Call to boycott U2's new albumn and remove their Passports

[greenwithirony]

At a concert last year in Croke Park, Dublin's biggest stadium, Bono appealed to Prime Minister Bertie Ahern to raise overseas aid to 0.7 percent of gross national product by 2007 from 0.5 percent now. The crowd responded by booing Ahern.
The political catcalls have now turned on Bono, whose real name is Paul Hewson.
``It seems odd, in a situation where they enjoy an already favorable tax regime, they would move operations to the Netherlands to get an even more favorable rate,'' said Joan Burton, finance spokeswoman for the opposition Labour Party.
For years, Bono and U2 got a better deal than most Irish taxpayers because songwriters paid no tax on earnings from music publishing. That will change next year, when Ireland limits the tax exemption, which also applies to writers and artists. From Jan. 1, artists that make more than 500,000 euros ($625,450) will pay tax on half their ``creative'' income, according to Ireland's Revenue Authority.
Remaining in Ireland would have forced Bono to pay a 42 percent tax on such earnings. Alternatively, the band could have channeled profits through a company to pay the 12.5 percent corporation tax.

Millennium Goals

Wealthy individuals have put about $11.5 trillion in tax havens around the world, according to a 2005 paper by the London- based Tax Justice Network. Unpaid taxes on those assets could amount to $255 billion, the paper said. (my emphasis)

``That's five times the amount needed to achieve the Millennium Development Goals, which Bono says he's really interested in,'' (my emphasis) Murphy said, referring to a United Nations plan to eradicate poverty and combat the spread of AIDS. ``My answer is, put your money where your mouth is.''

Some fans accept the band's explanation of its tax planning because U2 has been generous in the past.
``They've paid plenty of money up to now,'' said Peter Cooper, 58, who lives in Bray, near Bono's home in Dalkey. ``I think they are quite right'' to move the company abroad.
Paul McGuinness, the band's manager, said in the Oct. 4 issue of the music magazine Hot Press that Ireland itself had benefited from low taxes. The country's 12.5 percent profit tax - - half the European Union average -- has helped Ireland lure investment from companies such as Intel Corp. and Dell Inc.

Bloomberg.com: Exclusive

[myk]

And i think the greater point is that the tax system is there to help the rich avoid tax altogether or make in minimal. There are about 4406 people in Ireland with non-resident status. 440 of them are the super rich.

surely those people aren't in Ireland then

like I said, if you want to change the tax system, campaign for that, vote for politicians who want to do change the tax system to match what you want. but if you are going to target rich people for boycotting, protesting, I think Bono and U2 are the last rich people should target!

[greenwithirony]

Bono is seen as a guru. Of course, he’s a successful musician (although, I’ll be candid, I’m not sure I’d recognise a single one of his songs). And with Bob Geldof he’s been seen as the leader of the culture that has driven the ‘pop’ development agenda. It’s one that has not always sat comfortably with either the serious development agencies or government, but as a lobby exercise there’s no doubt it has contributed to awareness.
But, there has always been risk in his position. Bono has accumulated personal worth of hundreds of millions (chose your currency, I think the answer is the same in dollars, euros or sterling). And many (perhaps most) people still think wealth comes with responsibility, especially when the owner asks for that responsibility from others.
Shift tax
This makes Bono’s shift of his tax affairs from Ireland to the Netherlands all the more difficult to understand. As I’ve said before on this site, and will say again, Ireland is a tax haven. And amongst the absurd benefits it has offered is tax free status to artists. U2 have apparently exploited this to ensure that no tax has been paid on the royalties they have earned from their songs.

Now, in a slightly more enlightened moment Ireland has decided to cap the income which can be subject to this exemption at 250,000 euros per annum. This is, of course, income beyond the dreams of about 99% of artists, whatever their medium, and so hardly diminishes Ireland’s commitment to support the arts, if that was the intent of the exemption. But the change is apparently unacceptable to U2.
Let’s put this in context. At worst the change means that if their excess royalties were shifted into an Irish company they might be subject to 12.5% corporation tax. This is, because Ireland is a tax haven, one of the lowest corporate tax rates in the world. Except that the Netherlands, which as I’ve also noted before will get increasing attention from this site, offers an even better deal on royalties and hopes to improve still further upon it from January 2007.
In essence, the Netherlands has done two things. Firstly, unlike almost any other tax haven, it has developed a considerable network of double tax treaties. These offer the advantage almost unknown in the tax haven world of allowing royalties to be paid to the Netherlands without tax being deducted at source in many of the originating counties, or if taxes are to be deducted, the rate is much reduced. This makes it an ideal place to receive royalties.
As a tax haven the Netherlands has gone a deliberate stage further than this, which might otherwise be a characteristic it otherwise shares with a fair number of developed countries. The additional feature it has added that in essence the Netherlands seeks to tax the royalties received at a very low rate. The rate is officially 10% from January 2007 but given the significant range of reliefs and deductions also available, not usually available elsewhere, the effective rate can be much lower, which is absurd even by Irish standards. The rate can be reduced still further if the royalties are then paid on to a Netherlands Antilles holding company. It’s clear Bono is looking to exploit some of these arrangements, although precisely how is not certain. But, the Stones have been there before them. It’s clear they work.
Development
It’s important at this point to remind oneself why this is important. The reason is simple. Tax is a key component in the development equation. Development thinking started with aid. Then it moved to loans (which of course subsequently led to the whole debt issue), which in turn led to trade and the need to generate the income to repay the loans, but now tax is seen as the fourth component in the equation.
The reason is simple. Loans have not worked, as Bono is keen to point out. The resulting debt cannot be repaid. Trade remains an enormous issue, with the odds still stacked against developing countries. So aid remains on the agenda. But no one who is serious about development really sees aid as the long term solution to the development issue. Aid dependency is the outcome of it. And that does not result in the creation of viable independent states capable of supporting their own populations which has to be the objective of development. Only a country which can raise the tax to support itself can do that.

Holistic approach
What this argument on tax and development suggests is that the two are simply inseparable. Not everyone buys this argument yet, but it is hard to see how its validity can be denied. This means that anyone who promotes development has to be serious about tax: more than that, they have to be serious about paying tax.
That attitude to payment has to be evidenced in two ways. The first is a personal commitment to paying the tax that is due by an individual or corporation on the income they have earned in the location in which it can be best determined that it has been earned. The second commitment is to the integrity of the tax system, nationally and internationally.
What Bono proves
What seems clear is that Bono has not bought into this argument. I think he should be aware of it. The Tax Justice Network has tried to contact him. We’ve never succeeded in doing so. So, perhaps, to use tax jargon, he’s simply avoiding it. Which is an action in denying responsibility, as we’ve always argued.
...

Paying tax is essential to development
Where does this leave Bono? Seriously out of step I’m afraid. In fact, well outside the development agenda. The tax havens he uses undermine development. They divert income from developing countries. They ensure tax is not paid in them. They facilitate capital flight from those developing counties. As Raymond Baker has shown, tax avoidance driven capital flight costs developing countries ten times their aid receipts.
Bono is endorsing this. His credibility is in tatters.

Tax Research UK / Bono’s choice

[joel]

surely those people aren't in Ireland then

like I said, if you want to change the tax system, campaign for that, vote for politicians who want to do change the tax system to match what you want. but if you are going to target rich people for boycotting, protesting, I think Bono and U2 are the last rich people should target!

Look, due to Bono, the Irish are paying hundreds of millions in extra aid - and he goes and p. off.

[greenwithirony]

through bilateral agreements. governments negotiate double tax treaties with each other. this way they agree what should be taxed in each country.

And if the bilateral agreement didn't suit Bono what would he do? Move his affairs to yet another more favourable regime? And what would Ireland do then? Go around the world hammering out bilateral agreements to chase the self-serving hypocrite down?

[greenwithirony]

Bono and Bob Geldof increase Africa's problems say charity

Jobs Selasie, head of charity African Aid Action, claimed that such campaigns increase corruption and dependency on the continent.
...

The charity says since the original Band Aid campaign, the number of Africans living on handouts has increased by 500 per cent and African governments who used to rely on only 20 per cent of their annual budget from overseas aid are now dependent on a 70 per cent contribution.

“Aid has failed because campaigners, charities and governments do not have the right plan and excluded African entrepreneurs and grassroots organisations from being part of the solution,” said Selasie.

“You can’t impose change from without,” he continued. “It has to come from within and we won’t end poverty with handouts. Africans need to fight corruption and work hard.”

[atlantic]

And whats wrong with people striving to be successful and rich ?So we put a big wall around ireland and stop people leaving or retiring where ever they want.If the law is there they are right to use it.I

And i think the greater point is that the tax system is there to help the rich avoid tax altogether or make in minimal. There are about 4406 people in Ireland with non-resident status. 440 of them are the super rich.

[joel]

Bono and Bob Geldof increase Africa's problems say charity

Jobs Selasie, head of charity African Aid Action, claimed that such campaigns increase corruption and dependency on the continent.
...

The charity says since the original Band Aid campaign, the number of Africans living on handouts has increased by 500 per cent and African governments who used to rely on only 20 per cent of their annual budget from overseas aid are now dependent on a 70 per cent contribution.

“Aid has failed because campaigners, charities and governments do not have the right plan and excluded African entrepreneurs and grassroots organisations from being part of the solution,” said Selasie.

“You can’t impose change from without,” he continued. “It has to come from within and we won’t end poverty with handouts. Africans need to fight corruption and work hard.”

Right! Cut down on this aid business - if people are going to come around, pouring money at you, why bother?

[iartaoiseach]

And whats wrong with people striving to be successful and rich ?So we put a big wall around ireland and stop people leaving or retiring where ever they want.If the law is there they are right to use it.I

thats the attitude that has us in the mess we are in. legal loopholes to be used at every opportunity to enrich oneself at the expense of the many. I seem to remember Seanie Fitz telling us to tax childrens allowance-another hypocrite.

[greenwithirony]

Right! Cut down on this aid business - if people are going to come around, pouring money at you, why bother?

I think aid can work, but it must be in conjunction with local communities, listening to their needs & acting on them, building local & sometimes govt capacity, where & when possible.