Brexit has well and truly begun!

[Venturi Swirl]

Brexit partly responsible for the collapse of FlyBmi

A Flybmi spokesman said: "It is with a heavy heart that we have made this unavoidable announcement.
"The airline has faced several difficulties, including recent spikes in fuel and carbon costs, the latter arising from the EU's recent decision to exclude UK airlines from full participation in the Emissions Trading Scheme.
"Current trading and future prospects have also been seriously affected by the uncertainty created by the Brexit process, which has led to our inability to secure valuable flying contracts in Europe.

[Venturi Swirl]

He still has the right to an opinion, just like anyone else who uses tax avoidance measures.

So have I - he’s a hypocrite and scoundrel IMO. 

[Venturi Swirl]

Don't we actually need more hypocrites and scoudrels like him... How many jobs has he created....how many people iwe their livlihood to his company

Perhaps we should let him carry on being based in his beloved post-Brexit Britain by letting him off paying any taxes at all as a mark of the country’s gratitude.  Same goes for all Brexit businessmen, eh?

The phrase “rats deserting a sinking ship” springs to mind...

[Mr Gray]

Perhaps we should let him carry on being based in his beloved post-Brexit Britain by letting him off paying any taxes at all as a mark of the country’s gratitude.  Same goes for all Brexit businessmen, eh?

No he should abide by the rules that apply to everyone.... Entrepreneurs should be encouraged

[Carana]

Another Brexiteer hypocrite and scoundrel


“Britain’s richest man, Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who was knighted less than a year ago for his services to business and investment, has been planning to avoid up to £4bn in tax after switching his home and his fortune to Monaco.

The Sunday Times can disclose that the prominent Brexiteer, who built up the chemicals giant Ineos, has been working with the accountant PwC on the tax avoidance plan. This would see him and senior executives Andy Currie and John Reece legally share between £1bn and £10bn tax-free, depriving the Treasury of between £400m and £4bn”.

Now that's interesting. I posted the bbcqt clip of a small businesswoman who was going to have to move some of ther operations out of the country, and JRM's "answer" was that Ineo found EU regulations too strict. Ineo produces chemicals... and yes, EU regulations, which the UK contributed to making, are hopefully strict.

But there's also the crack-down on tax avoidance...

[Venturi Swirl]

No he should abide by the rules that apply to everyone.... Entrepreneurs should be encouraged

How would it be for the country if all successful entrepreneurs and business people followed his (perfectly legal) example and relocated their tax affairs to Monaco or elsewhere? 
Do you seriously not see anything at all hypocritical in his decision or particularly fishy in the timing of his decision? 

[G-Unit]

So have I - he’s a hypocrite and scoundrel IMO.

So what? The sincere and saintly may be wtong and he may be right; his character isn't relevant.

[Venturi Swirl]

So what? The sincere and saintly may be wtong and he may be right; his character isn't relevant.

I think it is, in the same way you get all emosh about the “hypocrites and scoundrels” amongst our MPs.  You can’t have it both ways in this discussion, IMO.

[Venturi Swirl]

So what? The sincere and saintly may be wtong and he may be right; his character isn't relevant.

His character may not be relevant but his actions are, and they stink to high heaven, IMO. 

[Eleanor]

What's not clear is which country (home or host) is responsible.

I haven't looked into the "job-seeker" benefit system.

However, at least in terms of medical insurance, if I were to move to France without a job, I'd have to prove that I already had medical coverage.

What normally happens, AFAIK, is that you register with your host country, you get the equivalent of an NHS card, and your home country reimburses any cost.

I had read that an EU citizen could claim e.g. unemployment benefit due by the home country, which is in reality  transferred to the host one. I'm not 100% certain of that, but I think that was the gist of what I'd read.

The UK reimburses 80%.  You have to pay insurance for the remaining 20%.  So far, I have cost The UK nothing at all.

[Mr Gray]

Perhaps we should let him carry on being based in his beloved post-Brexit Britain by letting him off paying any taxes at all as a mark of the country’s gratitude.  Same goes for all Brexit businessmen, eh?

The phrase “rats deserting a sinking ship” springs to mind...

The rats as far as I am concerned are those who have moved their production to eastern europe at the cost of UK jobs........he is stil providing a livlihood for UK citizens...

[Venturi Swirl]

It seems that Leavers disagree with the concept of freedom of movement for EU nationals if they are ordinary working men and women but applaud it if they are super rich.  I like to think that if I had voted Leave I would not blindly support the actions of every prominent Brexiteer just for the sake of it. What Brexit supporting Dyson and the appropriately named Ratcliffe  have done by relocating their billions to Singapore and Morocco is signallied their contempt for the working men and women in this country whose lives will IMO be made poorer as a result of the agendas they have been championing.  By all means go, it’s a free world (well to those who can afford it) but don’t preach to the rest of us about the costs to the country of freedom of movement and then take your billions out of the country.  It’s deeply hypocritical IMO.

[Mr Gray]

It seems that Leavers disagree with the concept of freedom of movement for EU nationals if they are ordinary working men and women but applaud it if they are super rich.  I like to think that if I had voted Leave I would not blindly support the actions of every prominent Brexiteer just for the sake of it. What Brexit supporting Dyson and the appropriately named Ratcliffe  have done by relocating their billions to Singapore and Morocco is signallied their contempt for the working men and women in this country whose lives will IMO be made poorer as a result of the agendas they have been championing.  By all means go, it’s a free world (well to those who can afford it) but don’t preach to the rest of us about the costs to the country of freedom of movement and then take your billions out of the country.  It’s deeply hypocritical IMO.

It's quite simple.... We need entrepreneurs who create jobs for working people... We don't need Romanian Big Issue sellers, who seem to have forced UK citizens out.... And we don't need Albanian gangsters... Posing as Kosovans

[Carana]

It's quite simple.... We need entrepreneurs who create jobs for working people... We don't need Romanian Big Issue sellers, who seem to have forced UK citizens out.... And we don't need Albanian gangsters... Posing as Kosovans

What's a "big issue seller"?

[Carana]

Brexit would allow our government to decide who gets which benefits, when and why. At the moment EU law forces us to pay child benefits and child tax credits for children who have never set foot in this country. A figure of up to £36 million oer year has been quoted. Two thirds of that money goes to Poland.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/oct/23/child-benefit-payments-outside-uk

There are also 900,000 Polish-born people living in the UK. Those with children will also get the benefits, along with healthcare, education ad social housing.. A total of 900,000 UK citizens live long-term in other EU countries and I'm pretty sure they're not in Poland.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poles_in_the_United_Kingdom

So the UK appears to be saving Poland a lot of money, as are other prosperous EU countries. I don't have a problem with these arrangements if;

The UK really does need these people to work here.
The UK didn't keep using 'austerity' as a reason for making the poor poorer.
 

Snipped from the first article.

The Treasury defended the overseas payments, saying that they were obliged under European law, and pointed out that claims could only be made if at least one parent was working in the UK and paying National Insurance."These payments make up less than 0.5% of child benefit awards," added a Treasury spokesman.

In response, Patel said the EU law should be challenged. "This is about the sustainability of our welfare state and benefits system," she added.