RonJeremy Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 yeah but i blame the immigrants Or the french - why not the french? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donuticus Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Because selling the shares in great quantities would devalue them. Supply and demand. Anyway if they are shareholders, then we will be receiving dividends from them. I never thought of that. I suppose if lots of something becomes available then those buying can negotiate a bulk discount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Disingenuous. Barclays would have collapsed had public money not been pumped into the system. It's not speculative to guess that future bank investors would be more careful if they saw their predecessors lose everything. I think that's right. John Varley the previous cheif executive admitted as much in an interview posted here http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/business_money/did+barclays+benefit+from+bailout+measures/3293597.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonJeremy Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 I think that's right. John Varley the previous cheif executive admitted as much in an interview posted here http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/business_money/did+barclays+benefit+from+bailout+measures/3293597.html Read that. Supports my point (post 61) on catashtrophe for the UK. Nothing else Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Corporation tax is to be reduced 4 percentage points... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigthumb Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 I never thought of that. I suppose if lots of something becomes available then those buying can negotiate a bulk discount. Very true. I remember some one eyed Scottish git did that with our gold reserves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ned Ludd Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 Oh Dear No wonder the country is in the <REMOVED> when so may people think that Barclays are being victimised at a time when NHS Trusts axe front line staff and beds and freeze non-urgent surgery leaving Operating theatres (and staff)under used, when staff pension schemes are closed, pay is frozen whilst inflation hits 5%, energy prices go spiral upwards etc The bottom line is that Barclays pay a mere 1% Corporation Tax on BRITISH based trading as a result of legal tax-dodging. Small British companies pay 20% + . The difference being that Barclays is the tail that wags the dog Oh and George Osborne still wants to cut Corporation Tax.......... I suppose he can raise VAT again to cover the costs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iansheff Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 I just read this article (link below) apparently a whistle blower said in 2009 their job was to avoid tax by moving money to offshore companies in places like the Cayman Islands in the Caribbean. It was lead by Roger Jenkins nicknamed Roger the Dodger in the City who has since left his £40million-a-year post. The anonymous informant refused to go public with his claims so no further action could be taken. http://www.people.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/2011/02/20/fury-as-barclays-pays-just-1-per-cent-corporation-tax-on-profits-of-11billion-102039-22935909/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxy lady Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 I think it would probably be best all round if all the banks moved their head offices out of London and moved abroad. That way they when they did their job of avoiding tax it would probably be the Swiss who lost out, and as the banks would take most of the fat cats who pick up £2million bonuses, the Swiss would have the job of collecting their £million tax bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonJeremy Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 I think it would probably be best all round if all the banks moved their head offices out of London and moved abroad. That way they when they did their job of avoiding tax it would probably be the Swiss who lost out, and as the banks would take most of the fat cats who pick up £2million bonuses, the Swiss would have the job of collecting their £million tax bills. everyone avoids tax. Perhaps everyone could leave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.