I guess Vodafone is amongst the robber ...

... baron companies of the world that steal taxes from countries in which they operate.

Nicholas Shaxson in his "Treasure Islands" (£8.99 from Amazon), subtitled "Tax Havens and the Men Who Stole the World", explains what is wrong with global finance  ...

... he write, while many might dismiss tax havens as offshore homes for spivs, money-launderers and the odd celebrity, in fact they help big companies and the super-rich to avoid paying tax, tax that totals "$1000 billion" each year.

... that's a trillion dollars, a trillion dollars unspent in the countries that the wealth is created, a trillion dollars that should be underpinning the health and welfare of the little people who have no voice in this unjust world.

Update on my entry for yesterday ...

The dispute has severely dented India’s reputation as a safe place for foreign companies to do business. Many are facing similar tax cases that could be affected by the judgment, including Cadbury, GE, Vedanta, AT&T, Sanofi-Aventis and SABMiller. The companies declined to comment on the decision, although one representative said: "Clearly, it does provide some encouragement."

... recognise the household names that are siphoning off the taxes from India through the use of offshore tax havens or countries that give advantage to business.

Time to create a level playing field that includes "justice" in the rules of the game.

The bullshit that is both India and Vodafone, and ...

... throughout the world.

The narrative, courtesy The Times 21 Jan 2012, there is more if you pay the tariff £ .....

It has taken four years of fighting but last night Vodafone was celebrating a landmark legal victory after the Indian Supreme Court ruled that it would not have to pay a £3.1 billion tax bill.

The ruling centred on Vodafone’s £7.1 billion acquisition of Hutchison Whampoa’s majority stake in Hutchison Essar in 2007 and was declared a “thumping judgment” by Harish Salve, the company’s lawyer. It is expected to open up the region to more foreign investment.

The Indian Government had claimed that it was owed tax because the assets bought had been bought in India. Vodafone argued that both the buyer and seller were based overseas and the deal had been conducted via offshore holding companies. It also said that, since it was the buyer of the asset, it should not be liable for a tax on the profits from the sale.

The Supreme Court ruled yesterday that “Indian tax authorities had no jurisdiction to tax Vodafone”.

The Supreme Court of India is of course a Logical Ass.

My reasoning relates not to ownership, but to location, if a business is located in Delhi, then the business as an asset should be taxed in Delhi, without exception.

This type of nonsense occurs in the UK, an offshore company owns assets and pays little or no tax because of domicile.  If politicians were not spineless creatures, there would be an alternative Davos where such practices would be by common agreement outlawed throughout the world, there is no logic in failing to tax a process other than where the process happens.  If you sell it here you pay the taxes here ...... simple.

If companies are able to avoid paying taxes to the country it creates its wealth, then the politics of that country is probably corrupt, if the politics is suspect might not its Supreme Court be also suspect, there is an enormous smell wafting from the East.  But it is not just from the East that smells waft, our very own tax collectors let the very same Vodafone off the hook to the tune of a £6bn tax bill, we need to remember the efforts our very own HMRC are using to claw back taxes from the little people of Britain.

Update ........ Britain’s balance is shifting towards ....

... the South and East. The City now gets what it wants, or Stay or go, Scotland’s power is on the wane ... thus wrote William Rees-mogg (The Times 20 Jan 2012), read it in full here £.

For those without a subscription, the former Editor of The Times (1967 to 1981) sums up by writing :

Power in Britain is moving south and east, not north and west. The independence of Scotland is a secondary element in a shift that is already under way. One should not mention it, but the embarrassing fact is that Boris, rather than Alex, is the future. As far as the English are concerned, Scotland is a country that is completely free to make its own choice between independence or sticking with the good old UK. Power is going to London, which makes the money, not to Scotland, which spends it.

........... no doubt he thinks the same of Wales, should we be telling our children to follow Dick Whittington and go east to London town in search of a future ?


Update Groundskeeper Willie wrote in response to a Scottish blog conversation ...

January 2012 19:28 EyeEdinburgh said ... 'a referendum that has a clear democratic mandate.' The turnout was 50%. Of that 45% voted SNP. The SNP manifesto didn't mention a two question referendu. It didn't mention changing the voting rules to include 16 and 17 year olds. The SNP's mandate, such as it is, is to have a one question referendum, for adults. No one would object to that. No one other than the SNP. They know they would lose such a referendum and Salmond knows he'll be left high and dry, like a beached whale, with no hope of seeing independence in his lifetime.

Interesting times we live in ............

Salmond 1 - Democracy Zero, and all ...

... because ...

Salmond, aka Scotland's Governor General, "has said the SNP government in Edinburgh does not need legal authority to proceed", proceed with a referendum.

Is he right ?

Of course not, no national or regional government is above the law, even where it makes the law, and the law says "constitutional matters" are reserved to Westminster.  But being wrong is trumped each time in Salmonds' game of chance when he plays the "Scotland the Brave" wildcard.

The answer to our Scottish poltroon is difficult yet simple, it is to give the Scots no alternative, Westminster should announce "severance talks this summer following the Olympic Games in London", bypass the referendum, explain to the Scots that there are far more important issues than the politics of "Nationalist Scotland".

And the logic, if Salmond fails to get his perverse way he will continue to trump the politics of the Union with "Scotland the Brave", but without the rule of law Democracy has lost, Westminster must let its partner go, there is no logical answer to a trump card.  Britain, get used to the name, cannot afford the distraction that Salmond and Co. brings to the table.

Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland ...

.... Margaret Curran, said she believed it was not right to create "second-class MPs" based on "which part of the UK they come from, or because they come from Scotland".


She added: "To understand this issue properly, we need to understand the nature of devolution"


"Every person elected to the House of Commons has a responsibility not just to their constituents, but to the UK as a whole"

"That is a fundamental principle of devolution that decisions are taken in the right places to reflect our different nations that make up the UK, but that our House of Commons operates together as a country. It strengthens Scotland and I think it strengthens the whole UK."

Would the SoS expect the SNP to do anything other than exclude the UK from its thoughts, I don't ...

Salmond, her part in his ...

... downfall.

... or "Wee Eck" gets his knickers in a twist..........

If ... I don't think so Carwyn, it is ...

... a done deal. The "if", well it is the if in ...

".... if Scotland became independent, the relationship between Wales and the rest of the UK would have to change ..."

... where he was speaking on the Sunday Politics programme.

The done deal is of course the "referendum", the outcome is particularly irrelevant, the very fact that "Politics Scotland" has begun the process of divorce, makes it imperative the other partners in this seemingly unhappy marriage begin an urgent process to rearrange the marriage (constitution) to produce a fair world that everyone can sit at ease with each other.

Assume the worse, a reconciliation shouldn't effect the need for change, if Scotland decided not not move on their legacy should be a fair constitution for the majority.

If Carwyn is the statesman he likes to project, he might call a constitutional convention with the other parties, not as an antagonist, but as a bridge builder, and top of his list of objectives would be to gain a sense of worth for the element without a devolved administration, England is as important as the other parts of our Britain.

Myself, I will still keep the party hats ready for the big day .............