES
CARTOONS
MAGIC MONEY TREE
POSH GRAMMAR
OSBORNE KERCHING!!
PROMISES PROMISES
SOUTHERN FAIL
DUMB POLLSTERS
DON'T BLAME TRUMP!
£13bn APPLE TAX DODGE
SAFE SEATS = BREXIT?
UKIP v LABOUR
ALL OUT OF IT TOGETHER
EU IMMIGRATION
TORY v TORY
PRISON SUICIDES
LONDON LEAVES UK!
EU v TORY MANDATE
HMRC IS A TAX HAVEN
PANAMA TAX LEAK
IDS v IDS
RICH v POOR
POSH BOYS
HELP2BUY PROFITEERS
LLOYDS, RBS CEO PAY
HSBC DRUG MONEY
PM'S MUM FIGHTS CUTS
PEAK "STUFF" IS HERE
HMRC GOOGLY
PENSION TAX RAID
Showing posts with label regulation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label regulation. Show all posts

Wednesday, 1 February 2017

Wednesday, February 01, 2017 Posted by Hari No comments Labels: , , , , , , ,

[UPDATED 8/3/17] SOURCE GUARDIAN: George Osborne to be paid £650,000 for working one day a week

George Osborne has declared a salary of £650,000 a year for working just four days a month at BlackRock, the world’s biggest fund management firm, as well as almost £800,000 for speeches to financiers. The former chancellor’s earnings were revealed in the latest register of MPs’ interests, which shows that he will make more than eight times his salary as a backbencher as an adviser to the Wall Street firm. He was criticised for taking the job earlier this year, because BlackRock may have benefited from reforms to pension rules made while he was chancellor.

SOURCE DAILY MAIL: A shameless ex-Chancellor: the damning extent of Osborne's murky relationship with the Treasury and the finance giant that's just given him a six-figure job
Former Chancellor George Osborne, who is paid £75,000-a-year to fulfil his duties as an MP, will be working one day a week as an adviser to the vast American finance firm, BlackRock. This position will add around £200,000 a year to the household income at the £4million Notting Hill home he shares with wife Frances and their two young children. It has also reignited the long-standing, and increasingly furious, public debate about the grubby ‘revolving door’ between government and the private sector. Since Tony Blair left Downing Street and began lobbying for a mixture of wealthy corporations and dodgy dictators, it has seemingly become almost automatic for ex-Cabinet Ministers to cash in by using the experience they gained in office for commercial gain. This shoddy practice is theoretically regulated by Acoba, a Whitehall appointments watchdog. Yet in the past eight years, it has not attempted to stop one single civil servant or politician from taking up a job. Osborne’s new role at BlackRock was waved through despite the fact that he’d met executives from the finance giant five times during his last two years at the Treasury. Even without this latest scandalous twist about BlackRock, which has sparked calls for a complete revamp of Parliamentary rules, there can be few dethroned senior politicians who have been quite so shameless and proactive as Osborne in their pursuit of a fast buck. His dash for cash began a mere four weeks after being sacked, when he signed up to an American speaking agency called the Washington Speakers’ Bureau. It represents 602 of what it calls ‘the world’s greatest minds’ — including those noted intellectuals Tony Blair, Alastair Campbell, George W. Bush, the former Alaska governor Sarah Palin and the magician David Blaine — and has already helped Osborne earn £628,000 and counting since he left the Treasury. Some of the financial institutions that have paid to hear Osborne’s words of wisdom are, however, a rum old bunch. They include the aforementioned HSBC, which has paid vast fines in recent years for money-laundering offences in Mexico and Switzerland, and JP Morgan, which bunged the former Chancellor £141,752 for two speeches. This is the same JP Morgan that was last month fined £288 million by European regulators for interest-rate manipulation. Then there is Citi, who coughed up £85,396 for two Osborne speeches in November (this week it was hit with a £23 million fine in the U.S. for mis-treating mortgage holders), and Aberdeen Asset Management, which spent £51,328 getting him to talk to investors two months ago (and which not long ago paid a £7.2 million penalty to the Financial Conduct Authority for failing to properly protect client funds). Most curious of all, however, is a mysterious organisation called Palmex Derivatives that flew Osborne to New York in October, where it paid him £80,240.16 for giving a two-hour talk. This secretive firm — whose operations are said to include financial and insurance activities, security broking and fund management — has no website, no listed telephone number or email address and was, until December, registered to a detached brick home on a cul-de-sac in Southend-on-Sea. Now listed at a service address in Caterham, Surrey, it has just two directors, a 34-year-old ‘futures and options broker’ called Robert Palmer and his domestic partner Kirsty Lewis, who describes her occupation on Companies House documents as ‘home-maker’. In its last published accounts — up to January 2016 — Palmex listed assets of a mere £54,598, so hiring the former Chancellor appears to represent a huge investment for such an apparently small firm. And there is the intimate nature of the relationship Osborne appears to have forged with his new employer, BlackRock, while his day-job was running the British economy.

SOURCE BBC NEWS: Working age families are still £345 poorer than they were before the financial crisis
The average UK household's disposable income - or spending power - rose by nearly £600 in 2015-16. The typical household had £26,332 to spend after taxes were paid and benefits received, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) said. Senior statistician Claudia Wells said: "Household incomes are above their pre-downturn peak overall, but not everyone is better off... While retired households' incomes have soared in recent years, non-retired households still have less money, on average, than before the crash." The ONS puts growing private pensions ahead of the guaranteed rise in the state pension - under the so-called triple lock - as the long-term reason for the pick-up in pensioners' incomes. Household income has tended to pick up faster over the years owing to an increasing number of couples both in employment. Matt Whittaker, chief economist at the Resolution Foundation think tank, said: "Strong employment growth, low inflation and rising pensioner incomes over recent years have helped drive inequality down to its lowest level in nearly 30 years... However, the last three years of growth have come back off the back of a living standards squeeze so deep that typical working age families are still £345 poorer than they were before the financial crisis. With employment plateauing, productivity growth refusing to budge and inflation rising, the risk is that this mini boom won't continue."


OUR RELATED STORIES:

The NHS is not a “cost”. It creates nationwide jobs, technology, growth and wealth. Oh, and health

FTSE bosses take 2.5 days to earn what you earn all year. Data shows they don't deserve it

All governments agree to fix the housing crisis. Latest figures show we're still not even trying

Recovery? What recovery?! Bank of England director explains why broke Britain is still broken

Brexit was about inequality in Britain, not immigration. Have our politicians realised this?

See the Stats: Osborne's 2016 budget protected the wealthiest while the most vulnerable suffer

Inequality: the UK has 9 of the 10 poorest regions in Northern Europe. But Inner London is the richest

Graphs at a glance: With highest pay and highest job growth is London sucking the life out of Britain?

Londoners earn 15% more 'cos London is damn expensive! But the poorest 5th in London are paid only 4% more

Graphs at a glance: Britain is already a low-pay economy with falling average wages

Is your Cost of Living crisis over?! Average wages are still back where they were 10 years ago


Tuesday, 20 September 2016

Tuesday, September 20, 2016 Posted by Hari No comments Labels: , , ,

SOURCE BBC NEWS: Apple should give Ireland 13bn euros in unpaid taxes, European Commission rules
After a three-year investigation, the European Commission has concluded that the US firm's Irish tax benefits are illegal. The Commission said Ireland enabled the company to pay substantially less than other businesses, in effect paying a corporate tax rate of no more than 1%. Ireland and Apple both said they disagreed with the record penalty and would appeal against it. The standard rate of Irish corporate tax is 12.5%. The Commissions's investigation concluded that Apple had effectively paid 1% tax on its European profits in 2003 and about 0.005% in 2014. The company said: "Apple follows the law and pays all of the taxes we owe wherever we operate. We will appeal and we are confident the decision will be overturned." The record tax bill should not be a problem for Apple, which made a net profit of $53bn in the 2015 financial year. The US Treasury, which said last week that the European Commission was in danger of becoming a "supranational tax authority", said the latest ruling could "undermine foreign investment, the business climate in Europe, and the important spirit of economic partnership between the US and the EU". In Apple's case, 90% of its foreign profits are legally channelled to Ireland, and then to subsidiaries which have no tax residence. At the same time, countries can scarcely afford not to co-operate when Apple comes calling; it has a stock market value of $600bn, and the attraction of the jobs it can create and the extra inward investment its favours can bring are too much for most politicians to resist.


OUR RELATED STORIES:

Tax relief costs £30bn a year and goes overwhelmingly to those who need it least

How to avoid Inheritance Tax. Easy. If you're rich, that is

Office for National Statistics reports show Tory party claims of lowering personal taxes are an illusion. Personal taxes have actually increased since 2010!

Taxes up! Public spending up! Government borrowing up! No, these aren't Corbyn's future plans. They are Osborne's 2015 budget pledges

In numbers (+ a cool animation): The trillions in global tax evasion and money laundering

Corporate scroungers: How about forcing employers to publish how much welfare top-ups their low paid staff depend on

Graphs at a glance: Budget 2014 document shows we’re growing through borrowing. Again. That's why Britain needs a pay rise

Who needs fat cat pay? The Germans don't. See the comparison with the UK

The incomes of the bottom 90% have hardly risen in 20 years, whilst the top 1%’s has doubled

Thursday, 14 April 2016

Thursday, April 14, 2016 Posted by Hari No comments Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

SOURCE MIRROR: David Cameron blasted over £400m cut to tax collectors in furious Prime Minister's Questions clash
Jeremy Corbyn has blasted a £400million cut to the government's tax collection department in his first clash over the Panama Papers at Prime Minister's Questions. The Labour leader accused David Cameron of letting down the nation by cutting the HM Revenue and Customs budget from £3.3bn to £2.9bn by 2020. "Why has he laid off so many staff in HMRC who therefore can't go and collect tax?" said Corbyn. This week David Cameron announced UK law enforcement will be able to find out the beneficiaries of firms in all tax havens except Anguila and Guernsey, which hadn't yet agreed to a deal.


OUR RELATED STORIES:

Friday, 8 April 2016

Friday, April 08, 2016 Posted by Hari No comments Labels: , , , ,
Chris, KJ and Fee think their chances could be quite good...

SOURCE GUARDIAN: Britain under pressure to end opposition to tax haven blacklist
Pierre Moscovici, the European commissioner in charge of tax policy, urged member states to throw their support behind his plans for a blacklist of tax havens – an idea dismissed last year by UK officials. He cited the case of Lichtenstein as a success, arguing that a deal to hand over information to the EU was accelerated because the principality wanted to get off the list. Last year, the commission made a first attempt at creating a blacklist when it published the names of 30 “non-cooperative tax jurisdictions”. The list was based on EU member states’ own varying ideas and included the British Virgin Islands, Guernsey, Hong Kong and Panama. The British government, which does not keep a blacklist of tax havens, criticised the move as “deeply unhelpful”. A briefing in the name of Treasury minister David Gauke, seen by the Guardian, described it as “a misleading list, since most countries and jurisdictions which are referred to are as transparent as EU member states”. The Treasury document went on to claim that “the UK’s overseas territories and crown dependencies have put themselves at the forefront of global tax transparency over the last couple of years”. As the Observer reported in January, Treasury officials also lobbied Brussels against action against Bermuda, a tax haven favoured by Google. David Cameron said on Tuesday that no government or prime minister had done more “to make sure we crack down on tax evasion, on aggressive tax avoidance, on aggressive tax planning, both here in the UK and internationally”.

Definition of Tax Avoidance is using tax law in a way "Parliament never intended."


OUR RELATED STORIES:


Thursday, 25 February 2016

Thursday, February 25, 2016 Posted by Hari No comments Labels: , , , ,

SOURCE GUARDIAN: RBS pays chief executive Ross McEwan £3.8m as it reports £2bn loss
The bank’s full-year results for 2015 follow its admission last month that it was on track to report its eighth consecutive year of losses because of a £2.5bn hit to profits for a string of problems, including having to pay compensation for payment protection insurance mis-selling. Shares in the bank, 73%-owned by the taxpayer, slumped 10% in early trading after the figures were announced. McEwan – who has received the highest pay for a chief executive of the bank since the bailout – said further problems lay ahead for the bank, particularly from “big conduct” issues. Among these is a penalty, yet to be determined and which could run to billions of pounds, for the way it sold US mortgage bonds in the run-up to the 2008 banking crisis. The results – which followed a £3.5bn loss a year ago – mean that the bank has incurred more than £50bn of losses since 2008, when £45bn of taxpayer funds was used to prevent it from collapsing. The performance of the bank was accompanied by disclosures about pay. It said 121 of its staff received more than €1m (£800,000) during the year while its former chief executive Stephen Hester, who was forced out in 2013, received £2.1m from bonus schemes that dated to his time at the bank.

SOURCE GUARDIANLloyds hands chief executive £8.5m pay package
Lloyds Banking Group has handed its chief executive an £8.5m pay deal and ignited its share price by announcing a special dividend – despite reporting a 7% fall in profits. António Horta-Osório’s pay was disclosed alongside 2015 financial results showing profits had been knocked to £1.6bn by a further £4bn charge for mis-selling payment protection insurance (PPI). The bank, bailed out in 2008, has now incurred a total bill of £16bn for the long-running scandal which drove it to a fourth-quarter loss. The government has been gradually cutting back its stake, from 43% to less than 10%, but despite Thursday’s rally the shares remain below the 73.6p break even price. He was also handed shares worth £3.6m in a long-term incentive plan, which could pay out in three years’ time. His 10-strong management team were handed shares worth £17m in the same scheme. The total bonus pool was cut to £353m from £369m. Sixty-six staff received total pay of €1m (£800,000) or more.


OUR RELATED STORIES:

As of 2014, the £20bn paid out by the banks for their PPI mis-selling is more than all their taxes paid since 2008

The bailout of our banks continues. Not from the taxpayer, but from your pathetic savings interest rates. See the BofE data

Financial Reporting Council says just 2% of bank and building society audits are up to scratch

The Interest Rate Swaps that screwed 40,000 small and medium sized businesses: how the regulator allowed the banks to be judge and jury for their own dodgy deals

RBS accused of seizing small business assets and selling them at knock-down prices to an RBS subsidiary

The government wants you to think we made a profit on sale of Lloyds Bank shares. Actually we made a thumping loss!

How re-mortgaging covered up the theft of Britain's growing wealth in the boom, and helped cause the bust

Friday, 19 February 2016

Friday, February 19, 2016 Posted by Hari 1 comment Labels: , , , ,
KJ and Fee explain...

SOURCE GUARDIAN: HSBC to keep its headquarters in London, after concessions from chancellor
HSBC is to keep its headquarters in the UK after a 10-month review during which time the government has made a series of changes regarded as favourable to the bank. After the May 2015 Conservative election victory the chancellor, George Osborne, has backed away from creating rules intended to toughen up the regime for holding senior bankers to account. He had said he would reverse the burden of proof but has reverted to the more usual system of bankers guilt having to be proven. He also changed the system for taxing banks. A bank levy on balance sheets, which hit HSBC hardest of all the banks, is being scaled back and an eight percentage point corporation tax surcharge on profits is regarded as hitting its smaller rivals harder. Analysts have calculated that the changes mean HSBC will pay £300m to the exchequer – down from £1bn under the previous bank levy system. 

SOURCE BLOOMBERG: HSBC sued over drug cartel murders after laundering probe
Families of U.S. citizens murdered by drug gangs in Mexico have sued HSBC, claiming the bank can be held responsible for the deaths because it let cartels launder billions of dollars to operate their businesses. The lawsuit brings fresh scrutiny to the Mexican activities of HSBC, which in 2012 paid $1.9 billion to resolve a criminal investigation into whether it violated U.S. sanctions laws and laundered at least $881 million on behalf of drug cartels. The new case recounts a series of murders in 2010 and 2011 in horrific detail, arguing that the bank should be held to account for them under the U.S. Anti-Terrorism Act. Lesley Redelfs was four months pregnant when she and her husband, Arthur, were shot by the Juarez cartel after leaving a children’s birthday party hosted by the U.S. Consulate in Ciudad Juarez, where she worked. Jaime Zapata and Victor Avila Jr. were special agents for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, driving to Mexico City when they were run off the road by two vehicles filled with hit men from the Los Zetas cartel, who then opened fire. Avila survived. Rafael Morales Jr. was abducted on his wedding day, as were his brother and uncle, and the three died of asphyxiation after members of the Sinaloa cartel wrapped duct tape around their heads. HSBC already is among banks facing a lawsuit from families of U.S. soldiers killed or injured by attacks in Iraq on accusations that the firms helped Iran process transfers and finance Hezbollah and other militant groups. 


OUR RELATED STORIES:

As of 2014, the £20bn paid out by the banks for their PPI mis-selling is more than all their taxes paid since 2008

The bailout of our banks continues. Not from the taxpayer, but from your pathetic savings interest rates. See the BofE data

Financial Reporting Council says just 2% of bank and building society audits are up to scratch

The Interest Rate Swaps that screwed 40,000 small and medium sized businesses: how the regulator allowed the banks to be judge and jury for their own dodgy deals

RBS accused of seizing small business assets and selling them at knock-down prices to an RBS subsidiary

The government wants you to think we made a profit on sale of Lloyds Bank shares. Actually we made a thumping loss!

How re-mortgaging covered up the theft of Britain's growing wealth in the boom, and helped cause the bust

Sunday, 14 February 2016

Sunday, February 14, 2016 Posted by Jake No comments Labels: , , , ,
Regulators in Britain, including OFGEM (energy companies) and the FCA (financial companies), are powerless to stop many rip-offs because Parliament has made them that way. 
Regulators have about as much right to stop bad behaviour as a cop has to pull you over for doing 29 mph in a 30 mph zone. You'd need to be shooting at pedestrians with one hand, leaving just your other hand on the steering wheel, for them to do that. Even then, if a British regulator was prosecuting, you wouldn't be done for the civilian casualties but would get a £100 fine for driving while distracted (by shooting at people) as if you were using a mobile phone.

Regulators are impotent because consumer law passed and maintained by successive parliaments, Conservative and Con-Dem and Labour, make it quite legal for traders to rip off the 'less than average' 50% of their customers. This premise forms the bedrock of British commercial culture from banks to pensions to mobile phones to estate agents to broadband packages. The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) even provides a helpful roadmap to guide crooked traders on reaching the below average consumers (our annotations are in red (and this chart really is an OFT roadmap, not us being satirical)):



Energy companies, for example, have traditionally hidden behind hedges to carry out their mischief. These are not the leafy hedges prized by small children with catapults. The hedges the energy companies lurk behind are financial. So what are these financial hedges about?

There are legitimate reasons to take shelter behind a financial hedge. For example, the average refrigerator contains 123 pounds of steel. When a fridge manufacturer publishes a catalogue of prices for the next year, it wants to be sure the cost of the steel it uses doesn't shoot up leaving it making losses on the fridges it sells (or having to randomly hike their prices). The fridge maker can hedge this risk by contracting to buy all the steel up front, but only to be delivered and paid for at various times in the future during the year (a "futures contract"). The steel can be delivered to the fridge factory monthly, just in time for it to be fashioned into that month's quota of fridges.

As a result of the hedging the fridge manufacturer won't suffer if the actual price of steel goes up, but neither will it benefit if the actual price of the steel goes down. It will just pay the price it agreed when it signed up to the futures contract hedge.

Energy companies, who generate and sell electricity and gas to households and industry, can also 'hedge' their purchases of the fuels they use: oil; gas; coal; uranium.

In January 2016 David Cameron complained again about energy companies, scolding them for not cutting their household bills at a time oil prices had plummeted. 18 months before Cameron's passing winge, in June 2014 Mr. Dermot Nolan, CEO of OFGEM, wrote a “letter calling on large energy suppliers to explain the impact of falling wholesale prices on customer bills.”


This resulted in a series of "Dear Dermot" letters. The Big Six consensus being that due to hedging it would be at least 18 months before wholesale prices would have any impact on retail energy bills to households and businesses. Scottish Power stated in its letter:

"Dear Dermot,....
we buy our fuel ahead in order to avoid price shocks from instability in the wholesale markets. This means that movements in wholesale spot markets up or down, are not immediately passed into our cost base: the majority of our energy for 2014 was bought before the start of the year. Unfortunately, the energy we are mainly buying now – for delivery in 2015 and later – is not falling much in price.”


The energy companies thought the drop in oil prices would be temporary. They thought oil prices would surely be back up well within 18 months. In its own Dear Dermot letter, NPower said:
 
"Dear Dermot...
The primary reason for the fall in [wholesale] prices is the exceptionally mild winter we have had" [i.e. the winter of 2013-14].

Low prices caused by the exceptionally mild winter in 2013-14? They never for a moment thought the price would still be low 18 months later, blowing away their 18 month deep smokescreen and ripping off all the 18 veils they were prancing behind.

To better understand what they were talking about, take a look at the graph below of the price of a futures contract to deliver crude oil in January 2016. The price of a barrel of oil delivered to your power station in January 2016 depended on when you bought your futures contract:
  • If you bought the futures contract in 2013 it would have cost around US$95.  
  • If you bought the same contract in mid 2014 it would have cost about US$100. 
  • From mid 2014 the price crashed. 
  • In January 2015 the price was down to US$60. 
  • By the middle of 2015 this futures contract for delivery of oil in January 2016 was down to US$50. For the remainder of 2015 the price continued to fall towards US$40.
https://www.quandl.com/data/ICE/BF2016-Brent-Crude-Futures-January-2016-BF2016

The next graph shows the price of futures contracts for delivery of oil in July 2017.
https://www.quandl.com/data/ICE/BN2017-Brent-Crude-Futures-July-2017-BN2017
With prices so low, the energy companies should be filling their boots with oil futures for as far into the future as possible. They should be promising households and employers much lower energy bills for at least 18 months. Sadly, past experience shows when oil prices go up households and employers will pay more pretty quickly.

Oil prices will go back up. The price can be moved on the whim of a small group of men in countries round the World not subject to shareholders nor democracy nor supply nor demand. Just as energy companies claim to have been stuck with high prices for 18 months after prices crashed, they should also be stuck with low prices for 18 months after the oil price rebounds.

Will our household energy bills stay low for that 18 months? OFGEM did once try to expose the energy companies' shenanigans by publishing wholesale and retail prices. However, they were quickly slapped down, presumably by OFGEM's political masters. The Daily Mail reported in January 2016:
"Power giants have won a secret battle to hide the scale of the profits they are making by refusing to cut prices.

Money Mail can reveal that last April the energy watchdog was bullied into ditching data that show whether households are getting a good deal.

These vital figures used to be published monthly. They showed the difference between what power firms were paying [wholesale] to supply energy to your home and what they were charging you on your bill."


Dear Dermot, OFGEM CEO, responded to the Mail's allegation saying it's not true any secret deal was done. Dermot completely avoided the question of why OFGEM stopped publishing these figures.

History shows that when oil prices go up consumer energy prices go up straight away. But when oil prices go down, even when they collapse, consumer energy prices just trickle down. In February 2016, following the oil price crash 18 months earlier, energy companies reduced prices by a puny 5%.

Whichever way oil goes the energy companies continue business as usual, barely able to stifle their chuckles. They are confident that those who can do something won't, and those who want to do something can't.

Which leaves poor old OFGEM standing impotently by looking to British consumers very much like buffoons.


Share This

Follow Us

  • Subscribe via Email

Search Us