rooster59

May ready for tough talks over Brexit

5,530 posts in this topic

12 minutes ago, Flustered said:

Didn't have to, it's one of the more common tests.

 

Also, the Professor in question does not actually exist and for further info, follow this link

 

http://www.snopes.com/business/taxes/howtaxes.asp

 

 

I only got as far as "didn't have to"

 

Too bored to read to the end 😉

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, rockingrobin said:

I am not really suprised about the threshold increase , considering it was T.May who first introduced this requirement. 

Is it not really T.May response to the SC ruling regarding the treatment of children , to allow other sources of income to be included .

 

4 hours ago, nontabury said:

If you are meaning,other sources of income to include the income or future potential income, of foreign wives, the answer is they are not included. For the husband,it MUST be a guaranteed income or saving etc,or a combination. But like I said before, there are exceptions,but mainly not for British people.

One of the SC comments on the recent appeal

 

; Lord Carnwath said he and his fellow judges had held “that the minimum income threshold is accepted in principle” but he added that the Home Office’s rules and instructions failed to take full account of their legal duties in respect to the children involved or to allow alternative sources of funding to be considered '

 

I suspect that the raising of the threshold is partly in response to this comment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, mommysboy said:

That would be regarded as deprivation of assets in order to avoid fees.  I dont know if it would be followed up in practice, but a lawyer would not advise this.   However, one or both parents could make a will that puts their share in to a trust for the children upon their death. It then becomes random chance as to whether the will is enacted before one or other of the parents has to dispose of the house before enactment of the other's will.

The smallprint gives further information

 

Pensioners will not have to sell their home to pay for care costs while they or a surving partner are alive. Products will be available to allow the elderly to extract equity from their homes, which will be recovered at a later date when they die or sell their residence.

 

The above surely means some form of insurance, that will have to be taken out to allow the pensioner to keep thier home, and the premiums will be collected from the house sale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, billd766 said:

 

I couldn't get that link to work so I Googled it and got a printed copy.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/foreign-spouse-income-limit-latest-supreme-court-rules-lawful-bar-uk-entry-couples-british-children-a7592826.html

 

The Supreme Court has said the Government's £18,600 income threshold that bars UK workers’ foreign spouses is lawful, but judges admitted it will continue to cause “significant hardship” for thousands of couples. 

The policy, brought in when Theresa May was Home Secretary, has been blamed for keeping families apart because British citizens living in the UK do not earn enough money to bring their non-European Economic Area partners to the country. It holds even if their partner's earnings would tip them over the limit.

Britons have previously told The Independent they have had to move abroad to be with their families because of the policy.

I've read, though I don't know if it true. That citizens of other E.U. Countries can bring into the U.K. Their non-European spouses, without all the hassle that British people have to endure. If this is true, then I think it's another black mark against our country. It should be an automatic right of all British citizens to reside and bring into their country of birth A wife. As long as they can prove a relationship going back some time.

  There are also other exceptions. Such as the one taken advantage off, by blond blue eyed Russians. Money does help.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/18/2017 at 10:18 AM, Grouse said:

The dollar took it on the chin in N.Y. trade on Wednesday, with U.S. political concerns keeping risk taking levels well-contained. Gold soared, yields fell, and Wall Street was hit hard following reports that Trump asked then FBI chief Comey to call off the investigation into former NSA head Flynn and his Russian dealings. The DXY fell to 6-month lows of 97.53, led by a six-month EUR-USD top of 1.1154. Risk sensitive USD-JPY fell to 111.02, a three-week low from opening highs near 112.50. USD-CAD remained relatively firm despite higher oil prices and decent Canada data, holding over 1.3600 through most of the session. Cable printed new 7-plus month highs of 1.2991, though turned lower after the London close.

One of the interesting fall-outs from Sterling's drop after the referendum was the queue of Brexiteers saying that it was good for the pound to drop as it was positive for the UK and so on. Nobody really believed them and of course as soon as sterling perks up a bit so do they, so that's the end of that one....GBP not going up against EUR. I thought the EUR was supposed to collapse imminently? The bigger story was the rise in UK inflation. That is going to hurt.

Edited by SheungWan
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, rockingrobin said:

The smallprint gives further information

 

Pensioners will not have to sell their home to pay for care costs while they or a surving partner are alive. Products will be available to allow the elderly to extract equity from their homes, which will be recovered at a later date when they die or sell their residence.

 

The above surely means some form of insurance, that will have to be taken out to allow the pensioner to keep thier home, and the premiums will be collected from the house sale.

Currently, the protection is quite inadequate.  In order to comply one has to enter in to an arrangement which is not at all wise, and there is compound interest involved. Its unlikely the new deal will be any different: we were advised not to go there at all cost.  Hence, I didn't look in to it that much, but itn is essentially like a remortgage.

 

To an extent this is a game of cat and mouse- the least the authorities know the better! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've read, though I don't know if it true. That citizens of other E.U. Countries can bring into the U.K. Their non-European spouses, without all the hassle that British people have to endure. If this is true, then I think it's another black mark against our country. It should be an automatic right of all British citizens to reside and bring into their country of birth A wife. As long as they can prove a relationship going back some time.
  There are also other exceptions. Such as the one taken advantage off, by blond blue eyed Russians. Money does help.


So it's OK to have been away for 20 years from the U.K. and just rock up back whenever you feel like it with your wife but it's not OK to have been away for more than 15 years when voting in the referendum. Makes sense.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

UK Inflation Rate:

 

united-kingdom-inflation-cpi.png

 

Oh well, you can't use your preferred toy the exchange rate graphs at the mo, so you've found another one :laugh:.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SheungWan said:

One of the interesting fall-outs from Sterling's drop after the referendum was the queue of Brexiteers saying that it was good for the pound to drop as it was positive for the UK and so on. Nobody really believed them and of course as soon as sterling perks up a bit so do they, so that's the end of that one....GBP not going up against EUR. I thought the EUR was supposed to collapse imminently? The bigger story was the rise in UK inflation. That is going to hurt.

 

But the main cause of current inflation is the previous low value of Sterling. Once it's current higher value filters through, there will be a lowering of inflation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I strongly suggest people stop with the personal bickering and remarks.  

 

Stay on the topic, and the topic isn't about other members.  

 

Edit:   Off-topic posts and replies removed.  

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Flustered said:

Three elections in a row where Blair had taken the "Labour" party into territory historically and politically held by the Tories.

 

As a disenchanted Neil Kinnock said, " Labour and Tory policies are so close you cannot get a cigarette paper between them"

 

It was the only way Labour could ever get back into Government.

 

I remember John Major remarking that Blair was pushing through right wing policies which his (Major's) government would never have got away with.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

Oh well, you can't use your preferred toy the exchange rate graphs at the mo, so you've found another one :laugh:.

I am happy to use sources from ONS, Bloomberg, CNBC. I would use WSJ and FT as well but they are behind a firewall so less useful for illustrative purposes. There is also BoE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

I remember John Major remarking that Blair was pushing through right wing policies which his (Major's) government would never have got away with.

Whatever the observations and commentary on the parliament, the fact remains that Blair won 3 consecutive elections for Labour, the only Labour leader to have ever done so. It should also be a sobering factor to consider that he is the only Labour Leader to have won any General Election since Harold Wilson's victory in October 1974.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, nontabury said:

Interesting that you should mention Tony WMD Blair in the same sentence as Harold Wilson. They may have been Labour leaders,but that's where the similarity ends.

Harold Wilson served his country well, unfortunately dying penniless, his widow Mary haveing  to rely on charitable donations in her final years.

Tony WMD Blair has left a legacy of disruption, as can be seen on the streets of certain U.K. towns. Very much doubt he will die a pauper, certainly not after acquiring such wealth as £20million, or is that £30 million.

Harold Wilson won 4 General Elections, but not consecutively and one of those was a minority government. Electorally, Tony Blair was the most successful Labour leader since its formation, winning 3 consecutive elections with overall majorities. His majorities in 1997 and 2001 were larger than even Attlee in 1945 and were bigger than any of Thatcher's government majorities.

Edited by SheungWan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Grouse said:

Sandy's conclusion stands!

Not mine, I just reposted it. Thought it a good reminder of why people should never take things at face value. Here is another one.

 

"But here’s an odd thing, and one that has not been widely reported. As it happens, companies are paying an increasing amount of tax. Even more significantly, they are doing so as the rate of corporation tax falls. There are two things that we can learn from that. The corporate sector is paying its “fair share”, and arguably more than it really should. And if lower rates generate more cash for the Government, perhaps we should think about bringing them down further."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11498135/Why-lower-corporation-tax-means-more-for-Treasury.html

 

Off course there are always those that want to believe that in the face of a financial storm that companies and individuals will sail on regardless rather than take refuge in an offshore port.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

BANGKOK 25 May 2017 00:46
Sponsors