HSBC Move To Hong Kong 'Likely'

[Chrysalis]

I dont have a personal pension. When I was investing in one tho I picked the low risk option that didnt involve shares (had a choice). As buying shares is a gamble and there is no divine right to profit on them.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

HSBC paid tax on its profits made in the UK, as is right. These form a small part of its profits and will be mostly erased by these regulations if they remain here.

Contrary to the opinion of UKUncut companies pay tax where they make the profits.

---------- Post added at 19:28 ---------- Previous post was at 19:25 ----------

I'm not some hardcore capitalist, I just think HSBC have every right to consider changing their domicile and to seek concessions to make them reconsider, and am somewhat surprised they haven't already moved.

I'd love to see them operating out of China, I wonder what would've happened to them if this had happened there, my money's on a show trial, bullet to the head and a quick harvesting of organs and I'm sure they have considered that.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

I'd love to see them operating out of China, I wonder what would've happened to them if this had happened there, my money's on a show trial, bullet to the head and a quick harvesting of organs and I'm sure they have considered that.

I doubt it, I'm sure they actually had the relatively laissez faire nature of China's rule of Hong Kong on their mind.

As a reminder Hong Kong is a Special Administrative Region with a high level of autonomy from the PRC.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

I dont have a personal pension. When I was investing in one tho I picked the low risk option that didnt involve shares (had a choice). As buying shares is a gamble and there is no divine right to profit on them.

Well the fact remains that the vast majority of private pension funds embrace investments in major companies which include the large banks and a great many people's pension pots rely on their performance.


ps. If you don't have a pension, I'd like to know what you're expecting to live on in the future which doesn't involve a gamble of some sort. Come on, let us into the secret of risk free investment..

[Chrysalis]

Nothing is zero risk, but there is certianly lower risk options than shares.

As I said people do need a reality check, how some shareholders act is like me putting £10 in a fruit machine and then demanding a refund when I dont win the jackpot.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

Nothing is zero risk, but there is certianly lower risk options than shares.

As I said people do need a reality check, how some shareholders act is like me putting £10 in a fruit machine and then demanding a refund when I dont win the jackpot.

I think you have to differentiate between major shareholders like Standard Life, Legal and General etc. who own vast swathes of these companies and smaller private investors who whinge when their shares go down but forget about it when they're on the up. Unless you're an experienced trader or employ a broker to actively manage a portfolio, owning shares is best kept a long term game involving a spread of good companies with a proven track record in staple sectors. Of course there's always a risk but with inflation at the level it is and interest rates where they are, 'safe' deposits (which are only 'guaranteed' up to £85k in a given institution) are guaranteed to be losing you money which is one reason why the markets have gone up.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

I dont have a personal pension. When I was investing in one tho I picked the low risk option that didnt involve shares (had a choice). As buying shares is a gamble and there is no divine right to profit on them.

I however have two personal pensions, I quite like the idea of leaving my daughter an inheritance rather than a debt paying for my retirement and healthcare.

Both are invested aggressively for now and will be toned down in risk as time goes on.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

I doubt it, I'm sure they actually had the relatively laissez faire nature of China's rule of Hong Kong on their mind.

As a reminder Hong Kong is a Special Administrative Region with a high level of autonomy from the PRC.

Yeah we saw how laissez faire they were when they took control with the tens of thousands of troops rolling in, make no mistake they screw up and their nature will be anything but laissez faire...

[Ignitionnet]

No chance, would scare away companies from investing in Hong Kong and in turn mainland China and China quite likes money.