Cable Forum - UK & EU Agree Post-Brexit Trade Deal

The quote is about what the UK already had in place BEFORE the EU directive.
Still waiting for concrete examples of differences and loopholes that are there currently and will exist after the directive is implemented as of 1st Jan 2020.The bill as a whole is 7 pages long.

EgMassive detailed changes required.:rolleyes:

You are the one who keeps linking to the article that says “primarily”. Earlier you claimed it was solely of an administrative nature which is clearly not true - otherwise it would have said that and left no doubt over the matter.

nomadking

11-11-2019 21:31

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36016880)

It's still ALL TRUE about what the UK already has in place, BEFORE any directive comes into force. Your contention is that there are loopholes and still will be after the directive is implemented.

Still absolutely no examples of material differences and loopholes.

Hugh	11-11-2019 22:10

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion

https://fullfact.org/online/brexit-n...hore-accounts/

Quote:

In practice, this aims to tackle large companies shifting profits from the EU country in which they were made to a country with a lower tax rate or “preferential” rules. This could be another EU country, or a non-EU country.

So these policies are about tightening up “systemic issues” to do with tax law in EU countries, to make it harder for companies to practice what the EU calls “aggressive tax planning”.

Most of these policies are already in place

Three of the five provisions of the new tax avoidance directive are already in place, with EU countries (including the UK) having to adopt them by 31 December 2018.

HMRC told us that the new EU rules on interest restriction and the general anti-abuse rule led to no changes in the UK, because the UK’s existing rules already met or exceeded the minimum standards set.

There were some minor changes made to controlled foreign companies rules, but none were expected to have any significant impact on individuals or the economy.

The two EU provisions not yet in place are on exit tax and hybrid mismatches. The UK must meet the EU’s new standards on these by the start of 2020.

HMRC told us the exit tax rules would lead to two “minor” changes.

Mick	14-11-2019 18:24

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion

BREAKING: EU to bring Legal case against UK over failure to name new EU Commissioner...

https://news.sky.com/story/eu-legal-...ioner-11861369

Oh you cretinous and corrupt fools, just chuck us out, we the 17.4 Million of us, won't care.

papa smurf

14-11-2019 18:27

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36017140)

Surely that would be up to the next government to choose after the election.

OLD BOY

14-11-2019 18:32

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36017140)

I've said it before. We should nominate Nigel Farage, which should ensure that they don't grant us any more extensions.

Mick	14-11-2019 18:43

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36017141)

Surely that would be up to the next government to choose after the election.

The Johnson government had apparently said it was unable to, under UK law to nominate a new EU Commissioner because the UK was in the lead-up to general election but let's not forget, one of the main reasons for wanting to leave this rat invested corrupt EU entity, is that the European Commission has repeatedly pointed out that EU law trumps domestic law of their Member States.

Carth

14-11-2019 20:15

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36017143)

I've said it before. We should nominate Nigel Farage, which should ensure that they don't grant us any more extensions.

or we could appoint Jeremy Clarkson, seeing as he never did get the PM job :D

nomadking

14-11-2019 20:38

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36017145)

Not in every aspect of UK law, and certainly not (yet) anything to do with national or local elections.

1andrew1

15-11-2019 08:03

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36017143)

I've said it before. We should nominate Nigel Farage, which should ensure that they don't grant us any more extensions.

They would give us unlimited extensions just to see the look on his face!

Hugh	15-11-2019 09:42

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36017143)

I've said it before. We should nominate Nigel Farage, which should ensure that they don't grant us any more extensions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36017188)

They would give us unlimited extensions just to see the look on his face!

It’s OK - he wouldn’t turn up to the meetings, just claim his salary and expenses... ;)

jonbxx

15-11-2019 12:13

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36017140)

Let's get ourselves chucked out for failing to comply with an international agreements requirements. Then we can set up new international agreements that we will 100% comply with (we promise)

Carth

15-11-2019 12:25

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by jonbxx (Post 36017234)

Let's get ourselves chucked out for failing to comply with an international agreements requirements. Then we can set up new international agreements that we will 100% comply with (we promise)

We're not out yet, but I understand we aren't allowed to attend certain meetings and discussions . . they started it :D

Mr K	15-11-2019 12:28

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36017236)

We're not out yet, but I understand we aren't allowed to attend certain meetings and discussions . . they started it :D

Err no, we started it !

nomadking

15-11-2019 12:33

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by jonbxx (Post 36017234)

Let's get ourselves chucked out for failing to comply with an international agreements requirements. Then we can set up new international agreements that we will 100% comply with (we promise)

You mean like the EU treaty that specifies that Article 50 and the WA is to be a transitional agreement and therefore can't include anything like the backstop? And allegedly against WTO rules. To begin with, NI becomes a different customs territory as it will have different customs rules and tariffs.
Link

Quote:

Fifteen countries, including the US, India and New Zealand, have been setting out Brexit concerns at a World Trade Organization (WTO) meeting in Geneva.
...
Brazil has raised another concern about the plans for customs procedures between Northern Ireland and Great Britain.
Brazilian officials said it could violate the WTO's rules against discrimination.

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 00:26.

Page 127 of 369

127

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page