The Federation of Small Businesses has lent its support to the campaign to bring an end to Low Value Consignment Relief, a tax mechanism that indie music retailers say puts them at a disadvantage to the online operators.
The organisation’s national policy chairman Mike Cherry has written to the EC’s directorate general for taxation and customs union on behalf of the FSB’s 213,000 members in the UK outlining why the EC must act on the issue.
Good for them.
This is about creating a level playing field.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
The Isle of Man, Jersey and Guernsey take great delight in informing the world that they though they are all “British” they do not consider themselves to be sufficiently “British” to consider becoming part of the UK or members of the EU. And that their (what are characterize as) “governments” can act independently of any other nations. This “independence” is discriminatory and chameleon. (Named after the small lizard that changes the pigment of its skin to relate to the color of its surroundings.)
In these circumstances how does the FSB expect the EU’s directorate general for taxation and customs union to have any influence in the issue LVCRs or any other matters unless it suits the island’s agendas?
@Premier Shareholder Group
This is just ill informed nonsense by someone who clearly knows nothing about the operation of LVCR. The Isle of Man has nothing to do with LVCR – it is in customs union with the UK. I have been pushing the UK to close the LVCR loophole for 15 years. It is THEIR problem and all they need to do is to legislate against THEIR UK residents importing small value mail order items without VAT. Let us hope they are at long last now going to do this.
PSG
Study your history books. Its not a case of the islands “not considering themselves to be sufficiently British to consider becoming part of the UK or members of the EU”. “Britain” and “the UK” are not the same thing at all. 1066, 1204, the Treaty of Rome – all very relevant.
And remember that it cuts both ways. The UK didn’t consider the Channel Islands to be sufficiently part of “the UK” to bother trying to defend us from the Nazis in 1940.
Obviously the Isle of Man’s historical relationship with the UK is different to that of the Channel Islands, but perhaps you can start to see why we don’t have the level of affinity with the UK which you seem to think we should. It’s not just about geography.
@Harry
As you say it is more about “history” than about “geography” … and has this “history” caused a deep seated resentment against any involvement with the UK and even perhaps the EU?
As crown dependencies the islands of Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man are already effectively autonomous from the UK; although any new laws passed by their so-called “parliaments” must be approved by the UK Privy Council and the UK government can still impose laws on the dependencies by using an “Order-in-Council”.
It is known that the island’s governments have secretly debated the issue of total independence from Britain.
Why not go ahead and see if you can survive?
Be assured that a good many people who will not invest a cent in your new country.
@Wooley
No it is not “ill informed nonsense”. It is all about the Crown Dependencies having their cake and eat it — ignoring some laws whilst enforcing others to suit avaricious vested interest. Although it is commendable that you have campaigned for 15 years against tax exploitation via the LVCR – particularly as the Isle of Man has nothing to do with the LVCR.
@Harry
Same old nonsense
In terms of gov’t the British Crown is the UK Parliament on whom by definition the Crown Dependencies are dependent
Sure they’re self governing within reason
But let’;s have no pretence they’re independent
I’, also self governing within reason – but I am subject to the UK parliament – and so are the CDs at the end of the day
@Richard Murphy
So following the logic therein and as I have said before, whatever we do is at the behest and with the connivance of the British establishment so it is no good beating the Islands up. Candidly, we suit them and as a by-product it earns us a living – or has done thus far. Look closer to home for the masterminds. More generally, day to day, we are free to do as we like, but upset big brother and we don’t last long. If anyone is in doubt about that, study what happened over Radio Caroline North in 1967. Might is right similar to the slavish attitude of the UK to the USA.
The notion that we stride the globe taking tax funds from other countries on our own initiative is frankly laughable. We could go for total independence via a referendum and the UK would respect that as with other dependencies in the past. Hardly a compelling prospect though is it?
@Woolley
At last an honest and sincere assessment recognising that the Crown Dependencies are viewed by certain factions in Westminster, and their list of rich and powerful friends, as a convenience that “suits” them.
An “arrangement” that provides the islands with a reasonable living, albeit at some cost to others.
The PSG gripe is that, in matters relating to the financial services, the island’s governments are selective in applying their own laws and that “regulation” is heavily weighted in favour of this industry and not the consumer.
However it is very encouraging to know that there are pragmatists like you who are prepared to recognise reality (even though your last paragraph may not be entirely accurate). Hopefully you are in a position of sufficient influence to help blow away the whiff of corruption that emanates from your otherwise charming island.
The PSG could do business with you.
@woolley
I agree
The whole Tax Justice Network thrust is it’s the UK’s fault
PSG
The UK cannot legislate for the CDs except in the most extreme of circumstances. Your post infers that they can do it at will. They cannot.
Very interesting that you think that the CDs have secretly discussed independence from Britain. Jersey certainly has, led by Sir Philip Bailhache. I don’t know whether the Isle of Man has or not. I am very reliably informed that Guernsey has not done so. That probably won’t surprise many people, given the very different approach that Guernsey is taking in relation to zero-10 in discussions with the UK and the EU. Acting as a very responsible and respected neighbour is far better than behaving and being treated like errant children. Never before have the three CDs been so far out of alignment with each other on the external relations front.
@Harry
The fact is that the UK can still legislate for the Crown Dependencies and notwithstanding the “most extreme of circumstances” this “will” still exists.
You will also find that in a meeting(s) led by Sir Philip Bailhache — Guernsey, Jersey and the Isle of Man jointly discussed an 83-page document looking at a possible ‘go it alone’ approach.
Visit http://www.thisisguernsey.com/2008/06/30/independence-from-uk-is-a-real-option/#ixzz1GrGOBVlJ
http://www.thisisjersey.com/2007/04/20/independence-on-guernsey-agenda/
Your claim that the Isle of Man as a very responsible and respected neighbour is simply not correct — in the view of the PSG the government’s regulation of financial services is simply appalling.
Neither is there that much evidence to support your claim that the three Crown Dependencies are “so far out of alignment”. There may be some superficial distinctions due to inconsistent PR propaganda … but to the PSG it appears that underneath there remains close collusion of doctrine between the three islands, conveniently clouded by their opaque and secretive nature.
At present the PSG would not advise anyone to deposit/invest a single cent on any of the islands. Hopefully this position will change and in the meantime we respect your (sometimes) erudite comment.
@Harry
But this simply proves the point. For “the most extreme of circumstances” read “if we refuse to roll over and do as we are told” which routinely we do when push comes to shove. Again, if you doubt this study what happened over Radio Caroline North in 1967.
@Premier Shareholder Group
Not sure I can see anything contentious in the last paragraph of my post at 1123 which you say may not be accurate.
@Premier Shareholder Group
Re Financial Regulation – comment is unfair on the Isle of Man regulator. Surely regulation throughout the world was “appalling” and this is what resulted in the crisis of 2008. I don’t think the UK distinguished themselves, particularly in the handling of Kaupthing if it is this to which you refer. The practices in the UK arm were breathtaking.
@Woolley
Wrong!
However “breathtakingly” inadequate regulation of the financial services industry may appear in the UK (and other EU countries) the Isle of Man, Jersey and Guernsey are in a special league on their own.
It is called the “No Regulation League”
All three “jurisdictions” openly flout UK Law, High Court adjudications and regulations mandatory to UK Financial Services Authority.
The excuse? Such niceties don’t apply to us!
The government’s cosy relations with “finance” is impregnable and any ill-fated consumer attempting to make justifiable complaint is summarily dismissed (after completing a cursory examination in a routine charade.)
The world should be warned that consumer rights do not exist if you are unfortunate to invest/deposit your life savings on any of these three wretched islands.
And don’t believe your government’s one-sided propaganda attempting to defend their atrocious mishandling of KSFIOM debacle — although this is not what the PSG is about.
PSG
Wrong – law and order would have to break down first.
That discussion paper by Philip Bailhache was hardly “secret” as you infer. It was driven very much by Jersey. It wasn’t taken seriously at all by many people, especially outside of Jersey. Merely discussing it does not mean that it was seriously considered. For all we know, the conclusion could well have been that there was absolutely no appetite for it.
I never suggested that Isle of Man was acting like a good neighbour – I was stating that Guernsey was. You have misread that comment.
Things might appear a certain way to the PSG re the relationship between the three islands – I can categorically assure you that those appearances are not accurate.
@Harry
The PSG has news for you:-
Law and order has broken down with regard to financial regulation on all three of the Crown Dependencies.
And still the islands image management churns-out euphoric propaganda creating an imaginary repute including Malcolm Couch (Isle of Man Assessor of Income Tax) declaring yesterday that “…. we are going to constantly think whether there is more the Isle of Man can do on transparency, and more that we can do on cooperation with other countries, to stabilize our position as a high probity, well regarded finance centre”.
Probity? High regard? Who is he kidding?
It maybe possible to fool some people some of the time – but not all people all the time.
The PSG has seen through the fa?ßade and behind it is a disgusting stink – and the ones that don’t smell it have either an involvement in the financial industry or a poorly developed sense of smell!
@Woolley. You write:- “Not sure I can see anything contentious in the last paragraph of my post at 1123 which you say may not be accurate.”
The low/no tax “initiatives” of the three Crown Dependencies encourage large companies, banks and wealth based in other countries to “relocate” (via creative financial devices) and dodge tax.
If a fair amount of tax was paid in the country (sometimes third world) where the wealth creation is based it could be humanely deployed; for example to relieve poverty.
Tax “initiatives are about greed — a greed that eventually causes suffering.
In reality the three dependencies would not survive as “independent nations” in their present form – they have nothing to offer except tax evasion/avoidance schemes only tolerated because of the island’s (dubious) connections in Westminster. Break these connections and bingo!
The only “compelling prospect” is to become honest and trustworthy.
Now there’s a thought!
@Premier Shareholder Group
“No regulation” would equally apply to the UK during the past decade and longer, you must surely agree. I remember Brown’s supine Mansion House speech to the assembled City even if you don’t. And of course the UK High Court does not apply to the crown dependencies which are not in the UK. However as I said before, the arrangement eminently suits the powers that be in the UK and the City so why beat up the Islands? It’s like attacking the checkout girl because you don’t like what Tesco is doing. Attack the owners, movers and shakers if you are big enough.
PSG
You say “Law and order has broken down with regard to financial regulation on all three of the Crown Dependencies.”
Total garbage. You’re biased and vindictive because of your experiences in the Isle of Man, which from what I can understand, you’ve never even bothered to test in the courts. So you don’t have a case, yet you spurt such nonsense.
Precisely how has “law and order broken down with regard to financial regulation” in Jersey and Guernsey? You’ve made a bold statement – now back it up with evidence. Not hearsay – evidence.
PSG
If investing in the Crown Dependencies (or indeed investing offshore generally) is such a bad thing because of its effect on the third world, why on earth did you and your merry band of investors invest offshore in the first place? What were you seeking to achieve by doing so?
If investing offshore is such an undesirable practice, bear in mind that the financial institutions offshore only have clients because those clients create the demand for those services in the first place. If there are no customers for the offshore institutions then there’s no offshore business.
The irony of your allegations is very clearly lost on you.
@Harry
You are beginning to appear like someone who is losing an argument and unable to articulate credibility resorts to personal abuse reinforced with bogus information.
What is not bogus is your island’s local newspaper, the Guernsey Press, which recently described your parliament as “a basket case”, saying: “Guernsey’s government does not know where it is going, has no directional leadership, has vague and drawn-out decision-making processes and, when it does make a decision, that’s often based on flaky information.”
If this is not approaching a break down in law and order what is?
Visit:- http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/6176148/Guernseys-parliament-declared-unfit-for-purpose.html
May the PSG sympathetically suggest that you have lost all confidence in your government and this frustration is causing you to resort to less than elegant prose.
As for “evidence” the PSG has 5kgs of it(in weight)and a statute-of-limitations to deal with.
@Premier Shareholder Group
That report on the government of and Guernsey is a classic – everyone should read it
@Woolley
There is a huge difference between light touch regulation and corrupt regulation.
The PSG is aware that the Crown Dependencies ignore UK High Court adjudications, and indeed those of the High Courts on their own individual islands.
These places should carry a Health Warning;
DANGER: INVEST/DEPOSIT MONEY ON THESE ISLANDS AT YOUR PERIL
Your analogy re check-out girls and Tesco suggests cowardice.
Let us be quite clear on this point. The PSG, average age mid-seventies, are proud and courageous people and far from “attacking” check-out girls they have taken their complaint to the top by (attempting) to engage with the governments on all three islands for their complicity in arranging circumstances to enable a company to obtain their life savings by deception.
The PSG is not beating-up the islands; all three are fabulous places with decent and honest people, corrupt governments apart. We also quite like you.
@Harry. Apologies we did not spot your latest posting…
Point One: Depositing and investing money in the UK is very difficult for expats. Many banks refuse to open a sterling accounts unless to non-UK residents.
This is why thousands of people are forced to rely on the Crown Dependencies to provide banking and investment services. Expats still pay tax on the interest – in the case of the PSG to the Spanish Exchequer who in turn fund a generous overseas aid programme.
Point Two: The undesirability in the practice of investing on Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man is not apparent at first — people believe the PR doctrine put out by their governments extolling the virtues of the islands. (Perhaps you are also a victim of this propaganda?).
Once the con is discovered it is too late because no one will help you. You are right in suggesting “irony” — but not in connection with our incontrovertible allegations.
PSG
That report (which is now quite old and already out of date with many aspects ready addressed) has absolutely nothing to do with the standard of financial regulation, which was your specific point. It also makes no suggestion whatsoever of corruption. For you to draw a correlation between that report and corruption and poort standards fo financial regulation beggars belief and simply exposes your motives.
The Guernsey Press report rightly highlights the inadequacies of a government structure in the modern. The current structure unquestionably needs reform, primarilyy because 45 independent elected deputies effectively constitutes 45 different political parties and, once elected, the deputies can forget their election manifestos for the next 4 years.
There are many aspects of government which need reform, but Guernsey is one of the least corrupt places on earth and the standard of financial regulation is incredibly high.
I note that you deliberately avoided the queation of why PSG investors were investing offshore in the first place, given your obvious disdain for the effect of tax havens (sic) in the third world.
@Premier Shareholder Group
I would say “incompetent” rather than “light touch” in the case of the UK and that is being charitable. Certainly in the pocket of mega finance which ironically is the accusation being levelled at the CDs. You make a very serious allegation about Isle of Man regulation being corrupt. I don’t know, perhaps you have been driven to this by your experiences? If that is the case, PSG, I sincerely encourage you to test your case in the Manx courts for your benefit and everyone who comes after you. Let’s hear it in the open.
@Harry
When in a hole stop digging. And any opinion expressed whilst half-comatose by insidious propaganda is rarely reliable — prefer instead the opinion of those with practical experience.
Your last paragraph clearly indicates that you are blind to the explanations provided at 1108 and as a consequence further debate is now closed. Adios.
@Woolley
Much of what you write is true and although the PSG episode may never be remedied it does draw attention to the fact that investment products which are launched without any form of regulation or approval and are not accountable to any responsible body (and hence restricted exclusively to professional investors only) should NOT be sold via unqualified and unregulated entities to inexperienced pensioners by highly misleading means.
Those responsible for knowingly allowing this to happen, and those providing such products with support services knowing the circumstances, should be held accountable.
Did you follow the KSFIoM fiasco? Here thousands of seriously wealthy people (and comparatively poor) people were involved and even they are now running low on funds to continue their case. So what chance has a relatively small group of ordinary working-class pensioners, many of them very elderly?
Vested interest is aware of this.
Thank you for making some very pertinent observations.
The PSG now draws a line under this discussion.
@Premier Shareholder Gro
Maybe you hadn’t understood that I opined that independence was not a compelling prospect for precisely the reasons you expound. The UK would respect a majority voting for independence in a referendum as I commented under the self determination of peoples conventions of the UN. However, like many things in our constitutional relationship with the UK it is what we call a typical Manx fudge. They KNOW we will never be stupid enough to go that way because only the most rabid Manx nationalists think we would have a prayer of surviving, and they are few in number. The big boys in the City (and globally) make the big bucks from all of this you understand. The Islanders only get the crumbs that fall from the table but it’s pragmatic and it’s better than spuds and herring. Oh sorry, all the herring’s gone now, so just spuds. Believe me there are a lot of people searching for the next “big thing”. Interesting debating with you though whilst understanding the financial constraits I still wish that you could test your grievances in court for the sake of your own sanity.