IOM Covid removing restrictions

[2112]

5 hours ago, Holte End said:

Cut your coat according to your cloth.

Mr Skelly says "Businesses coming to Island 'must create jobs'

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/businesses-coming-to-island-must-create-jobs/

But if this is going to cost another £270,000.00 per job again.  what is the point.

Someone should ask ,how many of these jobs still exist, what was the benefit to economy was ?.

I wish Skelly would just shut his trap, all he keeps doing is make a total tit of himself, both orally and in his press releases. 
 

I can only think that what the press release refers to is companies setting up their ‘HQ’s here, an office and a brass plate, but very few jobs. I wonder how much has been splurged on ‘relocation’ and the amount of jobs created?

[Holte End]

No that link was to DfE and the  £3million used by sparks impact.

Please try to keep up.

The nature of business is to make money, for the most people failure is not an option.

Why is there not a list of companies who DfE have given monies too for any reason  and how much.

This list should be accessible to the general public, that would be  real transparency.

Also I would rather be a clown, than not learn from my mistakes.

You appear to think  that I suffer from clown conspiracy.

 

 

 

[The Dog's Dangly Bits]

11 minutes ago, Holte End said:

No that link was to DfE and the  £3million used by sparks impact.

Please try to keep up.

The nature of business is to make money, for the most people failure is not an option.

Why is there not a list of companies who DfE have given monies too for any reason  and how much.

This list should be accessible to the general public, that would be  real transparency.

Also I would rather be a clown, than not learn from my mistakes.

You appear to think  that I suffer from clown conspiracy.

 

 

 

Well if the cap fits etc.....

There are guidelines as to how and what grants and assistance is available.

Why would confidential information be displayed publicly? Doesn't make any sense.

And the "nature of business" is that some thrive and some fail.  That's actually the nature of business.

[Cambon]

3 hours ago, 2112 said:

I can only think that what the press release refers to is companies setting up their ‘HQ’s here, an office and a brass plate, but very few jobs. I wonder how much has been splurged on ‘relocation’ and the amount of jobs created?

But surely that's a good thing. A few very highly paid employees, paying lots of NI and tax, versus lots of low paid people, still paying NI and some tax but taking more from God system than they are paying in? 

 

[Holte End]

13 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

Well if the cap fits etc.....

There are guidelines as to how and what grants and assistance is available.

Why would confidential information be displayed publicly? Doesn't make any sense.

And the "nature of business" is that some thrive and some fail.  That's actually the nature of business.

The nature of business is basically an activity of interest undertaken by an individual with an intention

to earn something out of the activity to offer him primarily the means of living and to some extent create

wealth for expanding the said activity or indulging in some other activity , which is also activity.

Tax payer money being invested into private businesses should not be confidential.

We seem to know how much each government department receives.

Government even when placing a job advert give the remuneration of said job.

But you seem to think when Government give monies to businesses it should be confidential.

[Roger Mexico]

39 minutes ago, Cambon said:

4 hours ago, 2112 said:

I can only think that what the press release refers to is companies setting up their ‘HQ’s here, an office and a brass plate, but very few jobs. I wonder how much has been splurged on ‘relocation’ and the amount of jobs created?

But surely that's a good thing. A few very highly paid employees, paying lots of NI and tax, versus lots of low paid people, still paying NI and some tax but taking more from God system than they are paying in? 

Brass doesn't pay much brass I'm afraid.  It's better to create jobs than have people out of work.  And given that the people behind those brass plates are skilled in avoiding tax, you may not get much out of them - indeed you may end up paying them.

If you consider tax and NI together the Isle of Man has pretty much a flat rate of just under 21% for everyone earning over about £40k and it's already about 17% for around £30k which is roughly median wage.  Once you hit the tax cap it then plummets of course.  And of course those with high salaries are less likely to spend them on Island, so in percentage terms they may pay less in indirect taxes as well.

[The Dog's Dangly Bits]

1 hour ago, Roger Mexico said:

Brass doesn't pay much brass I'm afraid.  It's better to create jobs than have people out of work.  And given that the people behind those brass plates are skilled in avoiding tax, you may not get much out of them - indeed you may end up paying them.

If you consider tax and NI together the Isle of Man has pretty much a flat rate of just under 21% for everyone earning over about £40k and it's already about 17% for around £30k which is roughly median wage.  Once you hit the tax cap it then plummets of course.  And of course those with high salaries are less likely to spend them on Island, so in percentage terms they may pay less in indirect taxes as well.

Why are they "less likely"?

Clearly people earning good money here are spending it locally.

[The Dog's Dangly Bits]

1 hour ago, Holte End said:

The nature of business is basically an activity of interest undertaken by an individual with an intention

to earn something out of the activity to offer him primarily the means of living and to some extent create

wealth for expanding the said activity or indulging in some other activity , which is also activity.

Tax payer money being invested into private businesses should not be confidential.

We seem to know how much each government department receives.

Government even when placing a job advert give the remuneration of said job.

But you seem to think when Government give monies to businesses it should be confidential.

I don't think I can help you here. You just don't understand .

[Albert Tatlock]

4 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

Why are they "less likely"?

Clearly people earning good money here are spending it locally.

Not necessarily.

Many buy up houses/flats to rent out - artificially inflating house prices here, disadvantaging 50% of under 40s living here

And the big spends are generally holidays away, or things bought online.

Most high earners generally have the same food and utility bills the rest get...or not much more. And unless they're constantly drinking cocktails, spend the same as the rest on a round of drinks.

[Phillip Dearden]

1 hour ago, Roger Mexico said:

Brass doesn't pay much brass I'm afraid.  It's better to create jobs than have people out of work.  And given that the people behind those brass plates are skilled in avoiding tax, you may not get much out of them - indeed you may end up paying them.

If you consider tax and NI together the Isle of Man has pretty much a flat rate of just under 21% for everyone earning over about £40k and it's already about 17% for around £30k which is roughly median wage.  Once you hit the tax cap it then plummets of course.  And of course those with high salaries are less likely to spend them on Island, so in percentage terms they may pay less in indirect taxes as well.

I agree with the above but would expand slightly. If we are considering things from an economic point of view, I would include the employers NI. If you see the salary plus Employer's NI as the gross cost - which it is, as this is the cost to the employer, then your 17% and 21% become 19% and 29%. From about 57k, the total tax take is 29% (increasing very slightly as you increase salary).

Our tax rates are progressive up to about £850pw, and then not ie as Roger  say "pretty much a flat rate".

[finlo]

16 minutes ago, Phillip Dearden said:

I agree with the above but would expand slightly. If we are considering things from an economic point of view, I would include the employers NI. If you see the salary plus Employer's NI as the gross cost - which it is, as this is the cost to the employer, then your 17% and 21% become 19% and 29%. From about 57k, the total tax take is 29% (increasing very slightly as you increase salary).

Our tax rates are progressive up to about £850pw, and then not ie as Roger  say "pretty much a flat rate".

Smoke and mirrors fooling folks that we are a low tax jurisdiction!

[The Dog's Dangly Bits]

42 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

Not necessarily.

Many buy up houses/flats to rent out - artificially inflating house prices here, disadvantaging 50% of under 40s living here

And the big spends are generally holidays away, or things bought online.

Most high earners generally have the same food and utility bills the rest get...or not much more. And unless they're constantly drinking cocktails, spend the same as the rest on a round of drinks.

Property is an investment asset class and funds pensions etc too.  It isnt artifical inflation.  It is simply supply and demand.

There are plenty of businesses here who don't aim their product and services at low income families.  They are kept going by people earning decent salaries.

Plenty of decent salaries spending decent money on the island.  People of all income levels are spending money off island.  Nothing new here.

[Out of the blue]

31 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

Not necessarily.

Many buy up houses/flats to rent out - artificially inflating house prices here, disadvantaging 50% of under 40s living here

And the big spends are generally holidays away, or things bought online.

Most high earners generally have the same food and utility bills the rest get...or not much more. And unless they're constantly drinking cocktails, spend the same as the rest on a round of drinks.

Bit negative Albert, many do buy large houses, but they require maintaining, improving and subsequent running. Domestic workers, building contractors, kitchen and bathroom suppliers, gardeners etc benefit from their spending power. They also eat out more and regularly use professional services such as accountants, lawyers and financial advisors . A proportion also buy high value items such as jewelry and premium motor vehicles on island. They also tend to be less of a drain on certain community services, choosing private medical treatment and private education over state options.

[Albert Tatlock]

1 minute ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

Property is an investment asset class and funds pensions etc too.  It isnt artifical inflation.  It is simply supply and demand.

 

Unregulated supply...that disadvantages many here.

[Roger Mexico]

12 hours ago, Phillip Dearden said:

I agree with the above but would expand slightly. If we are considering things from an economic point of view, I would include the employers NI. If you see the salary plus Employer's NI as the gross cost - which it is, as this is the cost to the employer, then your 17% and 21% become 19% and 29%. From about 57k, the total tax take is 29% (increasing very slightly as you increase salary).

Our tax rates are progressive up to about £850pw, and then not ie as Roger  say "pretty much a flat rate".

I don't think you can really include employer NI that way.  If you're looking at the total economic contribution you'd need to include other things as well and if you're looking at it from the employee's earnings point of view, they never get to see it so it doesn't affect their spending power.  The 12.8% Employer's NI also has a heavier weight for lower paid employees, so the percentages wouldn't be quite as you say.

The one place it does make a difference is because there is no upper cap (unlike employee's) it continues to add on at higher salaries.  But of course there have been lots of very ingenious schemes to prevent either side paying NI in the past, so how much actually ends up in the Treasury is another matter.

Edited July 13, 2020 by Roger Mexico
wouldn't for would - I shouldn't post that late