Author Topic: Financial Cliff in United States and impact on sales (Read 24185 times)

tab62 · « **on:** December 05, 2012, 14:52 »

anyone else have concerns on this matter? CNN had a good article this morning and it appears that companies are putting the breaks on spending to include marketing as well...

Pixart · « **Reply #1 on:** December 05, 2012, 14:54 »

Well, I'm not in the US and my husband is looking for a new job - the "financial cliff in the U.S." is one of the reasons. (Manufacturing.)

Poncke · « **Reply #2 on:** December 05, 2012, 14:59 »

The financial cliff must have hit today then. Only 4 sales on SS today. I had a roaring start of the week, and then it just dropped off a cliff. I think I never had a day before where FT and CanStockPhoto were outperforming SS on $$

WarrenPrice · « **Reply #3 on:** December 05, 2012, 15:21 »

Quote from: Poncke on December 05, 2012, 14:59

The financial cliff must have hit today then. Only 4 sales on SS today. I had a roaring start of the week, and then it just dropped off a cliff. I think I never had a day before where FT and CanStockPhoto were outperforming SS on $$

Seems like the norm; one contributor is cut off, another gets turned on.
Yours went down, mine went up.

Not sure what any of our problems have to do with "the cliff."

Sadstock · « **Reply #4 on:** December 05, 2012, 16:29 »

I have a friend who runs a business with about 80 employees who sells items to the U.S. military. He says business is good and he would like to hire more people but if the U.S. goes over the cliff, he expects he may have to furlough most of his employees, so he's certainly not going to hire anyone now. Lots of other companies who conduct business with the U.S. government are in the same boat and no doubt, they are not using as much imagery as a result. How big an impact this has currently, who knows.

tab62 · « **Reply #5 on:** December 05, 2012, 16:33 »

warrenprice you are hereby ordered to redirect some of your sales to us for not sharing sales during the 'Financial Cliff'

velocicarpo · « **Reply #6 on:** December 05, 2012, 16:47 »

The FC is just one potential trigger out of many for a possible Dollar Collapse. I am not worried about it especially since I assume they find some way to avoid it. But in the long run I do not think the US Dollar has a bright or any future since the only politics the FED / GOV knows is flooding and inflating the financial markets. Sadly, there is no stable, global alternative as a reserve currency on the horizon.

WarrenPrice · « **Reply #7 on:** December 05, 2012, 17:06 »

Could the December Doldrums be the culprit?

steheap · « **Reply #8 on:** December 05, 2012, 17:07 »

Look on the bright side - this could be a great opportunity for illustrators to make lots of images of money going over a cliff, the USA map going over a cliff - must be hundreds of possibilities.

I'm sure a stock photo of a stream of coins going over a waterfall would be pretty good.

Every problem has a silver lining!

steve

ruxpriencdiam · « **Reply #9 on:** December 05, 2012, 17:17 »

So President Obama won a second term pretty much due to the fact the middle class people would like to see the rich pay more taxes and so would some of the richer people as well because that is pretty much how and what his platform ran the bid for re-election on!

Now there is this Republican somewhat named Bonehead out there who if you pay close attention to him and his body language seems to think his sheite don't stink and that he is better then everyone else or at least 90+% of the people out there because he put's his pants on differently or so he thinks, and he probably has someone tie his shoes for him!

So this is one of those kids in School with a Polo shirt that cost a fortune that was better then everyone else except the one kid who had the balls to grab him with one hand by his balls and the other hand on his throat squeezing it like he was holding on for life while picking him up and slamming him into the bathroom wall trying to teach him some street smarts that he just still hasn't figured out just yet many years later!

So until someone grabs him by the balls and teaches him a thing or two we are going over the ledge.

velocicarpo · « **Reply #10 on:** December 05, 2012, 17:17 »

It`s called "Fiscal Cliff" BTW (not "financial cliff")

tab62 · « **Reply #11 on:** December 05, 2012, 17:38 »

it financial cliff to my paycheck lol!

cathyslife · « **Reply #12 on:** December 05, 2012, 17:38 »

The company I work for is going gangbusters, so I think the economy is a lot like microstock. Like Warren said, "Seems like the norm; one contributor is cut off, another gets turned on." If the country goes over the cliff, I am sure it will affect most everyone in one way or another. With millions of people still out of work, I would say the country already is over the edge and is only hanging on to that tree that always seems to grow on the side of the cliff.

lisafx · « **Reply #13 on:** December 05, 2012, 18:26 »

They are now calling it the Fiscal Slope on a lot of news programs. As I understand it, all He11 will not break loose at once on January 1. There will be time in January - February to pass the necessary tax cuts and restore some of the domestic spending to avoid financial armageddon. That is if these idiots in congress can pull their heads from their posteriors. Which I admit, is a bit IF.

sharpshot · « **Reply #14 on:** December 05, 2012, 18:58 »

Perhaps going over the fiscal cliff could be a good thing? Lots of pain in the short term but then a real recovery. I don't like the present global economic situation, waiting for Europe and the US to have a big crisis before confidence can return. The size of the debts is mind boggling, perhaps it's better to deal with it now than to delay the inevitable?

shotupdave · « **Reply #15 on:** December 05, 2012, 19:07 »

Lets all remember this is a made up event just as the Mayan Calender. The idea that we the consumers will stop buying products and services in inane. I own two shopping centers and my tenants are having the best business in years.

cascoly · « **Reply #16 on:** December 05, 2012, 19:50 »

Quote from: lisafx on December 05, 2012, 18:26

They are now calling it the Fiscal Slope on a lot of news programs. As I understand it, all He11 will not break loose at once on January 1. There will be time in January - February to pass the necessary tax cuts and restore some of the domestic spending to avoid financial armageddon. That is if these idiots in congress can pull their heads from their posteriors. Which I admit, is a bit IF.

right - the worst parts of the actual cuts are spread out over the next year or more, so there's no immediate disaster unless everyone panics and creates one.

gillian vann · « **Reply #17 on:** December 05, 2012, 22:41 »

Quote from: shotupdave on December 05, 2012, 19:07

Lets all remember this is a made up event just as the Mayan Calender. The idea that we the consumers will stop buying products and services in inane. I own two shopping centers and my tenants are having the best business in years.

you must be a realistic landlord. Here in Australia retail is dire, with most just paying wages and rents, which are outrageously high.

Ed · « **Reply #18 on:** December 05, 2012, 22:59 »

Buy stock in Alcoa. I predict the price of aluminum is going to rise

MetaStocker · « **Reply #19 on:** December 06, 2012, 03:18 »

If you think you have it tough in the US, come to Europe !
Endless red tape, taxation up to 50%, unions, strikes, overpriced gas, fuel, electricity, and transportation.

There's a good reason something like Silicon Valley cannot be replicated in Europe.

nicku · « **Reply #20 on:** December 06, 2012, 03:52 »

Quote from: tab62 on December 05, 2012, 14:52

anyone else have concerns on this matter? CNN had a good article this morning and it appears that companies are putting the breaks on spending to include marketing as well...

I believe this mean that the companies are looking in other markets regarding microstock photos... like SS instead of IS (because of the prices) and micro instead Macro or midstock. To put a brake on marketing or advertising those days means certain bankruptcy for many companies.

....and that especially in US where marketing and advertising is everything.

leaf · « **Reply #21 on:** December 06, 2012, 07:25 »


Fiscal Cliff \| The Simpsons \| Animation on FOX

lisafx · « **Reply #22 on:** December 06, 2012, 13:14 »

Quote from: MetaStocker on December 06, 2012, 03:18

If you think you have it tough in the US, come to Europe !
Endless red tape, taxation up to 50%, unions, strikes, overpriced gas, fuel, electricity, and transportation.

There's a good reason something like Silicon Valley cannot be replicated in Europe.

OTOH, Europeans have a social safety net. If you are unemployed or sick you are far less likely to end up homeless.

michaeldb · « **Reply #23 on:** December 06, 2012, 14:17 »

Quote from: MetaStocker on December 06, 2012, 03:18

If you think you have it tough in the US, come to Europe !
Endless red tape, taxation up to 50%, unions, strikes, overpriced gas, fuel, electricity, and transportation.

There's a good reason something like Silicon Valley cannot be replicated in Europe.

Yes, and the VAT tax in particular makes selling new technology products more difficult. Hope the pro-high-tax people in the US never succeed in getting a VAT tax installed here. It's a real high tech innovation killer.

MetaStocker · « **Reply #24 on:** December 06, 2012, 15:34 »

Quote from: lisafx on December 06, 2012, 13:14

OTOH, Europeans have a social safety net. If you are unemployed or sick you are far less likely to end up homeless.

It depends on MANY factors and also by country, by region, and even by city.

Yes, if you're sick you can get a bed in a hospital, but otherwise you can pretty much end up under a bridge or begging for food in a church or other religious NGOs feeding the beggars, we've millions of homeless people, no matter if people outside europe think we've a happy welfare, it's BS, and it's BS even in scandinavia where taxation is up to 50%, see by yourself how many homeless you see in Stockholm alone.

MetaStocker · « **Reply #25 on:** December 06, 2012, 15:40 »

Quote from: michaeldb on December 06, 2012, 14:17

Yes, and the VAT tax in particular makes selling new technology products more difficult. Hope the pro-high-tax people in the US never succeed in getting a VAT tax installed here. It's a real high tech innovation killer.

Most of nowadays american technology has been stolen from Germany after 1945.

As for VAT, just look at HongKong or Singapore where the VAT is 5% or less or even ZERO.

In europe is 20%, it's just crazy but people dont realize it, they take it for granted.

There can be no innovation in europe in fact, unless you're a mega-multi-corporation paying taxes in Luxembourg or Cayman Islands.

lisafx · « **Reply #26 on:** December 06, 2012, 15:42 »

I don't know anyone in the US who wants a VAT tax. It's very regressive and punishes spending, which is not what we need to get the economy going.

ClaridgeJ · « **Reply #27 on:** December 06, 2012, 15:49 »

Quote from: MetaStocker on December 06, 2012, 15:34

Quote from: lisafx on December 06, 2012, 13:14
OTOH, Europeans have a social safety net. If you are unemployed or sick you are far less likely to end up homeless.

It depends on MANY factors and also by country, by region, and even by city.

Yes, if you're sick you can get a bed in a hospital, but otherwise you can pretty much end up under a bridge or begging for food in a church or other religious NGOs feeding the beggars, we've millions of homeless people, no matter if people outside europe think we've a happy welfare, it's BS, and it's BS even in scandinavia where taxation is up to 50%, see by yourself how many homeless you see in Stockholm alone.

You are 100% correct. I am born in Stockholm, live there and in London. Nowdays I have a farm in the country, Smaland. Its total BS, sweden is one of the most heavily taxed countries in the world. Yes the standard is high, etc. Nowdays there are countless homeless people and especially young people, sleeping under bridges, this and that.
Ofcourse, its not like NY or London but then again Stockholm has a populatiuon of only 1-5, million, so there is no excuse at all.

gostwyck · « **Reply #28 on:** December 06, 2012, 16:00 »

Quote from: lisafx on December 06, 2012, 15:42

I don't know anyone in the US who wants a VAT tax. It's very regressive and punishes spending, which is not what we need to get the economy going.

You already have 'VAT' in the US. It's just that you call it 'sales tax' and it's controlled by individual states rather than Federally (and is a lot less than in most European countries). In the US property taxes are vastly higher than in Europe. Swings and roundabouts.

One of the good things about VAT is that it is difficult for the wealthy to avoid. They might be able to hire accountants for creative tax-avoidance schemes for their income but at least they get taxed when they spend it.

Jim Rogers, the US billionaire investor, has always advocated taxing on spending rather than investing. Maybe if that had been the case before the recession it might not have happened. The recession was largely caused by people spending money that they didn't have and over-heating the economy.

MetaStocker · « **Reply #29 on:** December 06, 2012, 16:03 »

Quote from: lisafx on December 06, 2012, 15:42

I don't know anyone in the US who wants a VAT tax. It's very regressive and punishes spending, which is not what we need to get the economy going.

And that's nothing.
Do you know that in europe if you dare to buy a house you will have to pay a monthly or recurring property tax ?

In France they even had a tax if you had a balcony.

What if you own a car, same, you're taxed, and you must have insurance etc, no matter if you leave your car in the garage.

Do you want to walk in a bar and have a beer ? 20% is in VAT, and same in supermarkets and pretty much anything else, whatever you buy 1/5th goes to the government and if we talk about cigarettes or gas it can be as much as 80%.

MetaStocker · « **Reply #30 on:** December 06, 2012, 16:04 »

Quote from: ClaridgeJ on December 06, 2012, 15:49

Quote from: MetaStocker on December 06, 2012, 15:34
Quote from: lisafx on December 06, 2012, 13:14
OTOH, Europeans have a social safety net. If you are unemployed or sick you are far less likely to end up homeless.

It depends on MANY factors and also by country, by region, and even by city.

Yes, if you're sick you can get a bed in a hospital, but otherwise you can pretty much end up under a bridge or begging for food in a church or other religious NGOs feeding the beggars, we've millions of homeless people, no matter if people outside europe think we've a happy welfare, it's BS, and it's BS even in scandinavia where taxation is up to 50%, see by yourself how many homeless you see in Stockholm alone.

You are 100% correct. I am born in Stockholm, live there and in London. Nowdays I have a farm in the country, Smaland. Its total BS, sweden is one of the most heavily taxed countries in the world. Yes the standard is high, etc. Nowdays there are countless homeless people and especially young people, sleeping under bridges, this and that.
Ofcourse, its not like NY or London but then again Stockholm has a populatiuon of only 1-5, million, so there is no excuse at all.

Yes, especially YOUNG people, that's the problem, and all they can do is switching to crime.

lisafx · « **Reply #31 on:** December 06, 2012, 16:10 »

Quote from: gostwyck on December 06, 2012, 16:00

You already have 'VAT' in the US. It's just that you call it 'sales tax' and it's controlled by individual states rather than Federally (and is a lot less than in most European countries). In the US property taxes are vastly higher than in Europe. Swings and roundabouts.

The only time I have heard VAT tax discussed in the US it they were referring to a national tax, and it was going to be IN ADDITION to the state sales and property taxes.

It is regressive because, although the wealthy can't avoid paying it, the middle class and poor end up spending far greater proportions of their income than the wealthy do. Which, of course, explains why billionaires would be in favor of it.

MetaStocker · « **Reply #32 on:** December 06, 2012, 16:15 »

Quote from: gostwyck on December 06, 2012, 16:00

Quote from: lisafx on December 06, 2012, 15:42
I don't know anyone in the US who wants a VAT tax. It's very regressive and punishes spending, which is not what we need to get the economy going.

You already have 'VAT' in the US. It's just that you call it 'sales tax' and it's controlled by individual states rather than Federally (and is a lot less than in most European countries). In the US property taxes are vastly higher than in Europe. Swings and roundabouts.

One of the good things about VAT is that it is difficult for the wealthy to avoid. They might be able to hire accountants for creative tax-avoidance schemes for their income but at least they get taxed when they spend it.

Jim Rogers, the US billionaire investor, has always advocated taxing on spending rather than investing. Maybe if that had been the case before the recession it might not have happened. The recession was largely caused by people spending money that they didn't have and over-heating the economy.

What surprises me is how much americas are surprised in the whole rest of the world taxes are so high.

It's usual for us in europe saying that some thing could only work or succeed in America as in europe you couldn't fly due to taxation and red tape.

So, really you guys complain having it tough but you're still the most business-friendly place on heart apart the many "financial paradises" like HongKong or Singapore.

Unfortunately the US is so hostile to foreigners nowadays including europeans, much better and easier to move in Canada from any point of view, but even there .. you see .. these guys think they're giving you a favour ... imagine that ! a european downgrading to canada or US or Australia.

MetaStocker · « **Reply #33 on:** December 06, 2012, 16:19 »

Quote from: lisafx on December 06, 2012, 16:10

Quote from: gostwyck on December 06, 2012, 16:00

You already have 'VAT' in the US. It's just that you call it 'sales tax' and it's controlled by individual states rather than Federally (and is a lot less than in most European countries). In the US property taxes are vastly higher than in Europe. Swings and roundabouts.

The only time I have heard VAT tax discussed in the US it they were referring to a national tax, and it was going to be IN ADDITION to the state sales and property taxes.

It is regressive because, although the wealthy can't avoid paying it, the middle class and poor end up spending far greater proportions of their income than the wealthy do. Which, of course, explains why billionaires would be in favor of it.

Wasn't Warren Buffett complaining he was paying as much taxes as his secretary ?

And about tax recycling and money laundering, is it me or all the mega-rich guys run their own charity including Bill Gates, Soros, and claim to be "philantropists" ?

gostwyck · « **Reply #34 on:** December 06, 2012, 16:33 »

Quote from: lisafx on December 06, 2012, 16:10

The only time I have heard VAT tax discussed in the US it they were referring to a national tax, and it was going to be IN ADDITION to the state sales and property taxes.

It is regressive because, although the wealthy can't avoid paying it, the middle class and poor end up spending far greater proportions of their income than the wealthy do. Which, of course, explains why billionaires would be in favor of it.

I've never quite understood the 'regressive tax' arguement, which left-wingers in the UK always scream about with regard to VAT. The cost of all goods and services is effectively 'regressive' in that they all absorb a greater proportion of a poor person's income than a rich person __ but nobody says that a paintbrush or an ipad or whatever should be cheaper for a poor person to buy than a rich one do they?

VAT was originally designated as a 'luxury goods tax' and different things attract different rates. Most food and all books, newspapers, children's clothes, etc are actually VAT 'zero-rated'. Energy used to be zero-rated too but is now taxed at 5% in the UK. During the 70's, when Britain had massive economic problems, VAT went up to 25% for 'luxury' imported goods like TV's, cameras, etc.

lisafx · « **Reply #35 on:** December 06, 2012, 16:38 »

Quote from: MetaStocker on December 06, 2012, 16:19

Wasn't Warren Buffett complaining he was paying as much taxes as his secretary ?

No, he was saying it is unfair that his tax rate is so much LOWER than his secretary pays.

Had you bothered to google it, you would have probably found this article:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/business/2012/01/warren-buffett-and-his-secretary-talk-taxes/]
[url]http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/business/2012/01/warren-buffett-and-his-secretary-talk-taxes/[/url]

One relevant part is:

Bosanek(Buffet's secretary) pays a tax rate of 35.8 percent of income, while Buffett pays a rate at 17.4 percent.

lisafx · « **Reply #36 on:** December 06, 2012, 16:40 »

Quote from: gostwyck on December 06, 2012, 16:33

I've never quite understood the 'regressive tax' arguement, which left-wingers in the UK always scream about with regard to VAT. The cost of all goods and services is effectively 'regressive' in that they all absorb a greater proportion of a poor person's income than a rich person __ but nobody says that a paintbrush or an ipad or whatever should be cheaper for a poor person to buy than a rich one do they?

VAT was originally designated as a 'luxury goods tax' and different things attract different rates. Most food and all books, newspapers, children's clothes, etc are actually VAT 'zero-rated'. Energy used to be zero-rated too but is now taxed at 5% in the UK. During the 70's, when Britain had massive economic problems, VAT went up to 25% for 'luxury' imported goods like TV's, cameras, etc.

Sounds like you understand it, but disagree.

Poncke · « **Reply #37 on:** December 06, 2012, 16:47 »

The US has VAT on products. Its about 7%, depending on the state you are in. Or am I missing something.

lisafx · « **Reply #38 on:** December 06, 2012, 16:49 »

Quote from: Poncke on December 06, 2012, 16:47

The US has VAT on products. Its about 7%, depending on the state you are in. Or am I missing something.

Yes, you're missing Gostwyck's post making the same point, and my reply to it.

Poncke · « **Reply #39 on:** December 06, 2012, 16:51 »

Quote from: lisafx on December 06, 2012, 16:49

Quote from: Poncke on December 06, 2012, 16:47
The US has VAT on products. Its about 7%, depending on the state you are in. Or am I missing something.

Yes, you're missing Gostwyck's post making the same point, and my reply to it.

I saw that but I understood from your reply that you said you didnt have VAT. Must have misunderstood your reply then.

lisafx · « **Reply #40 on:** December 06, 2012, 17:21 »

Quote from: Poncke on December 06, 2012, 16:51

I saw that but I understood from your reply that you said you didnt have VAT. Must have misunderstood your reply then.

Right, we don't have a national VAT. Quoting what I said before on the subject:

Quote from: lisafx on December 06, 2012, 16:10

The only time I have heard VAT tax discussed in the US they were referring to a national tax, and it was going to be IN ADDITION to the state sales and property taxes.

sharpshot · « **Reply #41 on:** December 06, 2012, 18:11 »

Quote from: gostwyck on December 06, 2012, 16:33

I've never quite understood the 'regressive tax' arguement, which left-wingers in the UK always scream about with regard to VAT....

Funny but I've always thought it's only right-wingers that try and argue that VAT isn't regressive. Might explain why good time George was so eager to increase VAT. And I don't think those that have a good understanding of economics really believe it. Economists often argue that black is white. This is a great quote by Ezra Solomon, “The only function of economic forecasting is to make astrology look respectable”.

And I'm quite right wing on tax. I think lower taxation makes people earn more, spend more and it increases the governments tax revenues. Has the VAT hike helped the UK economy? At least we're doing slightly better than Italy

aspp · « **Reply #42 on:** December 06, 2012, 18:50 »

Quote from: lisafx on December 06, 2012, 16:38

Quote from: MetaStocker on December 06, 2012, 16:19

Wasn't Warren Buffett complaining he was paying as much taxes as his secretary ?

No, he was saying it is unfair that his tax rate is so much LOWER than his secretary pays.

There is nothing to stop him from choosing to paying more tax. AFAIK the write-in option still exists for him to opt to pay more.

Probably like many very wealthy people he pays himself very little. In which case not much income tax to pay. Is he arguing that wealth and beneficial ownership should be taxed rather than income ?

If govts stopped spending so much money on foreign wars .... Etc

RacePhoto · « **Reply #43 on:** December 06, 2012, 22:15 »

#1 It's Fiscal Cliff not Financial Cliff? http://lexicon.ft.com/Term?term=fiscal-cliff

#2 Buffett reveals that he made $62,855,038 last year. He also said his taxable income was $39,814,784. If he was taxed at (that terribly low rate of) 17% that was... $6,768,513 in income taxes. He pays 15% on capitol gains which is most of his income.

#3 if his secretary made half a million income (and she's likely to be making at least $250,000 a year, that Poor Little overtaxed lady) She paid $175,000 in taxes. Assuming no deduction and taxable income was 100% of her earned income, which is unlikely.

Here's the 6th grad math question. Who paid more taxes?

No dodging the facts, Buffet paid in about 6.5 million more dollars in Federal taxes, in bottom line, real money. Who paid more into the treasury in real dollars, not percentages?

Tax the rich, heck we already do that! LOL

The upper 50% of the wage earners pay @97% of all tax collections, and the lower ones only @3%. It can't be simpler than real numbers. The Top 1% of earners = 37% of taxes paid, the next bracket 2-5% accounts for another 20%. So about 57% paid by the top 5%. This is personal income taxes. Want that again? 57% of all income taxes collected, come from 5% of the people.

Where the taxes get really regressive and a burden on the average person is the state and local taxes. Not income taxes. True most states have a sales tax of 6-7% and they also have sin taxes on cigarettes and alcohol, and highway taxes on fuel if you drive a vehicle. Everyone pays these, regardless of income level. You want regressive? Start with local, not the Feds.

Ed · « **Reply #44 on:** December 06, 2012, 23:07 »

Here's a chart of effective tax rates by size of income.

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=366

I've been paying 13% in income tax for years.

It might also interest you that the majority of Americans (I think the last number I saw was about 60%) don't pay income tax.

That doesn't mean they don't pay sales tax, payroll tax, excise tax on the fuel they buy or the hunting/fishing gear they buy, etc., etc.

lisafx · « **Reply #45 on:** December 06, 2012, 23:23 »

Quote from: aspp on December 06, 2012, 18:50

Quote from: lisafx on December 06, 2012, 16:38
Quote from: MetaStocker on December 06, 2012, 16:19

Wasn't Warren Buffett complaining he was paying as much taxes as his secretary ?

No, he was saying it is unfair that his tax rate is so much LOWER than his secretary pays.

There is nothing to stop him from choosing to paying more tax. AFAIK the write-in option still exists for him to opt to pay more.

Probably like many very wealthy people he pays himself very little. In which case not much income tax to pay. Is he arguing that wealth and beneficial ownership should be taxed rather than income ?

If govts stopped spending so much money on foreign wars .... Etc

I was correcting Metastocker's misquoting of Buffet. I'm not going to sit here and try to speak for the man or explain what was in his mind when he made the statement. You should direct your questions to him or his representatives.

JPSDK · « **Reply #46 on:** December 07, 2012, 00:18 »

Where are you from meta? some of the information you come up with is quite different from how things are in the part of Europe I live in. (Denmark)

ClaridgeJ · « **Reply #47 on:** December 07, 2012, 01:43 »

Sweden house three famillies who are among the top 20 richest families in the world ( according to Forbes anyway) the IKEA boss, the Hennes& Mauritz boss and the Bankers Wallenberg.

These three families are totally exempted from ANY tax what so ever. Reason behind it? then they will remain in Sweden, which ofcourse they havent.

Still. I am a conservative, have always been and always will be. Having said that, when pple are worth billions and billions of dollars, well? I think its a pretty weird decision.

Myself? Jersey and Guernsey. Tax heavens

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Financial Cliff in United States and impact on sales (Read 24185 times)

tab62

Poncke

WarrenPrice

tab62

velocicarpo

WarrenPrice

velocicarpo

tab62

lisafx

Ed

lisafx

lisafx

lisafx

lisafx

lisafx

Poncke

lisafx

Poncke

lisafx

aspp

RacePhoto

Ed

lisafx

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors