Businesses across Europe have cash flow worries because of problems with a new electronic system that was supposed to speed up value added tax refunds across borders.
The move from a paper-based to an electronic system for VAT refunds at the start of January has been marred by the failure of about half of Europe’s member states to set up a working interface through which businesses can submit claims to other member states.
Meanwhile, a technical change to the point of time at which VAT has to be assessed means that it is virtually impossible for businesses to comply properly with the new rules, according to BusinessEurope, the umbrella organisation for national industry federations in Brussels.
“The new rules on when the supply of services needs to be reported for VAT are almost impossible to comply with. This may bring penalties even where no tax is due,” it warns. Henk Wildeboer, head of its VAT working group, says the organisation will be detailing its concerns in a formal paper shortly and lobbying for legislative changes .
A spokesman for the International VAT Association said that assurances about the state of the systems from member states representatives and the commission had proved over-optimistic. He said: “They are not as ready as they indicate they are.”
The biggest problems were potentially faced by transport companies for which VAT on diesel fuel is a significant portion of their operating costs, he said. They could face serious cash flow problems if the VAT refunds are delayed. VAT reclaim agencies will also face particular difficulties, he said.
The survey by the International VAT Association found that Cyprus, Poland, Romania, Italy, Lithuania, Greece do not yet have working portals allowing businesses to access the electronic system. Portals in Ireland, Slovak Republic, Portugal, the UK, Luxembourg, Spain, Denmark and the Netherlands are only partially working.
Sweden, Finland, Germany, Austria, France, Belgium and Bulgaria had fully working systems, while it was unable to obtain information about Estonia, Slovenia, the Czech Republic, Latvia, Malta and Hungary.
The change from a paper-based to an electronic system, which was designed to make refunds for businesses faster and easier, was part of a package of reforms that represented the most far-reaching changes to the EU VAT system since the introduction of the single market in 1993.
The reform of the refund system was an attempt to move away from a burdensome paper-based system which often resulted in delays with valid claims being paid late or not at all. Many companies ended up paying much more tax than they needed because they were put off making claims by the difficulty of keeping up to date with legislation in different countries, complicated paperwork, tight deadlines for submitting claims and language barriers.
A spokesman for the Association criticised a failure to conduct end-to-end testing of the IT system before it went live. He also criticised the failure of member states to collaborate in building compatible portals, saying that Finland and Sweden were the only countries known to have worked together.
Suggestions that the EU should go back to its old paper-based system until the new technology is up and running have been rejected on the grounds of legal rules and the unworkability of operating two systems in parallel, he said.
The timing issue stems from the fact that a “taxable event” for cross-border services supplied to businesses is now deemed to occur when the service is supplied, rather than when it is invoiced. But Mr Wildeboer says that, because invoicing inevitably lags, this means that businesses cannot realistically calculate the right amount of tax due in any month. While some member states are fairly sympathetic to short payment delays – such as the UK and some Nordic countries – others are “really strict” and could impose penalties.
BusinessEurope will lobby to revert to calculating VAT at the invoice date, but Mr Wildeboer says that it will also want some assurances that member states will apply a “soft touch” vis-a-vis penalties in the meantime.
European Union finance ministers, meeting in Brussels, will have another stab at trying to agree revisions to the savings tax directive, so as to better crack down on tax evasion, on Tuesday. The measures require agreement by all 27 EU member states, and progress proved impossible last month, when Austria and Luxembourg dug their heels in over automatic sharing of savers’ bank account information. Although the majority of EU member states are supportive of the changes, diplomats say it is unlikely that unanimity will be forthcoming.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2010. You may share using our article tools. Please don't cut articles from FT.com and redistribute by email or post to the web.
Source:ft.com/
Showing posts with label Luxembourg banks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Luxembourg banks. Show all posts
Monday, January 18, 2010
Luxembourg's "Draft Dodgers" an uneven war drama
PALM SPRINGS, California (Hollywood Reporter) - The youth of Nazi-annexed Luxembourg had a choice, "Draft Dodgers" shows: conscription in the German army and likely death on the Russian front or the death-in-life of hiding in the country's iron mines for months on end.
Focusing on one young man's brutal wartime awakening, Luxembourg's foreign-language Oscar entry is by turns melodramatic and muscular.
The English-language title of "Refractaire" -- which bowed stateside at the Palm Springs festival -- doesn't quite match the nuance of the original. And producer Nicolas Steil's directing debut sometimes forsakes subtlety for overwrought flourishes. But at its best, "Draft Dodgers" offers fine period detail and makes powerful use of actual locations, from the mines themselves to the banal basement stairs that the occupiers turned into a tool of torture.
Gregoire Leprince-Ringuet stars as Francois, an unlikely member of one of the subterranean communities of deserters. Neither a communist nor the son of dissidents, he's the privileged child of an engineer who was well-known for collaborating with the Germans. After his father's retaliatory murder and his mother's steady fade into insanity -- one of the film's clumsiest elements -- Francois leaves the German-run university, where lectures center on the difference between Aryans and subhumans, and makes his way underground, with the help of the Resistance. In his three-piece suit and polished shoes, Francois is an almost comical addition to the group, which is run by the wiry Pierrot (Michel Voita) and at first glance threatens to turn into a collection of character types.
But broad strokes notwithstanding, the film is less interested in obvious personality clashes and class distinctions than in the ways Francois breaks out of his protective cocoon and into the world of moral complexity -- a world powerfully represented by the dank, impenetrable darkness of the mine.
Eventually becoming a courier for the Resistance, the collaborator's son finds a convenient hiding place in the arms of a collaborator's wife, Malou (Marianne Basler). The affair with an older woman is nothing if not a cliche of coming-of-age dramas, and the film doesn't entirely avoid a familiar touch of the mawkish. What deepens the lonely Malou's character is her clear understanding of what the Nazi Party represents to her weak, disappointed husband.
The film's strength is its understanding of the degrees of resistance and collaboration. At the other end of the spectrum are patches of stilted dialogue -- especially in Francois' family back story -- and plaintive music to drive home points.
Performances are a mixed bag; among the standouts are Thierry van Werveke as Malou's husband, Carlo Brandt as trigger-happy dissident Jacques and Guillaume Gouix as the rough-hewn Rene, who above-ground was Francois' rival for the affections of a girl. Leprince-Ringuet is not the most compelling of protagonists, but he convinces as an untested boy getting a devastating crash course in adulthood.
Source:reuters.com/
Focusing on one young man's brutal wartime awakening, Luxembourg's foreign-language Oscar entry is by turns melodramatic and muscular.
The English-language title of "Refractaire" -- which bowed stateside at the Palm Springs festival -- doesn't quite match the nuance of the original. And producer Nicolas Steil's directing debut sometimes forsakes subtlety for overwrought flourishes. But at its best, "Draft Dodgers" offers fine period detail and makes powerful use of actual locations, from the mines themselves to the banal basement stairs that the occupiers turned into a tool of torture.
Gregoire Leprince-Ringuet stars as Francois, an unlikely member of one of the subterranean communities of deserters. Neither a communist nor the son of dissidents, he's the privileged child of an engineer who was well-known for collaborating with the Germans. After his father's retaliatory murder and his mother's steady fade into insanity -- one of the film's clumsiest elements -- Francois leaves the German-run university, where lectures center on the difference between Aryans and subhumans, and makes his way underground, with the help of the Resistance. In his three-piece suit and polished shoes, Francois is an almost comical addition to the group, which is run by the wiry Pierrot (Michel Voita) and at first glance threatens to turn into a collection of character types.
But broad strokes notwithstanding, the film is less interested in obvious personality clashes and class distinctions than in the ways Francois breaks out of his protective cocoon and into the world of moral complexity -- a world powerfully represented by the dank, impenetrable darkness of the mine.
Eventually becoming a courier for the Resistance, the collaborator's son finds a convenient hiding place in the arms of a collaborator's wife, Malou (Marianne Basler). The affair with an older woman is nothing if not a cliche of coming-of-age dramas, and the film doesn't entirely avoid a familiar touch of the mawkish. What deepens the lonely Malou's character is her clear understanding of what the Nazi Party represents to her weak, disappointed husband.
The film's strength is its understanding of the degrees of resistance and collaboration. At the other end of the spectrum are patches of stilted dialogue -- especially in Francois' family back story -- and plaintive music to drive home points.
Performances are a mixed bag; among the standouts are Thierry van Werveke as Malou's husband, Carlo Brandt as trigger-happy dissident Jacques and Guillaume Gouix as the rough-hewn Rene, who above-ground was Francois' rival for the affections of a girl. Leprince-Ringuet is not the most compelling of protagonists, but he convinces as an untested boy getting a devastating crash course in adulthood.
Source:reuters.com/
Friday, January 1, 2010
Thank you, Dubai
Your obnoxious adherence to the Arab boycott made Chanukah come early for the Israelis.
Lyon Roth
Dear Dubai,
On behalf of many, I would like to say shukran iktir (thanks a lot). Thanks to your longstanding adherence to the Arab boycott, dozens of Israeli investors and entrepreneurs got their Chanukah present a couple of weeks early this year. Admittedly, this was an unconventional gift from an entirely unexpected source, but Israelis were completely spared the carnage precipitated by the Dubai debacle disclosed last week.
Rest assured that, given the chance, Israelis would have aggressively pursued investment opportunities in the region. Isolated for years, they have become among the most globally active entrepreneurs, seeking practically any market that will agree to work with them. Historically, that meant traveling great distances. When a Frenchman wants to export something locally, he can get in his car and drive to any of eight countries: Belgium, Luxembourg, Germany, Switzerland, Italy, Monaco, Andorra or Spain. An Argentinian can drive to five: Chile, Bolivia, Paraguay, Brazil or Uruguay. There is only one place an export-oriented Israeli businessman can drive to: Ben Gurion Airport. Due to the Arab boycott, regional trade has never been an option and Israel’s closest geographic neighbors may just as well have been on Mars.
No peace payoff
Your application of the Arab boycott is neither original nor unique. Arab boycotts of Jewish interests started as early as 1922. A formal boycott was declared by the newly formed Arab League Council on December 2, 1945, two and half years before the creation of the modern State of Israel. It applied to "all Jewish and Zionist products." The boycott evolved after 1948, and intensified following the Yom Kippur war in 1973. Essentially, it has three components: (1) the primary boycott, which prohibits direct trade between Israel and the Arab nations; (2) the secondary boycott, directed against companies that do business with Israel; and (3) the tertiary boycott that blacklists firms that trade with other companies that do business with Israel. The latter two components have been somewhat relaxed since the Oslo accords in 1993 and the peace treaty with Jordan in 1994. That year also marked the launch of the World Economic Forum’s Middle East North Africa business summits, in which many of your countrymen participated.
Patterned after the famous annual gatherings held in Davos, these were the first formal engagements between Israeli and Arab business leaders. As expected, Israeli participants, including Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Foreign Minister Shimon Peres, were tripping all over each other to meet potential Arab business partners who, for the most part, seemed overwhelmed and uncomfortable. Very few deals were consummated, and those that were received harsh condemnation in the Arab world for being premature.
The next year, in Amman, Israelis showed up with a list of 218 proposed projects worth $25 billion. As can be imagined, almost all were ignored. Moreover, the $5 billion regional bank that was agreed was never established. The Egyptians hosted the following year, and the last of these conferences was held in Doha, Qatar in 1997.
As a participant, I can attest that a lot of pressure was applied, directly and indirectly, by the Americans as well as EU countries, to end the Arab boycott entirely. These efforts failed. However, the summits did provide an opportunity to meet, learn from, and develop relationships with potential partners who, hopefully, would be more forthcoming in a more private forum.
Politics prevails
In the 1990s, I was working for Koor Industries. It was Israel’s largest conglomerate with over 50 subsidiaries, employing 35,000 people and representing 7% of the country's industrialized economy. Following each of the three World Economic Forum conferences I attended, I traveled throughout the region (with a Canadian passport) to see whether Koor’s extensive menu could provide a platform for joint venture activities with Arab interlocutors, especially within the Persian Gulf. I visited each of the six GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council) countries (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, UAE and Oman) at least once and was in your city, Dubai, four times. Everyone I met was courteous and curious. But, at the end of the day, the political obstacles were insurmountable.
It is worth recalling that in 1997, oil was trading at about $10-12 a barrel, and these countries were under enormous pressure to accelerate economic diversification. Perhaps because you in Dubai had already almost run out of oil, you were substantially ahead of your neighbors in almost every other industry. Major real estate construction projects punctuated the expanding skyline and the unquenchable thirst for record-breaking trophies was visible all over the city. You developed a thriving diamond industry, a financial center, and a burgeoning tourism and entertainment complex that was a playground for the wealthy within the region and beyond. Flying to and from Riyadh through Dubai was an incredible study in contrasts. In Dubai, women wore western clothes, worked in offices and drove cars. The mega-wealthy would fly in and out just to purchase luxury goods from the largest duty-free zone in the world.
Over the next ten years, as oil soared towards a peak price of $147 per barrel, the Arab elite became increasingly wealthier and your town became their favorite place to show off their wealth. Major neighborhoods were built on man-made islands offshore, contractors were outdoing each other to construct the next Tower of Babel and a city that never came within 20 degrees of a snowy day now offers visitors year-round skiing - indoors! Nothing was too expensive because the petrodollar flow was destined to last forever. One or two Israeli real estate tycoons who have partnered with Saudi businessman on other projects are rumored to be “silent partners” in some Dubai projects as well. Yet you generally adhered to the Arab boycott and remain extremely reluctant to embrace meaningful partnerships with Israeli companies.
There is an old joke about the Jew who prefers to read Arab newspapers because instead of reading about Jews being persecuted, Israel being attacked, Jews disappearing through assimilation, and Jews living in poverty, he can now read how Jews own all the banks, Jews control the media, Jews are all rich and powerful, and Jews rule the world. One world Jews don’t own any part of is Dubai World, the sovereign wealth fund that is now teetering on the brink of insolvency, struggling to restructure nearly $60 billion in debt. This has already had significant repercussions for numerous entities within the region and many countries around the world. Except Israel. So as we approach Chanukah, let me say once again, shukran Iktir. And a'id sa’id (happy holiday).
Source:globes.co.il
Lyon Roth
Dear Dubai,
On behalf of many, I would like to say shukran iktir (thanks a lot). Thanks to your longstanding adherence to the Arab boycott, dozens of Israeli investors and entrepreneurs got their Chanukah present a couple of weeks early this year. Admittedly, this was an unconventional gift from an entirely unexpected source, but Israelis were completely spared the carnage precipitated by the Dubai debacle disclosed last week.
Rest assured that, given the chance, Israelis would have aggressively pursued investment opportunities in the region. Isolated for years, they have become among the most globally active entrepreneurs, seeking practically any market that will agree to work with them. Historically, that meant traveling great distances. When a Frenchman wants to export something locally, he can get in his car and drive to any of eight countries: Belgium, Luxembourg, Germany, Switzerland, Italy, Monaco, Andorra or Spain. An Argentinian can drive to five: Chile, Bolivia, Paraguay, Brazil or Uruguay. There is only one place an export-oriented Israeli businessman can drive to: Ben Gurion Airport. Due to the Arab boycott, regional trade has never been an option and Israel’s closest geographic neighbors may just as well have been on Mars.
No peace payoff
Your application of the Arab boycott is neither original nor unique. Arab boycotts of Jewish interests started as early as 1922. A formal boycott was declared by the newly formed Arab League Council on December 2, 1945, two and half years before the creation of the modern State of Israel. It applied to "all Jewish and Zionist products." The boycott evolved after 1948, and intensified following the Yom Kippur war in 1973. Essentially, it has three components: (1) the primary boycott, which prohibits direct trade between Israel and the Arab nations; (2) the secondary boycott, directed against companies that do business with Israel; and (3) the tertiary boycott that blacklists firms that trade with other companies that do business with Israel. The latter two components have been somewhat relaxed since the Oslo accords in 1993 and the peace treaty with Jordan in 1994. That year also marked the launch of the World Economic Forum’s Middle East North Africa business summits, in which many of your countrymen participated.
Patterned after the famous annual gatherings held in Davos, these were the first formal engagements between Israeli and Arab business leaders. As expected, Israeli participants, including Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Foreign Minister Shimon Peres, were tripping all over each other to meet potential Arab business partners who, for the most part, seemed overwhelmed and uncomfortable. Very few deals were consummated, and those that were received harsh condemnation in the Arab world for being premature.
The next year, in Amman, Israelis showed up with a list of 218 proposed projects worth $25 billion. As can be imagined, almost all were ignored. Moreover, the $5 billion regional bank that was agreed was never established. The Egyptians hosted the following year, and the last of these conferences was held in Doha, Qatar in 1997.
As a participant, I can attest that a lot of pressure was applied, directly and indirectly, by the Americans as well as EU countries, to end the Arab boycott entirely. These efforts failed. However, the summits did provide an opportunity to meet, learn from, and develop relationships with potential partners who, hopefully, would be more forthcoming in a more private forum.
Politics prevails
In the 1990s, I was working for Koor Industries. It was Israel’s largest conglomerate with over 50 subsidiaries, employing 35,000 people and representing 7% of the country's industrialized economy. Following each of the three World Economic Forum conferences I attended, I traveled throughout the region (with a Canadian passport) to see whether Koor’s extensive menu could provide a platform for joint venture activities with Arab interlocutors, especially within the Persian Gulf. I visited each of the six GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council) countries (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, UAE and Oman) at least once and was in your city, Dubai, four times. Everyone I met was courteous and curious. But, at the end of the day, the political obstacles were insurmountable.
It is worth recalling that in 1997, oil was trading at about $10-12 a barrel, and these countries were under enormous pressure to accelerate economic diversification. Perhaps because you in Dubai had already almost run out of oil, you were substantially ahead of your neighbors in almost every other industry. Major real estate construction projects punctuated the expanding skyline and the unquenchable thirst for record-breaking trophies was visible all over the city. You developed a thriving diamond industry, a financial center, and a burgeoning tourism and entertainment complex that was a playground for the wealthy within the region and beyond. Flying to and from Riyadh through Dubai was an incredible study in contrasts. In Dubai, women wore western clothes, worked in offices and drove cars. The mega-wealthy would fly in and out just to purchase luxury goods from the largest duty-free zone in the world.
Over the next ten years, as oil soared towards a peak price of $147 per barrel, the Arab elite became increasingly wealthier and your town became their favorite place to show off their wealth. Major neighborhoods were built on man-made islands offshore, contractors were outdoing each other to construct the next Tower of Babel and a city that never came within 20 degrees of a snowy day now offers visitors year-round skiing - indoors! Nothing was too expensive because the petrodollar flow was destined to last forever. One or two Israeli real estate tycoons who have partnered with Saudi businessman on other projects are rumored to be “silent partners” in some Dubai projects as well. Yet you generally adhered to the Arab boycott and remain extremely reluctant to embrace meaningful partnerships with Israeli companies.
There is an old joke about the Jew who prefers to read Arab newspapers because instead of reading about Jews being persecuted, Israel being attacked, Jews disappearing through assimilation, and Jews living in poverty, he can now read how Jews own all the banks, Jews control the media, Jews are all rich and powerful, and Jews rule the world. One world Jews don’t own any part of is Dubai World, the sovereign wealth fund that is now teetering on the brink of insolvency, struggling to restructure nearly $60 billion in debt. This has already had significant repercussions for numerous entities within the region and many countries around the world. Except Israel. So as we approach Chanukah, let me say once again, shukran Iktir. And a'id sa’id (happy holiday).
Source:globes.co.il
Saturday, December 26, 2009
Ambassador to Luxembourg: Who is Cynthia Stroum?
The American ambassadorship to Luxembourg has long been reserved as a post for rewarding political friends and benefactors of presidents. In the last 50 years, only three out of 21 U.S.
ambassadors to the tiny European country have been career diplomats. Cynthia Stroum, who was sworn in as Ambassador to Luxembourg December 7, 2009, is not one of them.
One of President Barack Obama’s biggest fundraisers, Stroum hails from a prominent Jewish family in Seattle whose patriarch was her father, Sam Stroum, a wealthy businessman (one-time owner of Schuck’s Auto Supply) and philanthropist (described as the “godfather of Seattle giving”). During the 1990s alone, her father and mother, Althea, reportedly gave $40 million to arts, educational, medical, human services and religious organizations, including the establishment of a $9 million foundation through the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle and a generous gift to help build Benaroya Hall, the home of Seattle’s symphony. Sam Stroum was also credited for helping save the Seattle symphony from going bankrupt.
Cynthia Stroum earned a Bachelor of Arts in public relations and journalism from the University of Southern California. Her professional career has included working in the television and film industries, although she is best known for helping run her family’s holding company, Sam Stroum Enterprises.
Stroum has been an angel investor in more than 20 technology, biotechnology and retail start-up companies, including Starbucks Coffee Company. She also has been active on Broadway, helping produce the 2004 production of A Raisin in the Sun, which earned her a Tony nomination.
She has served on the board of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and as the founding chairman of the board of the Pancreatic Cancer Action Network (PanCAN). She has also served on the board of the USC Shoah Foundation Institute.
Stroum served on President Obama’s finance committee during the presidential campaign. She was one of his key bundlers, pulling in at least $500,000 from numerous individual donors, according to OpenSecrets.org. She personally donated $10,000 to Obama’s presidential inauguration.
Stroum has been a major donor to Democratic Senators Maria Cantwell and Patty Murray, both of Washington, contributing $10,000 to each. Cantwell gave Stroum a “Woman of Valor” award at a private fundraising luncheon. Stroum has made four-figure donations to Senators Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Jon Tester (D-MT), as well as to former Senator John Edwards (D-NC).
Stroum is a single mother with one daughter.
Stroum is credited with getting President Obama hooked on Fran’s Chocolates smoked salt caramels in milk chocolate.
-Noel Brinkerhoff
Source:allgov.com/
Luxembourg bank to sell derivatives unit to Macquarie
FRANKFURT — The Luxembourg-based investment bank Sal. Oppenheim said Wednesday it had sold its equity trading and derivatives business to the Australian bank Macquarie.
Oppenheim, which is itself being bought by Deutsche Bank, did not provide financial details but according to the Financial Times Deutschland, Macquarie would pay around 50 million euros (70 million dollars) for the unit.
More than 90 Oppenheim employees would transfer to Macquarie as part of the deal, which is to close early in the second quarter of 2010, a statement said.
Macquarie would gain "access to a new range of products, a platform with state-of-the-art technology and top-class employees with in-depth knowledge of the domestic markets," Macquarie derivatives director Mark Gilbert said in a company statement.
A derivative is a financial instrument that derives or gets its value from some real good or stock, and Oppenheim trades them in Germany, Switzerland, Austria and Italy.
Deutsche Bank is buying Oppenheim for around one billion euros (1.42 billion dollars), and Oppenheim said Tuesday that Deutsche Bank executive Wilhelm von Haller would become its new boss.
Germany's biggest bank is not interested in Oppenheim's derivatives activities however, but rather in the Luxembourg bank's impressive private wealth management portfolio, worth around 60 billion euros, analysts said.
The future of Oppenheim's merger-acquisition advisory and financial markets activities remain uncertain meanwhile, with the latter responsible for much of the bank's recent financial troubles.
It purchased in particular a big stake in the German retail group Arcandor, which has since declared bankruptcy.
Options also remain open regarding the Frankfurt-based BHF bank which Oppenheim bought in 2005 for 600 million euros.
Source:AFP
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)