Google’s Executive Chairman, Eric Schmidt, has defended the company paying just £6m in corporation tax.
See original here: AUDIO: Google chief defends UK tax
The Top Penny Stocks newsletter for active penny stocks investors looking for penny stocks and pink sheet stocks
Richemont chairman Johann Rupert to take 'grey gap... Billionaire 62-year-old to take 12 months off from Cartier and Montblanc luxury goods groupRichemont's chairman and founder Johann Rupert is to take a year off from September, leaving management of the...
Cambodia: aftermath of fatal shoe factory collapse... Workers clear rubble following the collapse of a shoe factory in Kampong Speu, Cambodia, on Thursday
Spate of recent shock departures by 50-something CEOs While the rising financial rewards of running a modern multinational have been well publicised, executive recruiters say the pressures of the job have also been ratcheted upOn approaching his 60th birthday...
UK Uncut loses legal challenge over Goldman Sachs tax... While judge agreed the deal was 'not a glorious episode in the history of the Revenue', he ruled it was not unlawfulCampaign group UK Uncut Legal Action has lost its high court challenge over the legality...
Eurozone crisis live: Japan's strong growth figures... PM Shinzo Abe's stimulus package could generate feelgood factor needed to end two decades of stagnant growthPhillip Inman
Category : World News
LOS ANGELES, CA–(Marketwire – Feb 23, 2013) – Celebrating the biggest night in film and red carpet fashion, Eric Archibald (www.Eric-Archibald.com), personal stylist to Jennifer Hudson, will join E! Live From The Red Carpet at the Oscars this Sunday, February 24th. The Hollywood stylist will be giving commentary on the stars fashions alongside Giuliana Rancic, Kelly Osbourne and many others as they discuss who’s wearing whom, and who wears what best!
Go here to see the original: Celebrity Stylist Eric Archibald to Give Fashion Commentary on E! Live From The Red Carpet
Identifying the strategy for securing any changes to the UK’s relationship with the EU will be as important as determining what, if any, these changes should be (Report, 16 January). How one asks for things, after all, often determines what one gets. In this regard, the current strategy being touted looks hopelessly counter-productive. The premise is that, by threatening to veto treaty changes sought by other member states, the UK will have maximum leverage to secure the changes it wants. However, this veto exists only on paper.
The court of justice stated in its Pringle judgment last November that member states can set up treaties outside the EU framework and use EU institutions to run these. The only constraint is that these must not alter the “essential character” of the institutions. Faced with a threat of British veto on future fiscal integration, other member states would thus simply agree a new treaty managed by the EU institutions. This would be “EU” in everything but name. There would be no reason for it to take account of any British interests.
The terms of trade have therefore changed. A price no longer has to be paid by those wishing to push on with integration to those who previously could stop it. Rather, a price has to be paid by those who do not wish to participate to ensure they are not excluded on unfavourable terms.
Prof Damian Chalmers
London School of Economics and Political Science
• It is difficult to see how Britain, after leaving the EU, could possibly be sidelined. In macroeconomic terms, EU membership is virtually irrelevant for a member state that is large and not in the eurozone. Given the size of the EU budget, which is tiny, there is no reason why free trade and free capital movement cannot continue after “Brexit”.
Besides, the EU is becoming increasingly irrelevant in the global economy. When Britain joined the EEC – the forerunner of the EU – in 1975, the EEC was a trading block that accounted for 40% of global economic output. Today, it accounts for 25%. Within a decade, this figure is likely to be less than 15%. There may be many reasons why Britain should stay in the EU; fear of economic or political marginalisation cannot be one of them.
Randhir Singh Bains
Gants Hill, Essex
• Many benefits from EU membership are directly attributable to legislative change. Eric Deakins (Letters, 14 January) says much of this legislation would have appeared anyway. In fact, the UK was dragged kicking and screaming to accept equal pay, the working time directive, and many other social and labour rights.
The regulation on Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (Reach), entered into force on 1 June 2007, obliging UK manufacturers to meet common environmental standards. Changes in sewage processing, waste disposal and recycling were in direct response to EU law. Moreover, the whole point of single market legislation, including that concerning lead-free petrol, is that it is universally applied so we benefit not only from implementation and enforcement here, but throughout the European Economic Area.
Lecturer in international political economy, University of York
• Simon Jenkins (No more talk of in or out. We should be thinking opt-outs, 16 January) appears remarkably confident in his assertions. Many of us, who reject the anti-European stances he backs, would prefer the UK to be part of the eurozone, making it work a lot better by pooling fiscal sovereignty, and also accepting the social chapter and other civilising measures which go to make up a truly free market; free, that is, of the neo-classical economics that are presently ruining the world.
He accuses “Brussels” of power-grabbing and corruption, but these operate in every economy because some people prefer to gain advantages by less than fair means. You only have to look at the wreck of the British economy to establish that.
Furthermore, we are not yet done with establishing peace in our small continent, since many of the Balkan countries have a long way to go. As Europeans, we bear a responsibility to help them get there, without treating them simply as a market opportunity, which, as you report elsewhere, is being driven by hedge funds in the case of Greece. Only a tough-minded EU can put a stop to such shenanigans and it needs some British muscle to do so. I
New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman filed a lawsuit Tuesday against Credit Suisse, alleging that the bank repeatedly defrauded investors in sales of mortgage-backed-securities.
Read more from the original source: New York sues Credit Suisse in latest mortgage lawsuit
In a Wall Street vs. Wall Street fight, the NY AG Eric Schneiderman just gave hedgie Seth Klarman the upper hand.
See original here: Big winner in government’s JPMorgan suit: A hedge fund
My friend Eric Taplin, the foremost labour historian of Liverpool, has died of cancer aged 87. When, in 1960, he arrived in the city as a lecturer at the Liverpool College of Commerce, no serious research into the development of dockers’ trade unionism had been conducted. As an enthusiastic member of the Economic History Society, Eric set out to redress this situation, starting with research into the papers of the National Union of Dock Labourers.
With his books Liverpool Dockers and Seamen 1870-1890 (1974) and The Dockers’ Union: A Study of the National Union of Dock Labourers 1889-1922 (1986), Eric established himself internationally as the acknowledged authority on the Liverpool dockers and opened up the field for others who followed him. It took great skill to unravel and explain the complex work-relations on the docks, and the often fraught relationship between union leaders and the rank and file; Eric succeeded magnificently.
This was no mean feat, as his teaching left little time for research. After the College of Commerce merged into Liverpool Polytechnic, he became head of the department of social studies in 1972. His role in developing the department and the Polytechnic was pivotal. He was an able administrator and always treated his colleagues graciously, fairly and generously.
His book Near to Revolution: The Liverpool General Transport Strike of 1911 (1994) was based on a set of photographs of the strike taken by the Carbonara photographic firm, which had lain almost unnoticed in the archives. Eric weaved a succinct account of the strike around the images, providing a memorable history of what was perhaps the greatest achievement of the Liverpool labour movement.
Eric was born in London and attended Willesden county grammar school. In 1939 he was evacuated to Northampton. A conscientious objector in the war, he ended up guarding PoWs in Staffordshire. Because his education had not been interrupted by the war, Eric was ineligible for an undergraduate grant, even though he had been offered a place at Manchester University. He therefore became a primary school teacher in Manchester and London, while studying in the evenings for an external University of London degree, graduating in 1957. After a short spell at a college in Cardiff, he was appointed as a lecturer at the Liverpool College of Commerce.
Eric retired in 1984, but continued to publish many articles; he submitted the final corrections to his last article for a historical journal a few days before his death. He was appointed a research fellow at Liverpool University and was the founder and longtime president of the North West Labour History Society, as well as a founder member of the Maghull and Lydiate branch of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament and a member of the Labour party in Maghull.
Eric was a fine man who made friends wherever he went, and remained as sharp as ever until the end. He was predeceased by his wife, Joan McCourt, and is survived by his children, Stephen and Heather, four grandchildren and one great-grandchild.
'Hopefully they've got it out of their system'
Washington Post (blog)
Eric Brackey, a Ron Paul supporter who caused a disturbance on the floor during the 2012 Republican National Convention at the Tampa Bay Times Forum on Tuesday, August 28, 2012. (Photo by Michel du Cille/The Washington Post) Rep.