Wednesday, June 19, 2013
Columnists
Written by
Tony Moorby
on
Tuesday, 11 June 2013 14:33

Tax avoidance is legal while tax evasion is not. Apple Computers (or its parent company) has been roundly criticized recently for moving profits offshore, in this case to Ireland, to avoid paying taxes in the U.S. Duh: This practice has been going on since Joseph and Mary went from Nazareth to Bethlehem.
Is anyone really surprised to see someone exert an option of paying less or no taxes when the option is there? Commercially its a no-brainer, especially in a country that imposes a 35 percent base corporate tax rate on companies, virtually the highest in the civilized world.
The Caribbean is full of little havens to hide ill-gotten fortunes alongside sheltering legally earned incomes. Even snooty Bermuda, a British protectorate, derives most of its revenues by hosting businesses or management companies to hold funds away from the domicile of earnings. The British have been doing it since Red Beard was an able seaman.
While the well-to-do sun themselves on the pink sandy beaches drinking Dark and Stormies, the local rum quaff, tiny offices with naught but a plaque on the front door of an innocent-looking two-story walk up in some back alley, rack up the tally of a major corporation in London. It doesnt even require that anyone be there just maintain the presence at the address and pay local taxes.
Ive mentioned before that as much as $2 trillion of American money is secreted away in such conveniences, obviating its circulation in the normal course of commerce. It will stay that way until companies can make more than they save. Repatriating that money into a growing economy would spur even more growth imagine how many people could be put back to work with an injection of that magnitude. But companies would have to be incentivized to do it a tax holiday, to all intents and purposes, with no penalty so long as its put to good use in investment and employment.
Tax abatements have been used as incentives by state governors to attract all kinds of investments. Here in Tennessee, Nissan was attracted to Nashville, Amazon to Chattanooga along with VW. Dell Computers enjoyed the same dangled carrot (but didnt keep their side of the bargain and moved out).
With all this thriving industry around infrastructural entities grew too schools, hospitals, the health care industry, financing, retail and so on. Nashville is now the it place to live nice climate, low unemployment compared to other areas, good restaurants, its relatively safe and its in a beautiful area.
If this, or any, administration would quit shaking their fists at others successes and work with them to build together, wed all be better off.
The stars are lining up to form a growing economy. U.S.-based energy resources are more abundant (yes, I know we have to be careful with the environment), there is a pent up demand for all kinds of consumer and capital goods and the average American wants to shrug off the cloak of the recent past and look forward to something new.
Why doesnt Congress look to new and innovative ways to keep money in our own economy? Simplifying the tax code would be a good start but it strikes me that many Washington officials come from legal or accounting backgrounds; many still being partners in such firms and their incomes thrive on the complexities of the law and financial doings. Im not advocating a flat tax or fair tax but simple things tend to work; earn a hundred dollars, pay fifteen, no excuses, no rebates or deferments, no subsidies. Apply it to individuals the same as corporations plain and simple. Theres a lot to be attracted by this method; easy to police and a willingness to cough up would keep the IRS off most peoples backs including the Tea Party!
The downside is that a voracious government would increase it to 20 percent in five years, introduce different rates for different things and wed be back to where we are today. Its worth a try anyway - the money would work to our advantage and evasion would be a thing of the past.

 
Written by
Tony Moorby
on
Wednesday, 29 May 2013 14:20

Buy-here, pay-here dealers are as crooked as a cockroachs back leg!
How often have you heard a derogatory statement that parallels that or sounds something like it? Of course, its not true only those who are ignorant of the necessity for these valuable dealers existence would cast them in this lowly light.
The genesis for the subprime financing market for automobiles probably goes as far back as the 70s during the savings and loan crisis. Now, as then, unemployment was high, the economy was struggling to become a service-oriented environment from an industrial and production-based one. Credit was as common as hens teeth. So where banks wouldnt venture, the dealer stepped in to fill the gap. Nature abhors a vacuum and economics are just the same. An unfulfilled need doesnt stay that way for long.
Those dealers willing to take on enormous risk to keep car sales going had to put up hard cash for extended periods of time and the early days provided a hand-to-mouth, day-by-day need to oversee that their investment was going to make it back into their pockets.
Sure, it was a hard-nosed business, dealing with customers who didnt look after older cars, ran them till they stopped and then ceased paying for something that wouldnt work. Snatchbacks became part of the daily routine and everyones reputation suffered as a result.
Before consumerism came into our lexicon, thieves, vagabonds and neer-do-wells got in on the act for a quick buck upstarts who neither knew anything of nor cared anything less for customer service or even the real car business itself. Departments of Motor Vehicles were overrun with complaints about poor product and excruciatingly high interest rates. So naturally states decided that they should insinuate some authority over this business that was now seen as shady.
These days are vastly different and command nothing but the sharpest (in the nicest possible way) minds to oversee one of the most complicated business formats you could possibly think of and provide top quality cars for reasonable prices and at rates which sometimes do not reflect the risk at hand. State and national government oversight exists at every level from inventory acquisition, advertising, accounting, banking, record keeping blah, blah ad nauseam!
If everyone could meet Mickey Dorsey of Friendly Auto Sales, a buy-here, pay-here dealer in the Chattanooga market area, they would be convinced that the epitome of customer goodwill and service are the watchwords of his thriving business. It thrives because hes good. Good at all the disciplines that this business can and does throw at you. This market has been quixotic enough this year cast planning out the window for all the good its done and hes still meeting and greeting customers whove now started coming back for the third or fourth time. Some are now credit-worthy enough to dictate better deals at new car stores but opt to do business with Mickey because of who
he is and how he conducts his business.
He takes things seriously enough to join Tennessees Independent Automobile Dealer Association and became its president a couple of years ago. He started out as a salesman for a local new-car store and holds all the tenets that make a sales guy successful things he now teaches his own sales people. Even those responsible for the inevitable collections are polite, diplomatic and helpful. He ensures his staff is on top of all regulations and tax requirements.
He says that profit can only be measured by ones ability to collect it. He constantly seeks ways to improve everything about his business and ultimately a well-deserved profit. And hes as polished as a cockroachs shiny shell.

 
Written by
Tony Moorby
on
Tuesday, 14 May 2013 12:58

England is a nation of shopkeepers. An observation that was attributed to Napoleon Bonaparte; it was more probably a twist on a statement by the economist of the same era, Adam Smith, who opined, England is a nation governed by shopkeepers.
The late prime minister, Baroness Thatcher, was born to a corner-store grocer who also happened to be a local politician in Grantham, Lincolnshire. She followed his footsteps to a political career, although she studied chemistry at Oxford University. After being a research chemist, she later passed the bar and specialized in tax law.
She made most of her early affiliations to the Conservative Party while she was at university.
Early attempts at election were unsuccessful, but in 1958 she became the Member of Parliament for the London Borough of Finchley. She made a rapid rise through various government departments, becoming Secretary of State for Education and Science in 1970.
When Sir Edward Heath lost the 1974 election to the Labor Party, Mrs. Thatcher became the leader of the opposition and the first female prime minister in 1979, sweeping out the Labor Party with a massive 44-seat majority in the House of Commons.
I had been in the business world a solid 12 years by then and had already seen foment and strife between labor and the industrialists. Unions promoted strikes at the slightest warrant most were quite unnecessary as a way to negotiate better wages and conditions, especially in the face of growing competition from Europe and Japan. She believed in less government, lower taxes and more freedom for business and consumers while exacting rigorous wage restraint to maintain competition. Does any of this sound familiar? A Russian newspaper called her The Iron Lady, a soubriquet she gladly adopted.
For many, including me, she was a stalwart for individual success, believing that successful people promote a healthy economy in which everyone benefits. She stood her ground so firmly that strikes and even riots from the leftists wouldnt make her budge. Eventually the economy turned around, rampant inflation was brought under control and manufacturing got back to full swing. Things were on the up and she was re-elected.
She maintained a similar posture when the Argentine government wanted to claim the Falkland Islands as theirs, Las Malvinas, as they called them. Maggie Thatcher staunchly stated that as long as it was a British Sovereignty and that Brits were living there, we would defend them to the hilt. It was costly, as any war is many lost their lives and ships were sunk. Eventually Britain retained its grip on this colonial outpost and Thatchers popularity was further underpinned. She was again re-elected.
There were troubles in Northern Ireland, which peaked during her tenure, and she even survived a bombing at a hotel in Brighton where the Conservative Party Conference was being held.
She had a major presence on the international scene, supporting President George H.W. Bush in the ouster of Iraq from Kuwait and in spite of her hatred of communism, regarded Chairman Gorbachev as someone with whom I can do business. She was also one of President Reagans biggest supporters.
Many thought that she started believing that her opinions could not be wrong and her popularity started to slip. Her own party members challenged her leadership and she left Downing Street in November 1990.
As in any political position, its a love/hate relationship. Many couldnt stand her high-handed ways but just as many believed that her bearing and style helped Great Britain through some very hard times.
I think we could do with more icons that come from everyday backgrounds, but were unlikely to find them on supermarket shelves.

 
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>

Page 1 of 12


WE'RE ON FACEBOOK!
SPONSORED BY: