grahamffc

Michael Hessletine said recently in question time that when he was in Government they tried to get countries like the Cayman Islands and Monaco to agree to bilateral tax treaties but unsurprisingly they weren't interested. Governments before tried and the Governments since will have too. There is essentially nothing HMRC can do to force a company registered there to pay corporation tax in the UK. Only a retired MP would dare to be so honest because it's not what the public wants to hear.

Vodafone probably does make a lot from the UK but unless you are an expert analyst of the global telecoms industry (given you think retailers such as Starbucks own their stores I'm guessing not) we don't know they get a better return than they would by moving their investment to India, Brazil, or Africa. Tax credits are subsidising low wages, remove/reduce them and benefits (ie not working at all) may seem like a financially better alternative initially, employers them need to increase wages if they want anyone to work for them. Which assuming your point about them wanting to make money is true they will be have to do. The trouble with intervening in any market is that it's impossible to get it right and know when to stop. Benefits (for able bodied people), minimum wages, tax credits, living wages which will need to defer from one town to the next all need to be balanced and constantly changed depending on many variables. Or you could just let the market find its own ever changing equilibrium.

Corporations such as Vodafone, Starbucks, Amazon etc can threaten to leave the country resulting in not only HMRC getting zero corporation tax but also losing the VAT, personal income tax & NI their presence generates and thousands of people on the dole. They really hold all the cards and for the government to do anger them would be like cutting their nose off to spite their face. The principle might not be for be fair but I prefer it to the alternative which would be to increase taxes on those who cannot avoid it, ie 'normal' people.

Corbyn would put Labour into the wilderness for years, Tony Blair is their only leader to win an election in over 40 years and they want to distance themselves from his centre-left position. I will have respect for the party of they choose principle over increasing general election chances but it will be exactly that.

This was one of the biggest issues for me, if I could have afforded the cost and annual leave to go back once or twice a year I'd probably have stayed. I used to get so jealous of a friend who used to go back about three times a year for work but tag on an extra week each time.

What is it that is 'wrong' with the situation? It sounds as if you are suggesting that someone who has an expensive lifestyle (eg lives in a big house, has a brand new car, shops at waitrose etc) is more deserving of a funded education than someone who earns the same salary but has a thrifty lifestyle. This isn't meant to sound personal as it must be heartbreaking to see your business go bust after so much passion and hard work but the concept of what you're suggesting would be hugely unfair and counter productive.

It also breeds a system that is possible to manipulate. For example a student with self employed parents may be quite well off but can manipulate their incomes for a couple of years in order to get a sizeable grant.

There is no reason why anyone should get a grant as all tuition fees are paid after graduating and only when earning over £21k. Why should your friends son graduate with the same qualification but less debt than one of his peers. If fees were paid upfront (as they were when I was at uni) then it is absolutely fair that those from poorer backgrounds are subsidised otherwise they cannot afford a university education, but that is no longer the case.

Yeah I'd say it's pretty accurate, I came back last year and was offered three jobs within two weeks...I decided I could afford to take the summer off and the situation was the same in September. This is in London though which might not be representative of the entire country.

It's bonkers isn't it, to think they made me sit an English test in order to get my five year permanent visa.

Peak District A road trip around Europe Scotland A day at the cricket

Surely being new to an area doesn't help, as you essentially fall into tourist traps and your not thinking in the local currency. When I first moved to Melbourne everything seemed rediculously expensive, but I was converting everything into pounds at £1/$1.40 and depleting savings. Once I started earning dollars prices seemed a lot more normal and in time I found cafes and supermarket food that were good value. Also you accept some differences and get used to them. For example eating out seemed expensive compared to London where we'd often use pizza express vouchers or tastecard, but after a while we 'discovered' the dumpling restaurants in Chinatown are not something I had every had in London and are superb value.

Wherever you go first make sure you are not in Melbourne during winter (cold), or Brisbane during summer (rainy season). Melbourne is brilliant in summer with things like St Kilda Festival and the Australian Open, then I'd head to Sydney for winter.

*don't move around

With regards to people finding work difficult to find, I know there are plenty more (mainly macro economic) factors, but I'm convinced that Long Service Leave does not help the employment market in Australia. If I had been in a job for any resonable length of time (say 4 years) and thought it was time for a new challange I probably wouldn't bother knowing that in a couple of years time I could take three months paid leave. The result being that people move around and vacancies are fewer.

Thats correct, if the interest and other running costs are equal to the income you won't pay anything in either. Im afraid I don't know the rules relating to how long after you've moved out a property isn't considered your primary residence, but I expect the length of time you lived in it makes a difference too. ie if you had lived there for ten years then move to Australia and sell it two years later it ought to be considered your primary residence and any gains tax free, but if you lived there for a year moved to Oz and sold it three years later it's been an investment for longer than its been a home.

You'd have to pay the tax in the the UK, but that will be zero so long as it's less than the personal allowance (£21k per year if it's owned jointly). But then you will have to pay it in Australia. Basically you have to pay tax in one or the other unfortunately (and the rates are near enough the same), but you won't pay twice. The good news is you won't have to pay tax when you sell, unless that's a long time away it'll be classed as your primary residence. Perhaps soneone else can clarify how long that is.

I can give you my experience which in some ways was similar. I met my ex in Australia and right from the start she always said that she wanted to go back to Australia when she finished a part time masters she was studying that was going to take three years, I'd been there on holiday, watched neighbours everyday as a kid, had a few aussie friends so told her I'd love to one day too. We'd been together for about 3 years when I got a brilliant job that was really unique in my profession, is been in it for about a year when she finished her course and said she wanted to go back to Australia. We weren't living together and I was so happy with the job and the rest of my life that the thought of going didn't seriously cross my mind, so she went on her own and I stayed with a view to going in 6 months to a year. I assumed in this time that we'd either grow apart naturally or that I'd miss her so much that nothing else in my life would make up for it. I managed to spin things out for two years (largely by getting a skilled migrant visa which took ages). To be honest we had grown apart after the second year and I was getting cold feet (still living my job etc) and she gave me a bit of an ultimatum, no more putting it back a few months. So in that respect it was now it never plus I had gone to all the effort and expense of getting the visa so thought I should give it a go. Perhaps unsuprisingly it didn't work out. I resented her from the day I got there, probably before I had even left and was putting the wheels in motion to be honest. We split up and I stayed for about a year afterwards, having a much better time when the pressure of her and her family had been lifted. In hindsight I think that there are a couple of major things I/we got wrong and had they been different we might have lived happily ever after in Australia. For now I am happy back in London but I certainly don't hate Australia and would not rule out moving back one day if the circumstances are right. Had I gone at a time that suited me better, ie if I wasn't enjoying my job and the rest of my life, and secondly had I been a bit more assertive and said that I would go for two years and reassess it, but don't want to feel that I was thete forever from day one when its natural to be homesick. So I would suggest that you ask your girlfriend whether you can wait until something changes and makes you more keen to leave. Many things can make a dream job worse such as a new boss or moving locations. I appreciate this eoukd be tough for your gf as she will want to know whether this means one year or five years, or even longer. But you are very young so you have time on your side and going when you are not fully into it will not necessarily, but most likely be disastrous.

Just out of interest, did you move from London to Sydney? If not your observations about rent, and to a lesser extent wages are rather pointless. I didn't mind the occasional extreme whether, better to get it all out the way in a week than spread over three months in my opinion (I was in Melbourne so wasn't like this). Glad you seem to be enjoying it.

I find it strange that so many Labour people hate Tony Blair, the only leader to win them an election in over 40 years. If they pick another more left wing leader in the same mould as Micheal Foot, Neil Kinnock, or Ed Miliband they will be in opposition for a long time.

The above post sums up a lot of feelings I have. The grass is always greener. I wasn't ready to leave London when I did and this made it very difficult to settle in Melbourne. A big thing for me was that I felt so removed from my friends at home getting on with their lives. I eventually made some done really good friends in Melbourne mainiy through playing cricket and miss that massively when it was winter here seeing them all talk about their games on Facebook. But on balance I probably struggled more over there. Being in limbo was another huge factor. From before I left for MelbourneI was telling myself it's only for a year or two then I'll come home. This made life very difficult. I hardih bought anything like clothes etc because I had in my mind that I might not be there in six months and would either have to pay to ship it or give it away. I could never plan more than six months into the future. On balance I tell I've done myself a big favour in the long run. I needed to come back to finish qualifications which I am doing and if I do decide to go back before my PR expires I will not only be more qualified but I will know what to expect and more likely to settle from day one. I'd hope anyway!

Where would you go, I'm no expert on IT but have a few friends here in London working in IT and never seem to struggle. One has just returned into a contracting role after a year off travelling the world.

I suspect a lot of labour voters also switched to UKIP. Labour seemed to position itself as the party of the public sector and unions, this will have lost appeal to millions of low paid workers who traditionally should be voting Labour.

They need to find their identity, which is difficult because the identity they want won't get them elected by the UK population. They mostly had Tony Blair for being 'too tory', but he's the only leader to win them an election in over 40 years. If the unions insist on another Foot, Kinnock, or Miliband they won't get in government.

I should have said I only have knowledge of ICAA assessment this is what the migration agent recommended but CPA appears to be the same... http://www.cpaaustralia.com.au/become-a-cpa/migration-assessment/criteria-and-requirements How did you get around it? Does CPA accept qualifications that are not completed?