Originally posted by Wayne
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Chinese Investors spending up big in NZ
Collapse
X
-
Without excusing Putin's behaviour where do you draw the line?
Can NZ not take the same actions as the US, or the Euopean Union?
Can NZ perhaps be like an ethical investor? So we only trade with countries that at least try to be 'good' ? I reckon we can.Squadly dinky do!
Comment
-
"I'd hate to think that New Zealand was doing something other countries weren't, but you've got to remember this is being driven by the Russians and not by us."
Key said refusing to sell products to a country out of protest was not a stance the Government had ever taken.
"We can have a look at that, and we can take some advice on that, but at this stage I suspect we would sell if demand was there."
Leadership this is not!
Comment
-
David Atkinson explores how to look at foreign direct investment opportunities & sees in 'pragmatic nationalism' a model that avoids extremes and protects benefits
Pragmatic nationalism sits somewhere between the extremes of economic isolationism (the Marxist ‘radical view’) and free market philosophy.
.......
Labelling those opposed to particular FDI cases as racists or xenophobes is a tactic that is often used in debates.
On the other hand, supporters of particular FDI cases may be labelled as traitors, sell-outs, or lackeys of economic imperialists.
Arguments of this sort are not helpful in coolly analysing what the cost/benefit ratio of a particular FDI case may be, irrespective of any real xenophobic, xenophilic, or cosmopolitan views held by commentators.
Lochinver sale doesn't pass the test
.........
The term ‘vertical integration’ has been used by several commentators on this website, and is one of the key reasons why I consider that the sale is not ultimately advantageous to NZ Inc.
Vertical integration allows a company to sidestep opportunities for value-adding by New Zealand organisations, which means minimal income for New Zealand from such a company, apart from tax, some consumables, and perhaps intra-national transport charges.
In sum, the long-term benefits of this sale are unclear.
......
If such analysis leads to rejection of a sale, this does not need to indicate xenophobia - it can also indicate pragmatic nationalism.Last edited by speights boy; 11-08-2014, 06:25 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Perry View PostDoesn't matter which lot it is.
the refrain will be the same:
Regarding the latter, what is your personal opinion as to whether we should take up that Australian slack by increasing our sales to Russia ?Last edited by speights boy; 11-08-2014, 08:37 PM.
Comment
-
I don't have one. The cartoon point seemed
to be that it does not matter, much. Even if
the moral high ground seems inviting.
It sort-of reminds me of the old joke about
borrowing and difficult times.
If the loan is $710k - you have a problem;
If the loan is $7.1M - the bank has a problem.
PS
It does not need to be put as: "make up for
Australia." That puts a bias on it. Rather, it
might be:make up the shortfall for Russia.Last edited by Perry; 11-08-2014, 08:52 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Perry View PostI don't have one. The cartoon point seemed
to be that it does not matter, much.
Sitting on the fence is OK at times.
For me, not making up the shortfall for Russia should be our minimum response.Last edited by speights boy; 11-08-2014, 09:36 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Perry View PostOne alternative to "sitting on the fence"
is knowing when one is impotent and
what's more important.
I asked what your opinion was.
I accept you don't have one on this matter.
Others who have discussed this subject here simply do have an opinion.
Comment
-
after the ussr invaded afghanistan
nz heeded the call of the usa and did not go to the 1980 moscow olympics
australia did go
but they are taking the shoot-down harder than us for 2 reasons
lots of aussies were killed as the plane was flying to oz
i support actions to hold putin and his government responsible for trying to breakup the ukraine
and would support nz taking part in a world wide trade ban with russia
but europe won't do that as they need the gas to stay warm over winter
+ the chinese would veto it at the unLast edited by eri; 11-08-2014, 10:40 PM.have you defeated them?
your demons
Comment
-
Originally posted by eri View Postif nz'ers want to restrict the ways that foreigners do business here
it will result in less business done here
a lower tax take
We need to talk about that red carpet rollout
There are huge tax advantages available to overseas investors that simply cannot be accessed by locals.
...........
So CKI manages to pay virtually zero tax in New Zealand, but it presumably pays tax in its local jurisdiction, right?
Er, no.
Wellington Network is owned by an entity in the Bahamas, where, like BVI, the tax system is a warm bath for companies to float in the dark and listen to the sound of money - no company tax, no withholding tax, no capital gains tax, nothing.
There are plenty more examples, but we must get on.
The pattern here is of assets being transferred among overseas owners who seem able to pay very little tax.
...........
These issues have been highlighted by Inland Revenue and there are proposals to tighten the rules next year.
This is good.
Chalkie reckons we should welcome foreign investment, but not so much that we meet it at the airport with the tax equivalent of a red carpet on the tarmac, a chauffeur-driven limousine, free accommodation at Kauri Cliffs and an invite to John Key's house for drinkies every Friday night.
Whatever the benefits of overseas ownership - and there will be some - Chalkie reckons we should also take account of the costs.
.............
Chalkie reckons owning New Zealand farms through a Caribbean tax haven may have tax advantages - or is that xenophobic?
Comment
Comment