Jump to content

Phillip Dearden

Regulars
  • Posts

    458
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Phillip Dearden

Recent Profile Visitors

5,146 profile views

Phillip Dearden's Achievements

Apprentice

Apprentice (3/14)

  • Reacting Well Rare
  • Dedicated Rare
  • Very Popular Rare
  • First Post Rare
  • Collaborator Rare

Recent Badges

462

Reputation

  1. That article refers to properties on the IOM. Not IOM companies or IOM Bank Accounts. I think that if a property was acquired they would have to use an advocate and the advocate would have to be happy with the source of funds used to buy the properties. It is also possible that the article has left out details so that IOM companies or bank accounts were used. I can confirm that opening bank accounts for companies with non-resident owners does involve a lot of jumping through hoops.
  2. You still have not told us what you think.
  3. 2 big points here need addressing. 1. The economy is based on our tax position (agreed) and will therefore fail in 8 years. What happens in 2029 that spells curtains for the IOM? 2. How does joining the UK help. given that the economy is based on our tax position, becoming part of the UK will have a big and negative effect. We would become like a Hebridean Island, a few hundred crofters and some sheep. I do not deny that that the world is changing and that the advantages of being based in the IOM are under constant challenge and some of those advantages are chipped away at regularly. This does mean new types of business are needed and the Government needs to become more efficient but that was always the case. Perhaps you are BJ?
  4. Ann You throw out links and you make vague references but you consistently do not say what it is you believe or what you are trying to persuade us of. Until you actually make some kind of point no-one can either disagree or agree with you. As yet, all you have done is link us to some non-mainstream commentators and all that tells us is that there are some non-standard thinkers posting stuff on the internet. What is the point?
  5. I think its better that these discussions are out in the open. Also, we/I/you don't want to be accused of shutting down debate. Having said that, Ann still avoids telling us what she thinks and keeps producing links to non-mainstream thinking without telling us what her aim is. That's not really much of a debate, is it?
  6. I don't think this is right. I do agree that a dumb government can ruin the environment so that commercial business cannot function eg Venezuala or Zimbabwe. However, successful economies need wealth creating businesses (for us Financial Services and Gaming and a small contribution from manufacturing) and these need a suitable environment which means transport links, property rights, educated workforce, legal and technological infrastructure, employment law, stable money supply and exchange rate, low crime and so on - these all require a functioning government. Thus, a thriving economy is a partnership between businesses which produce wealth and government which creates the right environment for the businesses to thrive. I am not suggesting that the Isle of Man is perfect, far from it, I can think of many unresolved issues but the fact that the economy has done well for many years must mean that this partnership has been reasonably successful.
  7. If you know we are too impatient to read the article, perhaps you could summarise for us in a sentence or two. Given that the WHO believe that 204m people have caught the bug and 4.4m have died with or from it, is it really tyranny to offer a vaccine against it? Perhaps I don't understand the meaning of tyranny?
  8. You are still not telling us what your message is? The links are very interesting but I can't tell if you are trying to highlight that a small minority of the world believes in some very peculiar ideas or if you believe that we are being fooled and need to think again. If the former, your work is done. If the latter, you need to tell us what you think is happening and why and we can then ponder and consider as we see fit. To just throw out links is wasting everyone's time.
  9. What do you think about vaccination against Covid-19?
  10. I apologise if I am being obtuse and thank you for your "snippets" but I am still not clear what message you wish to convey? What are you trying to say to us?
  11. Good question. Ann, what are you trying to communicate to us?
  12. There are two. One looks like a USMC V-22 Osprey and one looks like a Beechcraft Texan Trainer. Both were practicing landing-runs, the Osprey also hovered over the runway. I think they were from RAF Valley but only because its close and they usually are.
  13. https://www.politico.eu/article/tim-berners-lee-i-dont-regret-creating-the-web-tim-berners-lee-web-summit-contract-for-the-web-lisbon/ Tim doesn't regret creating the WWW but he has spotted that it has the potential to cause polarised views. Isn't this the main point re the conspiracy promoters? There were always a minority with unusual and extreme views but they were isolated and easily dismissed. Now they can communicate with other like-minded people and the groups thus formed, reinforce each other's views. At the same time, their views are exposed to comment and opprobrium from the rest of the world. I am amazed at how many people can adopt views that are contrary to evidence that is easily available.
  14. Gladys makes a point and then provides the example that proves the point in so many ways. For normal UK domiciliaries, sheltering assets from tax in offshore companies has largely, not been effective for many years. There were small areas where an advantage was possible by putting a UK property in an offshore company. Over the last 10 years those opportunities have been closed down one at a time and in some cases, the structures previously used would now involve more tax than would be charged without the offshore structure. For example, offshore companies are now subject to CGT on the sale of UK property (previously non-residents were not generally subject to CGT) and where a non-dom (or trust he/she has created) holds a company which holds UK domestic property, IHT is still chargeable (used to be treated as foreign asset, shares, so that IHT not in point). There are gaps/loopholes but they are few and far between and, where there is doubt, the Courts these days are not sympathetic to aggressive schemes. In general, much less scope than there used to be.
×
×
  • Create New...