At least freeports are a benefit, right?

All I am trying to say is any jobs brought here is good news as we need them if they come from over parts of the uk I feel for them but as Teeside is one of the most deprived places in uk I would not turn them down
 
The Tees has a wider and far deeper channel than the Tyne, it has existing deep water wharfs and the facilities to handle ships larger than than any that could enter the Tyne. We also have a huge amount of available river frontage if needed.
 
BiggEggo said:
Freeport=Tax Avoidance Scheme - who does that really help.

Geordies shouldn't be worried about losing out. Boris will be back in his dressing up box in a couple of weeks then taking a cheap flight into Tyneside (trains are too green and expensive), to spread some more crumbs of levelling out for them. Put money on it.
Click to expand...
Well, it's confirmed. The dressing up box is being fully restocked ready for a rail trip. (Carrie has grounded him apparently, stopped him beating around her bush over air travel)

No 10 have approved the on site refrigerator so the clown will be pitching his circus tent on Tyneside very soon to spout more guff to the CBI about a sunlit uplands, levelling up and new exciting plans that will make PoT the place to be.

He might even break some wind, sorry, ground for them on a huge new project. He might even announce free port status for them now they have added a good Tory to their management team. It's that simple.
 
Moving jobs to the north east isn't a bad thing regardless of your political leaning. It doesn't even matter how it is framed or what the reasons are. It matters that jobs will be created in a deprived area, one we should all care about.

Furthermore there is the possible added benefit of manufacturing growing in the free zone to limit tax liability. I understand that less tax revenue looks bad, however, its not as simple an equation as that.

freezones inside and outside the EU can be legislated differently. For example the EU does not allow tarrif inversion, the uk can. So it is not an apple/apple comparison.

And finally Cameron didn't abolish freezones, the legislation that allows them lapsed.
 
Laughing said:
Moving jobs to the north east isn't a bad thing regardless of your political leaning. It doesn't even matter how it is framed or what the reasons are. It matters that jobs will be created in a deprived area, one we should all care about.

Furthermore there is the possible added benefit of manufacturing growing in the free zone to limit tax liability. I understand that less tax revenue looks bad, however, its not as simple an equation as that.

freezones inside and outside the EU can be legislated differently. For example the EU does not allow tarrif inversion, the uk can. So it is not an apple/apple comparison.

And finally Cameron didn't abolish freezones, the legislation that allows them lapsed.
Click to expand...
Where I work, shipping, tankers, is going from strength to strength, more projects have been sanctioned & over the next 24 months more uplifting good news, especially within the shipping side of our job, which is great for the younger workforce
 
Erimus74 said:
Where I work, shipping, tankers, is going from strength to strength, more projects have been sanctioned & over the next 24 months more uplifting good news, especially within the shipping side of our job, which is great for the younger workforce
Click to expand...
I don't live in the North East anymore but family do and I have an abiding love of the area. Anything that benefits it is OK with me. Not at any cost, but shifting some investment to the ne is long overdue.
 
Some questions being asked here. Is it really a benefit if the so called 18,000 jobs are just part time, temporary, fixed term, minimum wage crap. If not then why are trade unions excluded from the talks?
There is the risk of tax evasion and money laundering.
And as the article demonstrates, freeports already exist in the EU so there was no need to leave the EU to open one.
www.theguardian.com

Low taxes and levelling up: the great freeport experiment comes to Teesside

The Tories set great store by the special economic zone, but will it create thousands of jobs, or just be the economic damp squib experts predict?
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 
Trug said:
Some questions being asked here. Is it really a benefit if the so called 18,000 jobs are just part time, temporary, fixed term, minimum wage crap. If not then why are trade unions excluded from the talks?
There is the risk of tax evasion and money laundering.
And as the article demonstrates, freeports already exist in the EU so there was no need to leave the EU to open one.
www.theguardian.com

Low taxes and levelling up: the great freeport experiment comes to Teesside

The Tories set great store by the special economic zone, but will it create thousands of jobs, or just be the economic damp squib experts predict?
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Click to expand...
Tax avoidance is the point of freeports. No import tax on anything arriving at the port providing it doesn't continue past the free zone. It encourages manufacturing in the free zone because the finished goods can be shipped out duty free. If the finished goods move into the same country the import tax is generally less on finished goods than on parts.

I am not sure about money laundering, maybe but I don't see how.

As has been said many times the freeports allowed under EU legislation are not really freeports, they are a light version of them. Whether freeports in the uk will follow the EU model or the actual freeport model, I don't know.
 
So it has now been established that the 50-50 split in ownership of the Freeport has now changed to 90-10 in favour of private ownership, as the leaders don’t want to burden the public purse with the costs involved.How very noble of them, unfortunately they don’t seem very interested in explaining the decision to the public and Mayor Houchen was too busy to make an appearance yesterday when the story broke.
 
dribble said:
So it has now been established that the 50-50 split in ownership of the Freeport has now changed to 90-10 in favour of private ownership, as the leaders don’t want to burden the public purse with the costs involved.How very noble of them, unfortunately they don’t seem very interested in explaining the decision to the public and Mayor Houchen was too busy to make an appearance yesterday when the story broke.
Click to expand...
Funny that!!🙄
 
As with all of these 'Levelling Up' projects they are just designed for the rich to get rich take money away from the public purse into private hands.

In other news, as predicted, the Treasury move to Darlington is just costing the public more money:

www.telegraph.co.uk

Treasury's move to Darlington leads to £15,000 in travel costs

The Treasury aims to have 100 officials working in Darlington by the end of the financial year under levelling-up ambitions.
www.telegraph.co.uk www.telegraph.co.uk
 
Theft is the taking of goods with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of such goods (according to the Theft Act (1968). If we consider the U.K. as the person, as we should here, then this is redistribution, not theft. Having recently returned to the North East after a couple of decades working in the City and living in the Home Counties, I’m convinced we need considerably more redistribution.
 
Sisyphus said:
Theft is the taking of goods with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of such goods (according to the Theft Act (1968). If we consider the U.K. as the person, as we should here, then this is redistribution, not theft. Having recently returned to the North East after a couple of decades working in the City and living in the Home Counties, I’m convinced we need considerably more redistribution.
Click to expand...
So, we disagree on the theft point. Which is fine.

But what we can both agree on is there is no brexit benefit here.
 
SmallTown said:
So, we disagree on the theft point. Which is fine.

But what we can both agree on is there is no brexit benefit here.
Click to expand...
I will interpret your final sentence as a question, rather than a statement. There may be a limited, or minimal beneficial impact to UK GDP, but it is possible that the new freeports will help to balance the United Kingdom. Brexit has allowed greater customs concessions and tax incentives for the freeports, that would not have been permissible under the EU Customs Code and State Aid rules.
As to whether it is possible to analyse this benefit in isolation from the overall impact of Brexit, I doubt that very much.
 
Sisyphus said:
I will interpret your final sentence as a question, rather than a statement. There may be a limited, or minimal beneficial impact to UK GDP, but it is possible that the new freeports will help to balance the United Kingdom. Brexit has allowed greater customs concessions and tax incentives for the freeports, that would not have been permissible under the EU Customs Code and State Aid rules.
As to whether it is possible to analyse this benefit in isolation from the overall impact of Brexit, I doubt that very much.
Click to expand...
So no then. Just in more words so you can’t admit it. That’s where we are with Brexit isn’t it? Some people, even now, can’t admit it Has failed. So have to come up with huge wordy sentences to cover the failure
 
Sisyphus said:
I will interpret your final sentence as a question, rather than a statement. There may be a limited, or minimal beneficial impact to UK GDP, but it is possible that the new freeports will help to balance the United Kingdom. Brexit has allowed greater customs concessions and tax incentives for the freeports, that would not have been permissible under the EU Customs Code and State Aid rules.
As to whether it is possible to analyse this benefit in isolation from the overall impact of Brexit, I doubt that very much.
Click to expand...

But we had Freeports when we were in the EU.
 
SmallTown said:
So no then. Just in more words so you can’t admit it. That’s where we are with Brexit isn’t it? Some people, even now, can’t admit it Has failed. So have to come up with huge wordy sentences to cover the failure
Click to expand...
Freeports are likely to be a benefit to deprived areas. The concessions now being given to freeports would not have been possible whilst we were in the E.U. Whether the freeports increase the UK GDP is debatable.
Is that simple enough for you?
You also betray the intolerance of the Brexiteers for any alternative view. One of the reasons I no longer discuss this topic is that I regularly upset people in both camps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top