Ireland to contribute €16 billion more than it receives to EU in next 7 years

Graham

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

No we don't. What happens if we vote against something and lose?

We call that democracy at work.

It allows collectives to make decisions. It is generally seen as a good thing.

sameoldname

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Nope.

So you know little of the subject at hand, you've no interest in learning more and your opinion is the correct one? Tell me something I didn't know.

ExMachina1000

Graham wrote: »

We call that democracy at work.

It allows collectives to make decisions. It is generally seen as a good thing.

What's good for Denmark or Greece may not be good for Ireland.

Eu law supersedes national unfortunately. Ireland is a small fish with tax haven status. Ireland must pay more to EU budgets because of this.

Pay or leave. That's the choice.

View

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

No we don't. What happens if we vote against something and lose?
The law is still enacted and forced upon us. We cannot make our own law either. We are forced

EU law supersedes national law

No, we are not forced.

We have voluntarily and democratically agreed in the EU Treaties that we will accept decisions on EU laws and that we will do so irrespective of whether our view is the majority or minority view on any given law.

Since it was, and is, our free choice that that is the case, and, since, we are free to terminate our membership should we suddenly decide that the above is unacceptable, we are not forced but rather are freely choosing to exercise our sovereignty in a fashion that you disagree with, while apparently lacking the courage to advocate the sole alternative to it, namely, that of terminating our EU membership.

ExMachina1000

View wrote: »

No, we are not forced.

We have voluntarily and democratically agreed in the EU Treaties that we will accept decisions on EU laws and that we will do so irrespective of whether our view is the majority or minority view on any given law.

Since it was, and is, our free choice that that is the case, and, since, we are free to terminate our membership should we suddenly decide that the above is unacceptable, we are not forced but rather are freely choosing to exercise our sovereignty in a fashion that you disagree with, while apparently lacking the courage to advocate the sole alternative to it, namely, that of terminating our EU membership.

So pay or leave.
Like I said. These are the choices

Graham

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Pay or leave. That's the choice.

Is it that you think EU contributions should be optional?

We should be permitted to just take?

micosoft

greenfield21 wrote: »

What's the link between multinationals and ireland been in the EU?. For example US pharma companies come here to profit from ripping of US consumers. Am I right in thinking this is a tax treaty Ireland has with the US and nothing got to do with the EU. I'd love to see the spread of profits and know how much we are actually taking from the EU. In Pharma I'd say it is very small. If anything the EU is sort of gaining by having the resource and knowledge of these companies and may actually be in net postive on tax.

Umm. No.

US consumers are ripped off due to the dysfunctional US health market voted for by US Consumers. I appreciate there is an alt-right rumour that somehow the rest of the world is ripping off America to explain away the incompetence and nature of the US health market - but its untrue and has no basis in fact.

As an aside the EU is a leading developer of pharmaceuticals in its own right.

The truth is that a large part of America's wealth in the 20th century was built by cleverly invalidating all German Patents after WW1 and WW2. If we want to talk about the country that is the greatest larcenist in history in terms of IP there is an interesting discussion around the US.

There is an income tax treaty between the US and Ireland to avoid double taxation on income. Income tax is not within the remit of the EU. Not sure you understand whatever conspiracy theory you are trying to postulate here but you aren't even wrong.

International Commercial taxation is a complex legal and accounting discipline in its own right. Knock yourself out but you need to invest time if you want to understand it rather using terms like "spread of profits"...
Plenty here

ExMachina1000

Graham wrote: »

Is it that you think EU contributions should be optional?

We should be permitted to just take?

No they aren't optional.

sameoldname

Graham wrote: »

Is it that you think EU contributions should be optional?

We should be permitted to just take?

Wait until he grows up and has to pay taxes. Then he'll see what choices he has.

ExMachina1000

sameoldname wrote: »

Wait until he grows up and has to pay taxes. Then he'll see what choices he has.

Are the budget contributions a tax?

Is that what you mean

StupidLikeAFox

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

What's good for Denmark or Greece may not be good for Ireland.

Eu law supersedes national unfortunately. Ireland is a small fish with tax haven status. Ireland must pay more to EU budgets because of this.

Pay or leave. That's the choice.

Well its really:
Pay and enjoy the benefits (and downsides) of EU membership
Leave and give up the benefits (and downsides) of EU membership

I think the "Pay" option is probably the best for everyone

Podge_irl

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

You think that the EU are happy with Ireland's tax deals with multinationals?

Quite the opposite

A) Ireland doesn't have "tax deals" with multinationals

Some member states in the EU are very unhappy with it. Yet the situation remains. Seems like the all powerful EU can't actually force us to do anything about it

View

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

The choice is basically submit to EU law or leave

EU law supersedes national law.

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM%3Al14548

As I have already said, EU law only applies in those cases that are covered by the EU Treaties, so your comment is incorrect.

Were it the case that EU law superseded national law then in the case of the U.K., it would have been up yo the EU, not the U.K., to make the decision on whether the U.K. would be allowed to leave the EU, and the EU would have been under no obligation to even consider a U.K. request to leave the EU (much as Westminster is under no obligation to consider a request from Edinburgh to leave the U.K., much less grant it).

Timberrrrrrrr

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Nope.

EU law supersedes national law. That's the bottom line.

Posters going around in circles but at the end of the day the EU decides what is or isnt policy for everyone.

You obviously do not have a clue when you keep repeating this. Please keep repeating it though, it shows everyone how clueless you are when it comes to this subject.

ExMachina1000

StupidLikeAFox wrote: »

Well its really:
Pay and enjoy the benefits (and downsides) of EU membership
Leave and give up the benefits (and downsides) of EU membership

I think the "Pay" option is probably the best for everyone

Exactly. We have to pay up. The question I feel is the amount fair?

Do you think it's fair and what should be cut to fund this 2 billion annual bill?

sameoldname

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Are the budget contributions a tax?

Is that what you mean

Budget contributions are paid out of taxes, yes.

ExMachina1000

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

You obviously do not have a clue when you keep repeating this. Please keep repeating it though, it shows everyone how clueless you are when it comes to this subject.

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM%3Al14548

ExMachina1000

sameoldname wrote: »

Budget contributions are paid out of taxes, yes.

And what about the smart alec when he grows up comment.

Was that necessary? Why let yourself down like that.

micosoft

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

No we don't. What happens if we vote against something and lose?
The law is still enacted and forced upon us. We cannot make our own law either. We are forced

EU law supersedes national law

Compare and contrast.

Ireland in the EU does not lose. As a small country we make sure we build consensus with peers. We make strong fact based arguments. We listen to other countries and see how we can align interests. Which means we never get into a position of voting against something and losing.

I might contrast that to your approach to this discussion.

Graham

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Do you think it's fair

Yes

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

what should be cut to fund this 2 billion annual bill?

We gain far more than your figure and were we not to spend it the necessary cuts would be a multiple of €2 billion.

sameoldname

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

And what about the smart alec when he grows up comment.

Was that necessary? Why let yourself down like that.

It's a fair question? What are your options when you feel the taxes you pay aren't fair?

micosoft

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Exactly. We have to pay up. The question I feel is the amount fair?

Do you think it's fair and what should be cut to fund this 2 billion annual bill?

You feel? Do you go into the Supermarket and say "I feel I should only pay 5 euro for a 100 euro shop? Do you go to the car dealership and say "I feel I should pay 5 grand for a 100 grand Merc". Is this your general approach to life.

Given our economy and tax take would collapse can I ask what we should cut to fund the 20 billion plus collapse in our take take? The entire health service?

greenfield21

micosoft wrote: »

Umm. No.

US consumers are ripped off due to the dysfunctional US health market voted for by US Consumers. I appreciate there is an alt-right rumour that somehow the rest of the world is ripping off America to explain away the incompetence and nature of the US health market - but its untrue and has no basis in fact.

As an aside the EU is a leading developer of pharmaceuticals in its own right.

The truth is that a large part of America's wealth in the 20th century was built by cleverly invalidating all German Patents after WW1 and WW2. If we want to talk about the country that is the greatest larcenist in history in terms of IP there is an interesting discussion around the US.

There is an income tax treaty between the US and Ireland to avoid double taxation on income. Income tax is not within the remit of the EU. Not sure you understand whatever conspiracy theory you are trying to postulate here but you aren't even wrong.

International Commercial taxation is a complex legal and accounting discipline in its own right. Knock yourself out but you need to invest time if you want to understand it rather using terms like "spread of profits"...
Plenty here

what a load of nonsense, so you're saying US pharma companies are not here for tax arbitrage. I'm actually embarrassed for you.

ExMachina1000

micosoft wrote: »

Compare and contrast.

Ireland in the EU does not lose. As a small country we make sure we build consensus with peers. We make strong fact based arguments. We listen to other countries and see how we can align interests. Which means we never get into a position of voting against something and losing.

I might contrast that to your approach to this discussion.

You are going down the diplomatic approach where everyone listens to each other and laws are made that take everyone's opinion into consideration. Sounds great.

But if a decision is made that isn't in your favour you must comply. That's the price of being a member. Fair enough.

What happens when the EU acts to remove veto powers from countries and changes to qualified majority voting in EU taxation policy.

The EU are coming for Ireland's taxation deal with multinationals. The wheels are already in motion.

Do you think this will be good for Ireland and its citizens and national budget?

Graham

So you're saying we shouldn't pay our contribution because of future EU bogeyman.

Got it.

micosoft

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

You think that the EU are happy with Ireland's tax deals with multinationals?

Quite the opposite

What do you mean "the EU". The EU has no view on our Tax arrangements as it's not within its area of competence. The EU literally sends you to your national government on the matter.

In terms of views... of the 27 members there are a variety of views.

France has a view that is negatively inclined to our tax arrangements.

The Netherlands is positively inclined to our tax arrangements.

The great news is that while opinions are free there is nothing they can do. That said Ireland needs to be clever to avoid created difficulties with peers and not looking like a tax haven or a racing to the bottom. That would be the case even if the EU did not exist.

sameoldname

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

You are going down the diplomatic approach where everyone listens to each other and laws are made that take everyone's opinion into consideration. Sounds great.

But if a decision is made that isn't in your favour you must comply. That's the price of being a member. Fair enough.

What happens when the EU acts to remove veto powers from countries and changes to qualified majority voting in EU taxation policy.

The EU are coming for Ireland's taxation deal with multinationals. The wheels are already in motion.

Do you think this will be good for Ireland and its citizens and national budget?

Ireland has a veto on national taxation matters, if the EU want to change that to QMV Ireland also has a veto on that, along with the other 26 members, many of which would also veto that proposal. How many different ways do people need to explain the same thing?

ExMachina1000

micosoft wrote: »

You feel? Do you go into the Supermarket and say "I feel I should only pay 5 euro for a 100 euro shop? Do you go to the car dealership and say "I feel I should pay 5 grand for a 100 grand Merc". Is this your general approach to life.

Given our economy and tax take would collapse can I ask what we should cut to fund the 20 billion plus collapse in our take take? The entire health service?

But if I go to the shop and pick out 100 euro worth of groceries that is the price. Same with the car. I don't have to purchase. I can buy a cheaper car or put back the doritos and spuds

Where did the 2 billion figure come from? Who decided? Was there a debate?

We were told hey Ireland you must pay an extra 2 billion a year. End of

This will affect how the government can spend your tax money on public services to make your life better. You just want to hand over whatever you are told. No questions.

Why?

ExMachina1000

sameoldname wrote: »

Ireland has a veto on national taxation matters, if the EU want to change that to QMV Ireland also has a veto on that, along with the other 26 members, many of which would also veto that proposal. How many different ways do people need to explain the same thing?

Ireland currently has a veto. This wont always be the case. It will be an uphill battle for the EU to change to a majority voting system but it's a battle they are keen to undertake.

Will that benefit you and your life?

ExMachina1000

Graham wrote: »

So you're saying we shouldn't pay our contribution because of future EU bogeyman.

Got it.

Who decided our contribution? How was it decided