comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted about 12 hours ago
comment by Robb Raygun (U22716)
posted 44 minutes ago
Looks like RFK JR is gonna drop out of the presidential race and support Trump (to no one’s surprise). Wonder if that will be that extra few percent that helps Trump overtake Kamala.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
“BuT rFK jR iS a PrOgrEsSiVe?!?!” wail (only) dumbfack yoga instructors and Russell Brand subscribers across country.
“How cAn He sUpPoRt TrUmP?!?!”
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How can he support Trump? Man has brain worms, that's your answer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not even useful, constructively contributing brain worms. DEAD brain worms.
Home Secretary vows to increase removals to levels not seen since Theresa May’s government
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted about 4 hours ago
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted about 12 hours ago
comment by Robb Raygun (U22716)
posted 44 minutes ago
Looks like RFK JR is gonna drop out of the presidential race and support Trump (to no one’s surprise). Wonder if that will be that extra few percent that helps Trump overtake Kamala.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
“BuT rFK jR iS a PrOgrEsSiVe?!?!” wail (only) dumbfack yoga instructors and Russell Brand subscribers across country.
“How cAn He sUpPoRt TrUmP?!?!”
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How can he support Trump? Man has brain worms, that's your answer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not even useful, constructively contributing brain worms. DEAD brain worms.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The brain died by having to eat his brain
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 28 minutes ago
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted about 4 hours ago
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted about 12 hours ago
comment by Robb Raygun (U22716)
posted 44 minutes ago
Looks like RFK JR is gonna drop out of the presidential race and support Trump (to no one’s surprise). Wonder if that will be that extra few percent that helps Trump overtake Kamala.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
“BuT rFK jR iS a PrOgrEsSiVe?!?!” wail (only) dumbfack yoga instructors and Russell Brand subscribers across country.
“How cAn He sUpPoRt TrUmP?!?!”
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How can he support Trump? Man has brain worms, that's your answer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not even useful, constructively contributing brain worms. DEAD brain worms.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The brain died by having to eat his brain
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The wurm got stoopider
comment by #4zA (U22472)
posted about an hour ago
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 28 minutes ago
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted about 4 hours ago
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted about 12 hours ago
comment by Robb Raygun (U22716)
posted 44 minutes ago
Looks like RFK JR is gonna drop out of the presidential race and support Trump (to no one’s surprise). Wonder if that will be that extra few percent that helps Trump overtake Kamala.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
“BuT rFK jR iS a PrOgrEsSiVe?!?!” wail (only) dumbfack yoga instructors and Russell Brand subscribers across country.
“How cAn He sUpPoRt TrUmP?!?!”
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How can he support Trump? Man has brain worms, that's your answer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not even useful, constructively contributing brain worms. DEAD brain worms.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The brain died by having to eat his brain
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The wurm got stoopider
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"The *worm died by having to eat his brain"
Begining to think I have brain worms...
Brexit supporters are upset that the EU will be controlling its borders and require 3rd countries to obtain visas to enter Europe.
comment by mancW🏆🏆h🏆🏆- maximus mardius cob-on... (U10676)
posted 7 minutes ago
Brexit supporters are upset that the EU will be controlling its borders and require 3rd countries to obtain visas to enter Europe.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Has there been a large influx of brain worms to the UK in the last 10 years?
Just saw that poor chap Andrew Taint has been taken in for questioning again. Apparently about underage human trafficking. Wattaguy.
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 4 minutes ago
Just saw that poor chap Andrew Taint has been taken in for questioning again. Apparently about underage human trafficking. Wattaguy.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They're all over Facebook (and no doubt Twitter as well) defending him with their 'this is what happens when you speak the truth' garbage
comment by Jalisco Red (U4195)
posted 59 minutes ago
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 4 minutes ago
Just saw that poor chap Andrew Taint has been taken in for questioning again. Apparently about underage human trafficking. Wattaguy.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They're all over Facebook (and no doubt Twitter as well) defending him with their 'this is what happens when you speak the truth' garbage
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Chortle
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/yfPR_TuaRrLLFCXgrEQhdJRNcndUqHyOHAVNQooUsJye-ya6_U9EK8vTq9EcwoTltc1sHeMfrlKzgwOrkCrWNE17RezHUN6G4scAhLVPGJqpp3s-DwuERyJCjMCBGGF8DJg_59rXJdHKvm7gvZBZcmwuYb6OhIalYco
‘Firms across the UK's oil and gas supply chain have expressed "grave concern" about government plans to hike windfall taxes and eliminate investment incentives to an industry that supports 200,000 jobs.
In an open letter to HM Treasury, seen by the BBC, 42 companies have warned that official plans threaten £200bn of investment in all forms of domestic energy, including renewables.’
They are taking the govt for mugs, and they are taking public for mugs.
The windfall tax falls on profits, and not revenue. If these companies want to reduce their tax burden whilst the going is good (and it is very, very good indeed for them right now, as repeated record profits across the industry have shown) without jeopardising their revenue projections, then maybe they could reduce their vast profits by actually spending a little more on their entirely tax deductible green transitions instead of paying millionaire and billionaire executives and investors eye watering bonuses and dividends.
If they cared *at all* about their 200,000 underlings, they’d be working as hard as they could to ensure that they all had jobs in 15 years’ time when the oil and gas industry is no more and the UK is reliant on renewables.
But no. They’d rather squeeze out and see burnt every single last drop of oil and gas at the maximum possible margin, because when the rigs close and the tankers are decommissioned and the refineries shut their doors for the last time, the execs and investors won’t care a jot, because they’ll be able to sit on their own private beaches made entirely of gold sovereigns in the Caymans or BVI.
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted 21 minutes ago
‘Firms across the UK's oil and gas supply chain have expressed "grave concern" about government plans to hike windfall taxes and eliminate investment incentives to an industry that supports 200,000 jobs.
In an open letter to HM Treasury, seen by the BBC, 42 companies have warned that official plans threaten £200bn of investment in all forms of domestic energy, including renewables.’
They are taking the govt for mugs, and they are taking public for mugs.
The windfall tax falls on profits, and not revenue. If these companies want to reduce their tax burden whilst the going is good (and it is very, very good indeed for them right now, as repeated record profits across the industry have shown) without jeopardising their revenue projections, then maybe they could reduce their vast profits by actually spending a little more on their entirely tax deductible green transitions instead of paying millionaire and billionaire executives and investors eye watering bonuses and dividends.
If they cared *at all* about their 200,000 underlings, they’d be working as hard as they could to ensure that they all had jobs in 15 years’ time when the oil and gas industry is no more and the UK is reliant on renewables.
But no. They’d rather squeeze out and see burnt every single last drop of oil and gas at the maximum possible margin, because when the rigs close and the tankers are decommissioned and the refineries shut their doors for the last time, the execs and investors won’t care a jot, because they’ll be able to sit on their own private beaches made entirely of gold sovereigns in the Caymans or BVI.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. They’d rather when they feel the tax burden is too rich for their liking, they’ll close down operations and head elsewhere. The fatted calf can only be sacrificed once.
There is dependence upon these companies to protect their workforce and train them into new roles for the future, but as with everything, the cost becomes too much for their liking and they won’t. Where does that leave us?
There appears to be a train of thought in certain places that “squeezing” private enterprise can continue unabated won’t have consequences that may well make everyone worse off.
https://x.com/benhabib6/status/1826499134217466158?s=46
Don’t you just love it when the right turn on each other
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted 21 minutes ago
‘Firms across the UK's oil and gas supply chain have expressed "grave concern" about government plans to hike windfall taxes and eliminate investment incentives to an industry that supports 200,000 jobs.
In an open letter to HM Treasury, seen by the BBC, 42 companies have warned that official plans threaten £200bn of investment in all forms of domestic energy, including renewables.’
They are taking the govt for mugs, and they are taking public for mugs.
The windfall tax falls on profits, and not revenue. If these companies want to reduce their tax burden whilst the going is good (and it is very, very good indeed for them right now, as repeated record profits across the industry have shown) without jeopardising their revenue projections, then maybe they could reduce their vast profits by actually spending a little more on their entirely tax deductible green transitions instead of paying millionaire and billionaire executives and investors eye watering bonuses and dividends.
If they cared *at all* about their 200,000 underlings, they’d be working as hard as they could to ensure that they all had jobs in 15 years’ time when the oil and gas industry is no more and the UK is reliant on renewables.
But no. They’d rather squeeze out and see burnt every single last drop of oil and gas at the maximum possible margin, because when the rigs close and the tankers are decommissioned and the refineries shut their doors for the last time, the execs and investors won’t care a jot, because they’ll be able to sit on their own private beaches made entirely of gold sovereigns in the Caymans or BVI.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. They’d rather when they feel the tax burden is too rich for their liking, they’ll close down operations and head elsewhere. The fatted calf can only be sacrificed once.
There is dependence upon these companies to protect their workforce and train them into new roles for the future, but as with everything, the cost becomes too much for their liking and they won’t. Where does that leave us?
There appears to be a train of thought in certain places that “squeezing” private enterprise can continue unabated won’t have consequences that may well make everyone worse off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Windfall" tax.
Record levels of profit in the last few years (Shells highest in its history 2022), well done lads, you divvy that up amongst yourself whilst the country that provides your educated workforce, and your consumers, is up to its eyeballs in debts and its public services are on its knees.
comment by Hector (U3606)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted 21 minutes ago
‘Firms across the UK's oil and gas supply chain have expressed "grave concern" about government plans to hike windfall taxes and eliminate investment incentives to an industry that supports 200,000 jobs.
In an open letter to HM Treasury, seen by the BBC, 42 companies have warned that official plans threaten £200bn of investment in all forms of domestic energy, including renewables.’
They are taking the govt for mugs, and they are taking public for mugs.
The windfall tax falls on profits, and not revenue. If these companies want to reduce their tax burden whilst the going is good (and it is very, very good indeed for them right now, as repeated record profits across the industry have shown) without jeopardising their revenue projections, then maybe they could reduce their vast profits by actually spending a little more on their entirely tax deductible green transitions instead of paying millionaire and billionaire executives and investors eye watering bonuses and dividends.
If they cared *at all* about their 200,000 underlings, they’d be working as hard as they could to ensure that they all had jobs in 15 years’ time when the oil and gas industry is no more and the UK is reliant on renewables.
But no. They’d rather squeeze out and see burnt every single last drop of oil and gas at the maximum possible margin, because when the rigs close and the tankers are decommissioned and the refineries shut their doors for the last time, the execs and investors won’t care a jot, because they’ll be able to sit on their own private beaches made entirely of gold sovereigns in the Caymans or BVI.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. They’d rather when they feel the tax burden is too rich for their liking, they’ll close down operations and head elsewhere. The fatted calf can only be sacrificed once.
There is dependence upon these companies to protect their workforce and train them into new roles for the future, but as with everything, the cost becomes too much for their liking and they won’t. Where does that leave us?
There appears to be a train of thought in certain places that “squeezing” private enterprise can continue unabated won’t have consequences that may well make everyone worse off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Windfall" tax.
Record levels of profit in the last few years (Shells highest in its history 2022), well done lads, you divvy that up amongst yourself whilst the country that provides your educated workforce, and your consumers, is up to its eyeballs in debts and its public services are on its knees.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not saying that. But on that subject, why isn’t there an overriding piece of legislation that covers all businesses were they to benefit from Force Majeure events or the like?
Companies have to set out profit expectations to shareholders at the beginning of any financial year and again if there is a “swing” of 5-10% in either direction. Legislation on profits above a certain threshold which cannot be attributed to that company’s innovation or just doing it far better would be far more beneficial and at least understandable rather than this ad hoc “grab” we see in times of most need.
As for elimination of incentives; I assume this relates to tax relief on R&D. It is abused by almost most companies because it is so poorly regulated.
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted 21 minutes ago
‘Firms across the UK's oil and gas supply chain have expressed "grave concern" about government plans to hike windfall taxes and eliminate investment incentives to an industry that supports 200,000 jobs.
In an open letter to HM Treasury, seen by the BBC, 42 companies have warned that official plans threaten £200bn of investment in all forms of domestic energy, including renewables.’
They are taking the govt for mugs, and they are taking public for mugs.
The windfall tax falls on profits, and not revenue. If these companies want to reduce their tax burden whilst the going is good (and it is very, very good indeed for them right now, as repeated record profits across the industry have shown) without jeopardising their revenue projections, then maybe they could reduce their vast profits by actually spending a little more on their entirely tax deductible green transitions instead of paying millionaire and billionaire executives and investors eye watering bonuses and dividends.
If they cared *at all* about their 200,000 underlings, they’d be working as hard as they could to ensure that they all had jobs in 15 years’ time when the oil and gas industry is no more and the UK is reliant on renewables.
But no. They’d rather squeeze out and see burnt every single last drop of oil and gas at the maximum possible margin, because when the rigs close and the tankers are decommissioned and the refineries shut their doors for the last time, the execs and investors won’t care a jot, because they’ll be able to sit on their own private beaches made entirely of gold sovereigns in the Caymans or BVI.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. They’d rather when they feel the tax burden is too rich for their liking, they’ll close down operations and head elsewhere. The fatted calf can only be sacrificed once.
There is dependence upon these companies to protect their workforce and train them into new roles for the future, but as with everything, the cost becomes too much for their liking and they won’t. Where does that leave us?
There appears to be a train of thought in certain places that “squeezing” private enterprise can continue unabated won’t have consequences that may well make everyone worse off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They can’t “close down operations and head elsewhere” whilst exploiting the same oil and gas fields though.
They’d have to leave behind all that black gold for someone else and go invest a small fortune in exploring and developing business elsewhere.
If you want access to that very exploitable natural resource - a resource which many others would be very, very happy to tap - then you have to play by what really should be much tougher - and fairer for us all - rules.
As to leaving everyone worse off, look at their profits - go ahead and read the numbers across UK gas and oil plc - and then take a look at your latest gas and electricity bill. There are literally millions of people across the UK who turned their heating off last winter. 6.5 million *households* in the UK were estimated to be in fuel poverty at the turn of the year.
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted 21 minutes ago
‘Firms across the UK's oil and gas supply chain have expressed "grave concern" about government plans to hike windfall taxes and eliminate investment incentives to an industry that supports 200,000 jobs.
In an open letter to HM Treasury, seen by the BBC, 42 companies have warned that official plans threaten £200bn of investment in all forms of domestic energy, including renewables.’
They are taking the govt for mugs, and they are taking public for mugs.
The windfall tax falls on profits, and not revenue. If these companies want to reduce their tax burden whilst the going is good (and it is very, very good indeed for them right now, as repeated record profits across the industry have shown) without jeopardising their revenue projections, then maybe they could reduce their vast profits by actually spending a little more on their entirely tax deductible green transitions instead of paying millionaire and billionaire executives and investors eye watering bonuses and dividends.
If they cared *at all* about their 200,000 underlings, they’d be working as hard as they could to ensure that they all had jobs in 15 years’ time when the oil and gas industry is no more and the UK is reliant on renewables.
But no. They’d rather squeeze out and see burnt every single last drop of oil and gas at the maximum possible margin, because when the rigs close and the tankers are decommissioned and the refineries shut their doors for the last time, the execs and investors won’t care a jot, because they’ll be able to sit on their own private beaches made entirely of gold sovereigns in the Caymans or BVI.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. They’d rather when they feel the tax burden is too rich for their liking, they’ll close down operations and head elsewhere. The fatted calf can only be sacrificed once.
There is dependence upon these companies to protect their workforce and train them into new roles for the future, but as with everything, the cost becomes too much for their liking and they won’t. Where does that leave us?
There appears to be a train of thought in certain places that “squeezing” private enterprise can continue unabated won’t have consequences that may well make everyone worse off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They can’t “close down operations and head elsewhere” whilst exploiting the same oil and gas fields though.
They’d have to leave behind all that black gold for someone else and go invest a small fortune in exploring and developing business elsewhere.
If you want access to that very exploitable natural resource - a resource which many others would be very, very happy to tap - then you have to play by what really should be much tougher - and fairer for us all - rules.
As to leaving everyone worse off, look at their profits - go ahead and read the numbers across UK gas and oil plc - and then take a look at your latest gas and electricity bill. There are literally millions of people across the UK who turned their heating off last winter. 6.5 million *households* in the UK were estimated to be in fuel poverty at the turn of the year.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. They’d go further afield. The North Sea resources are dwindling and getting much harder and more expensive to “mine”. The cost is already proving prohibitive. The danger being they will just be abandoned completely by investors.
Don’t think we’ll have to worry for too long anyway as the recent licenses granted are being challenged in court and may well be overturned.
Ginger, you being a man ITK about these things...
If you send one of your guys on a training course, is the cost of that course tax deductible?
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 37 minutes ago
comment by Hector (U3606)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted 21 minutes ago
‘Firms across the UK's oil and gas supply chain have expressed "grave concern" about government plans to hike windfall taxes and eliminate investment incentives to an industry that supports 200,000 jobs.
In an open letter to HM Treasury, seen by the BBC, 42 companies have warned that official plans threaten £200bn of investment in all forms of domestic energy, including renewables.’
They are taking the govt for mugs, and they are taking public for mugs.
The windfall tax falls on profits, and not revenue. If these companies want to reduce their tax burden whilst the going is good (and it is very, very good indeed for them right now, as repeated record profits across the industry have shown) without jeopardising their revenue projections, then maybe they could reduce their vast profits by actually spending a little more on their entirely tax deductible green transitions instead of paying millionaire and billionaire executives and investors eye watering bonuses and dividends.
If they cared *at all* about their 200,000 underlings, they’d be working as hard as they could to ensure that they all had jobs in 15 years’ time when the oil and gas industry is no more and the UK is reliant on renewables.
But no. They’d rather squeeze out and see burnt every single last drop of oil and gas at the maximum possible margin, because when the rigs close and the tankers are decommissioned and the refineries shut their doors for the last time, the execs and investors won’t care a jot, because they’ll be able to sit on their own private beaches made entirely of gold sovereigns in the Caymans or BVI.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. They’d rather when they feel the tax burden is too rich for their liking, they’ll close down operations and head elsewhere. The fatted calf can only be sacrificed once.
There is dependence upon these companies to protect their workforce and train them into new roles for the future, but as with everything, the cost becomes too much for their liking and they won’t. Where does that leave us?
There appears to be a train of thought in certain places that “squeezing” private enterprise can continue unabated won’t have consequences that may well make everyone worse off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Windfall" tax.
Record levels of profit in the last few years (Shells highest in its history 2022), well done lads, you divvy that up amongst yourself whilst the country that provides your educated workforce, and your consumers, is up to its eyeballs in debts and its public services are on its knees.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not saying that. But on that subject, why isn’t there an overriding piece of legislation that covers all businesses were they to benefit from Force Majeure events or the like?
Companies have to set out profit expectations to shareholders at the beginning of any financial year and again if there is a “swing” of 5-10% in either direction. Legislation on profits above a certain threshold which cannot be attributed to that company’s innovation or just doing it far better would be far more beneficial and at least understandable rather than this ad hoc “grab” we see in times of most need.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/aug/21/uk-spider-species-comeback-rspb-fen-raft
Never, ever, ever going near a fen or wetland.
comment by Hector (U3606)
posted 16 minutes ago
Ginger, you being a man ITK about these things...
If you send one of your guys on a training course, is the cost of that course tax deductible?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is. As long as you can provide a direct link between the actual training and the relevance to your industry. That sometimes sound easier than it is and we err on the side of caution.
For example, trainee courses such as presentation skills we will take the tax hit on. Sales techniques, time planning etc will be set against tax.
Due to our size we get dispensation from HMRC to decide albeit we are open to audit at any time. Hence our caution
This is grate news
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/eu-free-movement-young-people-mobility-scheme-pvw0slfhh
Sign in if you want to comment
Arguing w/strangers cause I'm lonely thread
Page 4590 of 4823
4591 | 4592 | 4593 | 4594 | 4595
posted on 21/8/24
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted about 12 hours ago
comment by Robb Raygun (U22716)
posted 44 minutes ago
Looks like RFK JR is gonna drop out of the presidential race and support Trump (to no one’s surprise). Wonder if that will be that extra few percent that helps Trump overtake Kamala.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
“BuT rFK jR iS a PrOgrEsSiVe?!?!” wail (only) dumbfack yoga instructors and Russell Brand subscribers across country.
“How cAn He sUpPoRt TrUmP?!?!”
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How can he support Trump? Man has brain worms, that's your answer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not even useful, constructively contributing brain worms. DEAD brain worms.
posted on 21/8/24
Home Secretary vows to increase removals to levels not seen since Theresa May’s government
posted on 21/8/24
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted about 4 hours ago
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted about 12 hours ago
comment by Robb Raygun (U22716)
posted 44 minutes ago
Looks like RFK JR is gonna drop out of the presidential race and support Trump (to no one’s surprise). Wonder if that will be that extra few percent that helps Trump overtake Kamala.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
“BuT rFK jR iS a PrOgrEsSiVe?!?!” wail (only) dumbfack yoga instructors and Russell Brand subscribers across country.
“How cAn He sUpPoRt TrUmP?!?!”
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How can he support Trump? Man has brain worms, that's your answer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not even useful, constructively contributing brain worms. DEAD brain worms.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The brain died by having to eat his brain
posted on 21/8/24
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 28 minutes ago
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted about 4 hours ago
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted about 12 hours ago
comment by Robb Raygun (U22716)
posted 44 minutes ago
Looks like RFK JR is gonna drop out of the presidential race and support Trump (to no one’s surprise). Wonder if that will be that extra few percent that helps Trump overtake Kamala.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
“BuT rFK jR iS a PrOgrEsSiVe?!?!” wail (only) dumbfack yoga instructors and Russell Brand subscribers across country.
“How cAn He sUpPoRt TrUmP?!?!”
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How can he support Trump? Man has brain worms, that's your answer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not even useful, constructively contributing brain worms. DEAD brain worms.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The brain died by having to eat his brain
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The wurm got stoopider
posted on 21/8/24
comment by #4zA (U22472)
posted about an hour ago
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 28 minutes ago
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted about 4 hours ago
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted about 12 hours ago
comment by Robb Raygun (U22716)
posted 44 minutes ago
Looks like RFK JR is gonna drop out of the presidential race and support Trump (to no one’s surprise). Wonder if that will be that extra few percent that helps Trump overtake Kamala.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
“BuT rFK jR iS a PrOgrEsSiVe?!?!” wail (only) dumbfack yoga instructors and Russell Brand subscribers across country.
“How cAn He sUpPoRt TrUmP?!?!”
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How can he support Trump? Man has brain worms, that's your answer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not even useful, constructively contributing brain worms. DEAD brain worms.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The brain died by having to eat his brain
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The wurm got stoopider
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"The *worm died by having to eat his brain"
Begining to think I have brain worms...
posted on 21/8/24
Brexit supporters are upset that the EU will be controlling its borders and require 3rd countries to obtain visas to enter Europe.
posted on 21/8/24
comment by mancW🏆🏆h🏆🏆- maximus mardius cob-on... (U10676)
posted 7 minutes ago
Brexit supporters are upset that the EU will be controlling its borders and require 3rd countries to obtain visas to enter Europe.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Has there been a large influx of brain worms to the UK in the last 10 years?
posted on 21/8/24
Just saw that poor chap Andrew Taint has been taken in for questioning again. Apparently about underage human trafficking. Wattaguy.
posted on 21/8/24
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 4 minutes ago
Just saw that poor chap Andrew Taint has been taken in for questioning again. Apparently about underage human trafficking. Wattaguy.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They're all over Facebook (and no doubt Twitter as well) defending him with their 'this is what happens when you speak the truth' garbage
posted on 21/8/24
comment by Jalisco Red (U4195)
posted 59 minutes ago
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 4 minutes ago
Just saw that poor chap Andrew Taint has been taken in for questioning again. Apparently about underage human trafficking. Wattaguy.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They're all over Facebook (and no doubt Twitter as well) defending him with their 'this is what happens when you speak the truth' garbage
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Chortle
posted on 21/8/24
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/yfPR_TuaRrLLFCXgrEQhdJRNcndUqHyOHAVNQooUsJye-ya6_U9EK8vTq9EcwoTltc1sHeMfrlKzgwOrkCrWNE17RezHUN6G4scAhLVPGJqpp3s-DwuERyJCjMCBGGF8DJg_59rXJdHKvm7gvZBZcmwuYb6OhIalYco
posted on 22/8/24
‘Firms across the UK's oil and gas supply chain have expressed "grave concern" about government plans to hike windfall taxes and eliminate investment incentives to an industry that supports 200,000 jobs.
In an open letter to HM Treasury, seen by the BBC, 42 companies have warned that official plans threaten £200bn of investment in all forms of domestic energy, including renewables.’
They are taking the govt for mugs, and they are taking public for mugs.
The windfall tax falls on profits, and not revenue. If these companies want to reduce their tax burden whilst the going is good (and it is very, very good indeed for them right now, as repeated record profits across the industry have shown) without jeopardising their revenue projections, then maybe they could reduce their vast profits by actually spending a little more on their entirely tax deductible green transitions instead of paying millionaire and billionaire executives and investors eye watering bonuses and dividends.
If they cared *at all* about their 200,000 underlings, they’d be working as hard as they could to ensure that they all had jobs in 15 years’ time when the oil and gas industry is no more and the UK is reliant on renewables.
But no. They’d rather squeeze out and see burnt every single last drop of oil and gas at the maximum possible margin, because when the rigs close and the tankers are decommissioned and the refineries shut their doors for the last time, the execs and investors won’t care a jot, because they’ll be able to sit on their own private beaches made entirely of gold sovereigns in the Caymans or BVI.
posted on 22/8/24
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted 21 minutes ago
‘Firms across the UK's oil and gas supply chain have expressed "grave concern" about government plans to hike windfall taxes and eliminate investment incentives to an industry that supports 200,000 jobs.
In an open letter to HM Treasury, seen by the BBC, 42 companies have warned that official plans threaten £200bn of investment in all forms of domestic energy, including renewables.’
They are taking the govt for mugs, and they are taking public for mugs.
The windfall tax falls on profits, and not revenue. If these companies want to reduce their tax burden whilst the going is good (and it is very, very good indeed for them right now, as repeated record profits across the industry have shown) without jeopardising their revenue projections, then maybe they could reduce their vast profits by actually spending a little more on their entirely tax deductible green transitions instead of paying millionaire and billionaire executives and investors eye watering bonuses and dividends.
If they cared *at all* about their 200,000 underlings, they’d be working as hard as they could to ensure that they all had jobs in 15 years’ time when the oil and gas industry is no more and the UK is reliant on renewables.
But no. They’d rather squeeze out and see burnt every single last drop of oil and gas at the maximum possible margin, because when the rigs close and the tankers are decommissioned and the refineries shut their doors for the last time, the execs and investors won’t care a jot, because they’ll be able to sit on their own private beaches made entirely of gold sovereigns in the Caymans or BVI.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. They’d rather when they feel the tax burden is too rich for their liking, they’ll close down operations and head elsewhere. The fatted calf can only be sacrificed once.
There is dependence upon these companies to protect their workforce and train them into new roles for the future, but as with everything, the cost becomes too much for their liking and they won’t. Where does that leave us?
There appears to be a train of thought in certain places that “squeezing” private enterprise can continue unabated won’t have consequences that may well make everyone worse off.
posted on 22/8/24
https://x.com/benhabib6/status/1826499134217466158?s=46
Don’t you just love it when the right turn on each other
posted on 22/8/24
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted 21 minutes ago
‘Firms across the UK's oil and gas supply chain have expressed "grave concern" about government plans to hike windfall taxes and eliminate investment incentives to an industry that supports 200,000 jobs.
In an open letter to HM Treasury, seen by the BBC, 42 companies have warned that official plans threaten £200bn of investment in all forms of domestic energy, including renewables.’
They are taking the govt for mugs, and they are taking public for mugs.
The windfall tax falls on profits, and not revenue. If these companies want to reduce their tax burden whilst the going is good (and it is very, very good indeed for them right now, as repeated record profits across the industry have shown) without jeopardising their revenue projections, then maybe they could reduce their vast profits by actually spending a little more on their entirely tax deductible green transitions instead of paying millionaire and billionaire executives and investors eye watering bonuses and dividends.
If they cared *at all* about their 200,000 underlings, they’d be working as hard as they could to ensure that they all had jobs in 15 years’ time when the oil and gas industry is no more and the UK is reliant on renewables.
But no. They’d rather squeeze out and see burnt every single last drop of oil and gas at the maximum possible margin, because when the rigs close and the tankers are decommissioned and the refineries shut their doors for the last time, the execs and investors won’t care a jot, because they’ll be able to sit on their own private beaches made entirely of gold sovereigns in the Caymans or BVI.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. They’d rather when they feel the tax burden is too rich for their liking, they’ll close down operations and head elsewhere. The fatted calf can only be sacrificed once.
There is dependence upon these companies to protect their workforce and train them into new roles for the future, but as with everything, the cost becomes too much for their liking and they won’t. Where does that leave us?
There appears to be a train of thought in certain places that “squeezing” private enterprise can continue unabated won’t have consequences that may well make everyone worse off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Windfall" tax.
Record levels of profit in the last few years (Shells highest in its history 2022), well done lads, you divvy that up amongst yourself whilst the country that provides your educated workforce, and your consumers, is up to its eyeballs in debts and its public services are on its knees.
posted on 22/8/24
comment by Hector (U3606)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted 21 minutes ago
‘Firms across the UK's oil and gas supply chain have expressed "grave concern" about government plans to hike windfall taxes and eliminate investment incentives to an industry that supports 200,000 jobs.
In an open letter to HM Treasury, seen by the BBC, 42 companies have warned that official plans threaten £200bn of investment in all forms of domestic energy, including renewables.’
They are taking the govt for mugs, and they are taking public for mugs.
The windfall tax falls on profits, and not revenue. If these companies want to reduce their tax burden whilst the going is good (and it is very, very good indeed for them right now, as repeated record profits across the industry have shown) without jeopardising their revenue projections, then maybe they could reduce their vast profits by actually spending a little more on their entirely tax deductible green transitions instead of paying millionaire and billionaire executives and investors eye watering bonuses and dividends.
If they cared *at all* about their 200,000 underlings, they’d be working as hard as they could to ensure that they all had jobs in 15 years’ time when the oil and gas industry is no more and the UK is reliant on renewables.
But no. They’d rather squeeze out and see burnt every single last drop of oil and gas at the maximum possible margin, because when the rigs close and the tankers are decommissioned and the refineries shut their doors for the last time, the execs and investors won’t care a jot, because they’ll be able to sit on their own private beaches made entirely of gold sovereigns in the Caymans or BVI.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. They’d rather when they feel the tax burden is too rich for their liking, they’ll close down operations and head elsewhere. The fatted calf can only be sacrificed once.
There is dependence upon these companies to protect their workforce and train them into new roles for the future, but as with everything, the cost becomes too much for their liking and they won’t. Where does that leave us?
There appears to be a train of thought in certain places that “squeezing” private enterprise can continue unabated won’t have consequences that may well make everyone worse off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Windfall" tax.
Record levels of profit in the last few years (Shells highest in its history 2022), well done lads, you divvy that up amongst yourself whilst the country that provides your educated workforce, and your consumers, is up to its eyeballs in debts and its public services are on its knees.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not saying that. But on that subject, why isn’t there an overriding piece of legislation that covers all businesses were they to benefit from Force Majeure events or the like?
Companies have to set out profit expectations to shareholders at the beginning of any financial year and again if there is a “swing” of 5-10% in either direction. Legislation on profits above a certain threshold which cannot be attributed to that company’s innovation or just doing it far better would be far more beneficial and at least understandable rather than this ad hoc “grab” we see in times of most need.
posted on 22/8/24
As for elimination of incentives; I assume this relates to tax relief on R&D. It is abused by almost most companies because it is so poorly regulated.
posted on 22/8/24
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted 21 minutes ago
‘Firms across the UK's oil and gas supply chain have expressed "grave concern" about government plans to hike windfall taxes and eliminate investment incentives to an industry that supports 200,000 jobs.
In an open letter to HM Treasury, seen by the BBC, 42 companies have warned that official plans threaten £200bn of investment in all forms of domestic energy, including renewables.’
They are taking the govt for mugs, and they are taking public for mugs.
The windfall tax falls on profits, and not revenue. If these companies want to reduce their tax burden whilst the going is good (and it is very, very good indeed for them right now, as repeated record profits across the industry have shown) without jeopardising their revenue projections, then maybe they could reduce their vast profits by actually spending a little more on their entirely tax deductible green transitions instead of paying millionaire and billionaire executives and investors eye watering bonuses and dividends.
If they cared *at all* about their 200,000 underlings, they’d be working as hard as they could to ensure that they all had jobs in 15 years’ time when the oil and gas industry is no more and the UK is reliant on renewables.
But no. They’d rather squeeze out and see burnt every single last drop of oil and gas at the maximum possible margin, because when the rigs close and the tankers are decommissioned and the refineries shut their doors for the last time, the execs and investors won’t care a jot, because they’ll be able to sit on their own private beaches made entirely of gold sovereigns in the Caymans or BVI.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. They’d rather when they feel the tax burden is too rich for their liking, they’ll close down operations and head elsewhere. The fatted calf can only be sacrificed once.
There is dependence upon these companies to protect their workforce and train them into new roles for the future, but as with everything, the cost becomes too much for their liking and they won’t. Where does that leave us?
There appears to be a train of thought in certain places that “squeezing” private enterprise can continue unabated won’t have consequences that may well make everyone worse off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They can’t “close down operations and head elsewhere” whilst exploiting the same oil and gas fields though.
They’d have to leave behind all that black gold for someone else and go invest a small fortune in exploring and developing business elsewhere.
If you want access to that very exploitable natural resource - a resource which many others would be very, very happy to tap - then you have to play by what really should be much tougher - and fairer for us all - rules.
As to leaving everyone worse off, look at their profits - go ahead and read the numbers across UK gas and oil plc - and then take a look at your latest gas and electricity bill. There are literally millions of people across the UK who turned their heating off last winter. 6.5 million *households* in the UK were estimated to be in fuel poverty at the turn of the year.
posted on 22/8/24
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted 21 minutes ago
‘Firms across the UK's oil and gas supply chain have expressed "grave concern" about government plans to hike windfall taxes and eliminate investment incentives to an industry that supports 200,000 jobs.
In an open letter to HM Treasury, seen by the BBC, 42 companies have warned that official plans threaten £200bn of investment in all forms of domestic energy, including renewables.’
They are taking the govt for mugs, and they are taking public for mugs.
The windfall tax falls on profits, and not revenue. If these companies want to reduce their tax burden whilst the going is good (and it is very, very good indeed for them right now, as repeated record profits across the industry have shown) without jeopardising their revenue projections, then maybe they could reduce their vast profits by actually spending a little more on their entirely tax deductible green transitions instead of paying millionaire and billionaire executives and investors eye watering bonuses and dividends.
If they cared *at all* about their 200,000 underlings, they’d be working as hard as they could to ensure that they all had jobs in 15 years’ time when the oil and gas industry is no more and the UK is reliant on renewables.
But no. They’d rather squeeze out and see burnt every single last drop of oil and gas at the maximum possible margin, because when the rigs close and the tankers are decommissioned and the refineries shut their doors for the last time, the execs and investors won’t care a jot, because they’ll be able to sit on their own private beaches made entirely of gold sovereigns in the Caymans or BVI.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. They’d rather when they feel the tax burden is too rich for their liking, they’ll close down operations and head elsewhere. The fatted calf can only be sacrificed once.
There is dependence upon these companies to protect their workforce and train them into new roles for the future, but as with everything, the cost becomes too much for their liking and they won’t. Where does that leave us?
There appears to be a train of thought in certain places that “squeezing” private enterprise can continue unabated won’t have consequences that may well make everyone worse off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They can’t “close down operations and head elsewhere” whilst exploiting the same oil and gas fields though.
They’d have to leave behind all that black gold for someone else and go invest a small fortune in exploring and developing business elsewhere.
If you want access to that very exploitable natural resource - a resource which many others would be very, very happy to tap - then you have to play by what really should be much tougher - and fairer for us all - rules.
As to leaving everyone worse off, look at their profits - go ahead and read the numbers across UK gas and oil plc - and then take a look at your latest gas and electricity bill. There are literally millions of people across the UK who turned their heating off last winter. 6.5 million *households* in the UK were estimated to be in fuel poverty at the turn of the year.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. They’d go further afield. The North Sea resources are dwindling and getting much harder and more expensive to “mine”. The cost is already proving prohibitive. The danger being they will just be abandoned completely by investors.
posted on 22/8/24
Don’t think we’ll have to worry for too long anyway as the recent licenses granted are being challenged in court and may well be overturned.
posted on 22/8/24
Ginger, you being a man ITK about these things...
If you send one of your guys on a training course, is the cost of that course tax deductible?
posted on 22/8/24
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 37 minutes ago
comment by Hector (U3606)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by rosso says the time has come to unlock the unl... (U17054)
posted 21 minutes ago
‘Firms across the UK's oil and gas supply chain have expressed "grave concern" about government plans to hike windfall taxes and eliminate investment incentives to an industry that supports 200,000 jobs.
In an open letter to HM Treasury, seen by the BBC, 42 companies have warned that official plans threaten £200bn of investment in all forms of domestic energy, including renewables.’
They are taking the govt for mugs, and they are taking public for mugs.
The windfall tax falls on profits, and not revenue. If these companies want to reduce their tax burden whilst the going is good (and it is very, very good indeed for them right now, as repeated record profits across the industry have shown) without jeopardising their revenue projections, then maybe they could reduce their vast profits by actually spending a little more on their entirely tax deductible green transitions instead of paying millionaire and billionaire executives and investors eye watering bonuses and dividends.
If they cared *at all* about their 200,000 underlings, they’d be working as hard as they could to ensure that they all had jobs in 15 years’ time when the oil and gas industry is no more and the UK is reliant on renewables.
But no. They’d rather squeeze out and see burnt every single last drop of oil and gas at the maximum possible margin, because when the rigs close and the tankers are decommissioned and the refineries shut their doors for the last time, the execs and investors won’t care a jot, because they’ll be able to sit on their own private beaches made entirely of gold sovereigns in the Caymans or BVI.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. They’d rather when they feel the tax burden is too rich for their liking, they’ll close down operations and head elsewhere. The fatted calf can only be sacrificed once.
There is dependence upon these companies to protect their workforce and train them into new roles for the future, but as with everything, the cost becomes too much for their liking and they won’t. Where does that leave us?
There appears to be a train of thought in certain places that “squeezing” private enterprise can continue unabated won’t have consequences that may well make everyone worse off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Windfall" tax.
Record levels of profit in the last few years (Shells highest in its history 2022), well done lads, you divvy that up amongst yourself whilst the country that provides your educated workforce, and your consumers, is up to its eyeballs in debts and its public services are on its knees.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not saying that. But on that subject, why isn’t there an overriding piece of legislation that covers all businesses were they to benefit from Force Majeure events or the like?
Companies have to set out profit expectations to shareholders at the beginning of any financial year and again if there is a “swing” of 5-10% in either direction. Legislation on profits above a certain threshold which cannot be attributed to that company’s innovation or just doing it far better would be far more beneficial and at least understandable rather than this ad hoc “grab” we see in times of most need.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 22/8/24
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/aug/21/uk-spider-species-comeback-rspb-fen-raft
Never, ever, ever going near a fen or wetland.
posted on 22/8/24
comment by Hector (U3606)
posted 16 minutes ago
Ginger, you being a man ITK about these things...
If you send one of your guys on a training course, is the cost of that course tax deductible?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is. As long as you can provide a direct link between the actual training and the relevance to your industry. That sometimes sound easier than it is and we err on the side of caution.
For example, trainee courses such as presentation skills we will take the tax hit on. Sales techniques, time planning etc will be set against tax.
Due to our size we get dispensation from HMRC to decide albeit we are open to audit at any time. Hence our caution
posted on 22/8/24
This is grate news
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/eu-free-movement-young-people-mobility-scheme-pvw0slfhh
Page 4590 of 4823
4591 | 4592 | 4593 | 4594 | 4595