Farmer jailed in Hong Kong for burning flag

A man has been jailed in Hong Kong for burning the national flag, in the first sentence of its kind.

S Korea suspends savings banks citing weak finances

South Korea has suspended seven local savings banks citing the weak state of their finances.

Japan urges mass evacuation ahead of Typhoon Roke

More than a million people in central and western Japan have been urged to leave their homes as a powerful typhoon approaches.

Burma begins swap scheme for cars over 40 years old

Owners of some of Burma's most antiquated cars have been queuing in Rangoon to exchange their old vehicles for permits to import newer models.

Polio strain spreads to China from Pakistan

Polio has spread to China for the first time since 1999 after being imported from Pakistan, the World Health Organization (WHO) has confirmed.

Showing posts with label Losing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Losing. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 5, 2011

Insight: America's rich losing tussle with taxman

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
A luxury car is parked on Monte Carlo Casino square in Monaco, which is lit for holiday season, December 7, 2010. REUTERS/Eric Gaillard

1 of 5. A luxury car is parked on Monte Carlo Casino square in Monaco, which is lit for holiday season, December 7, 2010.

Credit: Reuters/Eric Gaillard

By Chris Vellacott

LONDON/NEW YORK | Fri Sep 30, 2011 12:51pm EDT

LONDON/NEW YORK (Reuters) - When Irish rockers U2 took to the main stage at this year's Glastonbury music festival, a small but vocal group of activists raised a large balloon emblazoned with the words "U Pay Tax 2?"

Most people in the 60,000-strong crowd barely noticed the stunt on a rain-lashed night, but the world's media latched on to the protest and gave it prominent mention in their reports of the eagerly awaited performance by one of rock and roll's biggest acts.

Years ago the band transferred some of its assets from Ireland to the Netherlands, as did members of the Rolling Stones, prompting the New York Times to label the Netherlands "The New Tax Shelter Hot Spot."

U2's music triumphed on that muddy June night, but the tax habits of the world's super-rich have since become a hot topic.

Cash-strapped western governments are on the offensive against their own elites. Wealth taxes are up, loopholes are being closed and crackdowns on offshore havens and Swiss bank accounts are gaining momentum.

"Flogging the rich always becomes a national sport in times of crisis," says Catherine Tillotson, managing partner at consultancy Scorpio Partnership.

Some super-rich are volunteering funds: billionaires Warren Buffett and L'Oreal SA heiress Liliane Bettencourt recently made statements offering to shoulder more of the tax burden.

In the United States, President Barack Obama has called for a new minimum tax called the "Buffett Rule" for American households that make more than $1 million annually. A recent USA Today/Gallup poll showed 66 percent of Americans support increasing income taxes for wealthy individuals.

Proposed changes to the U.S. tax code may not materialize soon -- the proposal is a "political statement and not a serious legislative proposal," said Scott A. Hodge, president of Washington-based research group the Tax Foundation.

But the debate and recent moves have underlined a longstanding truth: it is much harder for wealthy Americans to avoid taxes than for their European counterparts.

"You are definitely better off not being American," said John Christensen, director at Tax Justice Network, which campaigns against tax havens.

NO ESCAPE

U.S. citizens are liable to U.S. tax wherever they are in the world, making it virtually impossible for them to become legal tax exiles -- a possibility open to Europeans, many of whom have set up home in tax havens like Monaco and Britain's Channel Islands.

Americans cannot even escape these obligations by renouncing their citizenship, says Sydney E. Unger, a partner in the tax department of New York law firm Kaye Scholer LLP.

"If you want to renounce...you have to file tax returns for (the) last five years, and there is now an imposed exit tax. If you have a lot of assets, you have to pay tax on them as if you had sold them," he said.

Since the 2008 financial crisis, tax advocates say, America has been very effective at cracking down on illegal tax-dodging by people who take cover under banking secrecy rules to hide their fortunes in offshore financial centers like Switzerland.

"The U.S. has been chasing banks. They have an awful lot of data and they've been arresting people, charging them and indicting them -- very publicly indicting them and their lawyers. It's a very robust response and it's had a remarkable effect," said Christensen.

In 2009, a U.S. investigation into UBS resulted in a $780 million fine for the Swiss bank, which agreed to disclose more than 4,000 U.S. client names to the Internal Revenue Service and Justice Department.

Other European-based banks, including Credit Suisse and HSBC, and some of their clients, have more recently come under scrutiny in American probes.

Indeed, some banks have found offering offshore banking services to Americans such a regulatory headache that they stopped taking Americans on. HSBC's private bank said earlier this year it would no longer cater to American millionaires outside the United States.

"There are very few tax shelters left," says Martin Goldblum, chairman of the tax department at the New York law firm Troy Gould, which services super-rich clients.

LAST BASTION FALLS

The last real bastion of U.S. tax avoidance closed on September 9, the final day of an IRS tax amnesty window for Americans to declare foreign bank accounts.

This program, the second since 2009, allowed individuals who had not properly disclosed accounts and income earned abroad since 2003 to come clean, pay up their back taxes and penalties and file correctly in future.

The IRS said that as of September it had collected $2.7 billion from thousands of U.S. taxpayers. Among them were immigrants who kept holdings in their mother countries, people in the entertainment industry who earned money internationally, people with vacation homes in foreign countries and even some cases of people who had inherited accounts of which they were previously unaware.

Kaye Scholer's Unger stressed that these were often the reasons some Americans hadn't declared such income, countering a perception that all tax evasion was intentional and criminal.

"There's this feeling that it's only people who are trying to hide their money," he said. "On one of these accounts, I told the IRS agent, 'The reason they didn't tell you about the account is that they didn't know about it.'"

His client had inherited a $2 million account from a relative who had left Europe after surviving the Holocaust, and received a letter from UBS saying that as part of an investigation, the bank might release the names of U.S.-based account holders. That client ended up with a reduced penalty of 5 percent, or about $100,000, rather than the 20-25 percent typically charged.

"You can never say he's happy about that penalty," said Unger. "He came to the conclusion that these were the rules. He had an account at UBS. He didn't know if his name would be turned in. He wanted to clear things up and go forward with his life."

The highest penalty Unger has dealt with so far was $870,000, on an account of $4.35 million.

BRITISH BOLTHOLE

Billionaires in Europe -- and in Britain particularly -- can find it easier to escape the taxman's grasp.

Britain has the world's fifth-largest number of millionaires after the United States, Japan, Germany and China according to research published in June by Merrill Lynch and Capgemini.

But attempts by governments in Europe and Britain to crack down on tax evasion since the financial crisis have been noticeably gentler than those of the United States.

"The UK authorities are understaffed and don't have the latest technology," said the Tax Justice Network's Christensen.

In August, Switzerland and the UK did a deal to tax funds kept by British residents in secret Swiss bank accounts. It targeted just 5 billion pounds ($7.8 billion) in extra tax revenue, which critics say is a tiny fraction of what could be clawed back if the real extent of undeclared money was revealed.

"It's shocking. It's shabby," said Christensen.

Ronnie Ludwig, a partner in the private client team at accountants Saffery Champness, agreed the UK could have gone further if it was engaged in more vigorous pursuit.

"The actual figure that could come in ... would be significantly higher," he said.

The UK also permits residents with an often tenuous link to a foreign country to remain 'non domiciled' for tax purposes, which means they are not liable for money accumulated abroad, as long as it stays overseas.

This 'non-dom' status has helped turn London into an effective tax haven for thousands of rich foreigners, from Russian and Arab oil billionaires to global industrialists who earn most of their wealth outside the UK.

London's community of super-rich foreign-born residents includes Roman Abramovich, the Russian owner of Chelsea football club, and metals magnate Lakshmi Mittal, CEO of ArcelorMittal.

The UK has made an effort to force non-doms to pay more tax. In 2008, the Labour government which lost power last year said they should have their overseas wealth taxed or pay a 30,000 pounds ($47,036) levy after seven years' residence. In March the current government added a further 50,000 pounds after 12 years.

In the words of one financial adviser, the demand is laughable.

"What's the difference now for a Russian oligarch living in the UK? The 30,000 pounds tax? It's a joke ... For him, it's like five pounds for me," said the London-based adviser who specializes in super rich families but asked to remain anonymous because of the sensitivity of discussing his clients.

Efforts to target Britain's indigenous, and domiciled, millionaires have been more aggressive. In 2009, the Labour government announced a new top rate of income tax of 50 percent for people earning more than 150,000 pounds per year.

However, the nation's wealthy have lobbied for this to be reduced and a group of high profile economists urged Conservative finance minister George Osborne to ditch the 50 percent rate "at the earliest opportunity", in a letter to the Financial Times earlier this year.

Britain's Treasury has said that Osborne regards the tax as a "temporary measure" though the Conservative's junior partners in a ruling coalition, the Liberal Democrats, are resisting a cut in the top rate given the unhappiness of working and middle-class voters hit hardest by government austerity measures.

Whatever the American millionaire's tax burden, seeking alternative citizenship is not an option Kaye Scholer's Unger recommends to his clients: there are benefits to being a U.S. citizen that other nationalities, however rich, do not enjoy.

"If you get in trouble, will the Marines come bail you out?" he said.

($1 = 0.639 British Pounds)

(Additional reporting by Jilian Mincer and Beth Gladstone in New York and Mike Collett-White in London; Editing by Sara Ledwith and Sophie Walker)



View the original article here



Peliculas Online

Monday, September 26, 2011

10 States That Are Losing Business

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

Got jobs?

A few states can answer yes, as I explained in a companion piece on 10 states that are gaining business. But weak hiring has become a chronic national problem, and many states are losing businesses when they ought to be gaining them. New-business creation is one of THE key factors determining the unemployment rate, since young, growing firms typically hire more people than big or established companies. A depressed rate of new-business creation is one of the biggest reasons that unemployment remains high, and the economy weak.

[See 7 ways Obama can gain credibility on jobs.]

To determine which states seem to be losing businesses, I used data provided by economic consulting firm EMSI of Moscow, Idaho, showing business establishments per capita. Since the data control for population, they allow for comparisons between populous states like California and Texas and less populated ones like Rhode Island and Nevada. I was interested in each state's performance over the last few years, to account for the recent recession, so I measured the change in business establishments per capita from the beginning of 2008 through the end of 2010.

I also excluded states with an unemployment rate below the national average of 9.1 percent, because those states tend to be gaining population and businesses both, and outperforming the national economy. They may be gaining population faster than new businesses right now, but that could change as business creation improves. That took eight states off the list: Utah, Colorado, Minnesota, Vermont, Maine, Alaska, New Hampshire, and Maryland. That left the following 10 states as those with above-average unemployment and the worst rates of lost businesses:

Arizona. Businesses per person in 2008: 0.85; in 2010: 0.75. Unemployment rate: 9.4 percent. The housing bust has decimated the Arizona economy, with many lost businesses in construction and real estate.

[See how Rick Perry created jobs in Texas.]

Nevada. Businesses per person in 2008: 1; in 2010: 0.93. Unemployment rate: 12.9 percent. Like Arizona, Nevada is struggling with one of the worst housing busts in the country. The state also suffers from overbuilding in Las Vegas and sharp cutbacks in tourism since before the recession.

South Carolina. Businesses per person in 2008: 0.88; in 2010: 0.83. Unemployment rate: 10.9 percent. The old textile industry has all but disappeared, and depressed trade has hit the port city of Charleston. South Carolina has struggled to come up with replacement industries.

Idaho. Businesses per person in 2008: 1.22; in 2010: 1.18. Unemployment rate: 9.4 percent. Idaho has gained some technology businesses and benefited from entrepreneurs fleeing high-cost California. But that has been offset by losses in the lumber industry—closely tied to construction.

[See how the debt fiasco damaged the economy.]

Florida. Businesses per person in 2008: 1.15; in 2010: 1.1. Unemployment rate: 10.7 percent. Economic clouds have blanketed the Sunshine State, where the housing bust has been intense. For the first time in decades, Florida has suffered a net outflow of people.

Georgia. Businesses per person in 2008: 0.95; in 2010: 0.92. Unemployment rate: 10.1 percent. Overexuberant banks lent way too much money earlier in the decade. The sharp pullback in lending has soured business on the Peach State.

Alabama. Businesses per person in 2008: 0.85; in 2010: 0.83. Unemployment rate: 10 percent. Jefferson County, home to Birmingham, the state's biggest city, is on the verge of bankruptcy. Would you open a business there?

North Carolina. Businesses per person in 2008: 0.93; in 2010: 0.91. Unemployment rate: 10.1 percent. Charlotte-based Bank of America, one of the state's biggest employers, has been reeling. Tourism, another big part of the economy, is down too.

[See who will benefit from the slowing economy.]

Michigan. Businesses per person in 2008: 0.87; in 2010: 0.86. Unemployment rate: 10.9 percent. Detroit's automakers are back on their feet, but the dramatic downsizing of the auto industry has deeply hurt the Michigan economy.

Tennessee. Businesses per person in 2008: 0.77; in 2010: 0.76. Unemployment rate: 9.8 percent. Tennessee lost the former Saturn plant in Spring Hill, and is struggling due to slowdowns in auto production and other industrial activity elsewhere. That affects many small businesses dependent on bigger producers.

Twitter: @rickjnewman



View the original article here



Peliculas Online

Sunday, September 25, 2011

Bachmann, Romney Losing Media Battle to Perry

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

Tea Partyers helped put Michele Bachmann on the national map, so tonight's CNN/Tea Party Republican presidential debate could be an excellent place for her to regain lost ground. Polls show that Bachmann has lost substantial support over the last month, while Texas Gov. Rick Perry's popularity has skyrocketed. At the same time, data also shows, Bachmann andformer Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney have lost ground to him in the mainstream media.

Data compiled by the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism shows just how much Perry has taken over the national debate, at the expense of Bachmann and Romney. From the moment he announced his candidacy, Perry has received far more media attention than his fellow candidates. In a broad sample of news stories from print, broadcast, and online media studied by Pew, Bachmann and Romney have appeared nearly equally often as lead newsmakers in 2011 (through September 4), with 151 and 153 stories, respectively (in Pew's analysis, a "lead newsmaker" is a person present in 50 percent or more of a news story). Perry has received moderately less coverage, with 126 stories. However, Perry declared his candidacy on August 13, far later than Bachmann or Romney. Since his entry, he has been the lead newsmaker in 90 of Pew's stories, more than four times Romney's level of coverage (20 stories), and nearly seven times Bachmann's (13 stories).

See who Tim Pawlenty has endorsed in 2012

Media coverage of new presidential candidates tends to follow "an almost natural progression of events," says Mark Jurkowitz, associate director of Pew's journalism program. "The candidate explodes onto the scene, they essentially generate a significant amount of coverage if they show certain indices of viability," like successful fundraising and polling. "So the first thing the media tries to figure out if his person is a serious candidate or not, or has potential to be a serious candidate." After that, says Jurkowitz, "there kicks in another process, and that's the vetting process, particularly for candidates who aren't particularly well-known."

This process has played out differently for the biggest Republican candidates, and Bachmann's trajectory seems to have suffered the most during this process. Perry is still only one month into his candidacy and is only beginning to feel the in-depth scrutiny of media vetting. Romney, meanwhile, did not burst onto the scene in the way that Perry did, but as a 2008 top-tier Republican candidate also may not require the vetting that Perry will. "The press doesn't feel like it has to introduce Mitt Romney to the American public," says Jurkowitz.

Bachmann, however, was relatively well-known on a national scale prior to her presidential campaign, having made a name for herself as key Tea Party fixture and conservative firebrand. That image may have put her at a disadvantage in the current campaign. Much prior media coverage of Bachmann had focused on her propensity for making outrageous statements espousing what some consider to be extreme viewpoints. That preconstructed narrative, says Jurkowitz, is hard for the media to shake. "That would create the impression in many people, in many media quarters, that she's not going to be a likely successful presidential candidate, simply because of where she is in the ideological spectrum," he says.

Read about the economic battles that await Congress this fall.

And this is where the damaging circularity of media coverage and popularity comes in. "I think clearly the news media does have the effect of priming the attention that voters give to candidates," says Christopher Arterton, a professor of political management at The George Washington University's Graduate School of Political Management. "The press both follows and leads what's happening both in the polls and other indicators of candidate success."

In other words, to some extent, any publicity is good publicity. So Bachmann's key to regaining her footing with voters may be regaining her place in the spotlight. She does have a proven ability to attract the news media's attention, and with numerous economic battles awaiting on Capitol Hill this fall, Bachmann may have plenty of opportunities to make a media splash. For example, she seized on President Obama's jobs speech last week, as well as the lack of a formal Republican response, to hold a press conference at which she delivered her own reaction.



View the original article here



Peliculas Online