Guernsey has said of the decision by the EU Code of Conduct Group last week that:
it has received confirmation that, at its most recent meeting (19th November, 2010), the EU Code of Conduct on Business Taxation (‘Code Group’) agreed with unanimity that the zero/10 corporate tax regimes have harmful effects. It is understood that, whilst the formal assessment process has not technically been concluded, the expectation is that the Crown Dependencies will be required to introduce revised corporate tax regimes.
Although Guernsey’s zero/10 regime has not been subject to review by the Code of Conduct Group the implications of last Friday’s conclusion by the Code Group will need to be thoroughly reviewed and assessed.
I’ve already compared this with Jersey’s official response but now KPMG have moved response in Jersey into the world of fantasy. According to the Jersey Evening Post:
EUROPE’S response to the zero-ten tax package is ‘very good news’ for the future of the finance industry, according to the tax partner at major accountancy firm KPMG Channel Islands
John Riva said he was very pleased with the outcome of the meeting last week at which the EU Code of Conduct group on tax matters discussed zero-ten.
Mr Riva said his assessment was that there was a ‘tacit’ acceptance of the zero-ten regime.‘It would appear we will be able to maintain a zero per cent and a ten per cent rate and that will give us certainty,’ he said.
However, he said that the code group had decided that a process known as ‘deemed distribution’ of profits to shareholders was a business tax rather than a personal tax.
This is ludicrous. Guernsey, responding to the same information, say a revised corporate tax regime is needed, the existing one is harmful, and that reform is inevitable. KPMG say the scheme has been accepted. Someone has to be wrong — and I’ll say it is categorically Mr Riva. Having your tax system fail three out of five tests is not a ‘tacit acceptance’. It’s rejection. And nor is it an offer of certainty. It’s a demand for reform and pretty major reform at that.
It’s pretty amazing that anyone can put out such a statement. And it is certainly seriously misleading to do so. But then illusion has always been the basis for the Crown Dependencies’ financial services industry, so perhaps believing rejection is good news is a normal part of the deal in Jersey.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Well Richard we are still awaiting confirmation with regard to your ‘leak’ but we will wait with bated breath now…..
@Jamie
But my leak has now been confirmed
Guernsey has said I’m right
Even Riva has re deemed distribution
From the Isle of Man’s “Manx Independent” tonight – Assessor of Income Tax Malcolm Crouch states, “We are awaiting formal assessment of Zero/10. We are not abandoning Zero/10, it has not changed. Waiting for clarity from the EU is frustrating for everybody…. Govt’s position is that ARI is a personal tax measure and not part of Zero/10 and as such is not an issue that it is appropriate for the EU to rule on”
Discuss….? 😕
[…] commentator here has sent an extract from today’s Manx Independent, which says: Assessor of Income Tax Malcolm […]
[…] commentator here has sent an extract from today’s Manx Independent, which says: Assessor of Income Tax Malcolm […]
At least you now agree we lead the way in transparency.
http://www.thisisjersey.com/2010/11/29/two-tax-pacts-signed/
Funny how all your doomsday predictions are being dismissed by finance people in Jersey yet swallowed hook, line and sinker by our resident non financial people. Well you have an audience Richard even though the collective terms is monkeys.
@Jamie
Nonsense
As you well know – I suspect you work for KPMG – TIEAs don’t work
@Jamie
Yes, and the banks in Ireland said they didn’t need a bail out
Murphy you really are too stupid for words…
A number of different proposals were put forward by the Channel Islands to the UK treasury when the OECD created their lists. The UK treasury picked the 0/10 regime as the one they wanted implemented, it was and never has been a case of anyone getting around any rules. The UK treasury picked the system. Had you done your research properly or had you been party to talks of that level, you would have known that. But you didn’t and you weren’t so you don’t.
It would be nice, for once, to hear a balanced opinion from you, as opposed to an ill-informed rant. However, as Bertrand Russell once said ‘“The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt” and Murphy, you are indeed very cocksure…
@Martyn
And maybe I’m so sure because I know the facts
Remember, I advised Jersey on this issue
And yes, the UK supported zero /10
And they were wrong – for all the reasons I explained
And that’s why I now know I’ve been proved right
Assuredness based on facts
Nothing more
Better than abuse any day, don’t you think?
This comment has been deleted. It failed the moderation policy noted here. http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/comments/. The editor’s decision on this matter is final.
If you wish to engage in debate a string of personal abuse is not the way to start
Oh dear…
An alternative view is offered and is deleted.
To be clear, in no way was the post abusive merely posted in a jocular tone.
The fact that you would delete it, is why you and your site, will never be taken seriously.
@Martyn
Nonsense – it was abusive from beginning to end
And aren’t you “cocksure”? (to quote you)
Unfortunately you’re wrong, as ever. Yesterday was on two BBC radio stations, spoke to the Sunday Times twice, Reuters, The Belfast Telegraph and the Guardian. Oh what it is to be ignored and not be taken seriously
The reality is you need to get out of your goldfish bowl. You can pretend I’m of no consequence in the CI, but you’re losing this game, and losing it badly
No wonder you’re so angry
Richard, you make some pretty serious accusations on this blog regularly against the Channel Islands and I will tell you why this blog is not taken seriously and thats because your predictions are regularly way off target. This 0-10 nonsence you have been saying for the past few weeks, why is it only you and a few anti-finance lobbyists in Jersey talking about it and nobody else? One day you will have to accept that your views on Jersey’s finance industry are not always factually accurate and once people start seeing that they stop taking you seriously.
I like the fact Richard predicted the zero ten deficit far more accurately than the States of Jersey managed themselves several years ago.
That at least was one prediction where Richard was not “way off target” Jamie.
I read the JEP every night and I read http://www.gov.je too, from what this non expert has noticed Richard seems more accurate in his predictions.
If you really think so David.
Maybe we will see “0-10 Flawed” or similar in next weeks JEP as a headline then?
@Jamie
I doubt that Jamie as it’s not PC over here to say such a thing. As we all know millions upon millions have left our shores in the last two years so confidence sapping headlines like that will never appear in the JEP, however true they may be.
My apologies Jamie I was incorrect, looks like the JEP have published a headline along those lines after all.