GEN
Active topics
  1. Big damage? I doubt anyone that was thinking about going to see u2 play live is going to avoid going because of an article about the morality of legally minimising your tax liabilities that Bono gets a mention in
  2. There were far more damaging revelations about some other stars recently enough...don't remember their being a huge outcry over it. People who hate U2 & Bono will of course jump on it though. On a broader point it's up to Governments to close these schemes as people only taking advantage of what is there. Hell my own CEO was named in The Panama Papers a couple of years ago and he is still in his job!

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/business/shortcuts/2016/jun/13/take-that-tax-avoidance-celebrities-reimburse-hmrc
  3. This is less immoral from his side than the propaganda made with what was displayed at the video wall during the Ultra Violet song....



    But during the last 2 decades I decided to stay focused in listening just the music and not the preach of a nouveau riche that is flattered to socialize with powerful puppets.

    When he starts saying the big words I simply close my ears.
    .
  4. Originally posted by adynaton:This is less immoral from his side than the propaganda made with what was displayed at the video wall during the Ultra Violet song....

    [image]

    But during the last 2 decades I decided to stay focused in listening just the music and not the preach of a nouveau riche that is flattered to socialize with powerful puppets.

    When he starts saying the big words I simply close my ears.
    .
    what do you think about Pride, then?
  5. Pride as Bullet the Blue Sky were written in the 80s.

    But it is ridiculous to listen to Bullet the Blue Sky and then watch Condoleeza and Medeleine as symbolic figures. It seems that their airplanes were carrying flowers delivered to Iraqi and Serbian people.

    And as a Greek I was delighted when I saw Angela and Christine. They are my favorite.
  6. Originally posted by adynaton:[..]
    Pride as Bullet the Blue Sky were written in the 80s.

    But it is ridiculous to listen to Bullet the Blue Sky and then watch Condoleeza and Medeleine as symbolic figures. It seems that their airplanes were carrying flowers delivered to Iraqi and Serbian people.

    And as a Greek I was delighted when I saw Angela and Christine. They are my favorite.
    You've got valid points on Condoleeza. But I think U2 took that into account and I can see why they use her image as a black women icon.
  7. "Blessed are the filthy rich, for you can only truly own what you give away, like your pain".

    Interesting.

    In fairness, whilst we all know Bono is clearly shrewd and savvy when it comes to finances, as you undoubtedly absolutely have to be when dealing with so much money, I can't help but wonder if some of this shenanigans is perhaps down to over-aggressive techniques used by the accountant(s) he employs - who will always naturally look to legitimately minimise any tax liabilities, and perhaps the full ins and outs of precisely what is being done to achieve this is without Bono's knowledge.

    Either way, it doesn't look particularly good, and I'm sure its more 'stick' that us U2 fans will have to deal with from non-U2 fans.
  8. I kind of get the anger. The band has said that they pay a 'fortune' in taxes, and I understand that they want to make sure they don't pay too much.

    But, first, contrast what has just emerged with Bono's many spiels about transparency. And, second, consider U2's talk of 'fortune' (in taxes) versus the roughly 50% I pay in any income exceeding 60K here in Austria. Do *they* pay 50% on earnings exceeding 60K? (Band members laugh.) And why should folks like *me* (with two kids, single income family at the moment) pay that much while folks like them don't? (Band members look the other way.)

    When Bono was operated in Munich, it was largely thanks to the taxes of several folks like me that he could find a hospital, excellent doctors etc. Bono, and rich people in general, also benefit from the public services ordinary folks support through their taxes.

    I don't object to paying 50% over any income exceeding 60K (there isn't much of it at the moment anyway!). I support redistribution, and I am lucky to have the job I have etc. I object that rich people pay way less than that, though. I really do.
  9. And since he tax avoided via a Maltese company (well known EU tax paradise) he might include in Songs of Experience tour as a woman figure Daphne Caruana Galizia.
  10. Originally posted by JuJuman:I kind of get the anger. The band has said that they pay a 'fortune' in taxes, and I understand that they want to make sure they don't pay too much.

    But, first, contrast what has just emerged with Bono's many spiels about transparency. And, second, consider U2's talk of 'fortune' (in taxes) versus the roughly 50% I pay in any income exceeding 60K here in Austria. Do *they* pay 50% on earnings exceeding 60K? (Band members laugh.) And why should folks like *me* (with two kids, single income family at the moment) pay that much while folks like them don't? (Band members look the other way.)

    When Bono was operated in Munich, it was largely thanks to the taxes of several folks like me that he could find a hospital, excellent doctors etc. Bono, and rich people in general, also benefit from the public services ordinary folks support through their taxes.

    I don't object to paying 50% over any income exceeding 60K (there isn't much of it at the moment anyway!). I support redistribution, and I am lucky to have the job I have etc. I object that rich people pay way less than that, though. I really do.
    There are thousands of people working in my industry who are self employed as contractors...this allows them to set up Ltd companies domestically and pay feck all tax. Again where is the uproar about this ? It's selective reporting
  11. Originally posted by badirishcharlie:[..]
    There are thousands of people working in my industry who are self employed as contractors...this allows them to set up Ltd companies domestically and pay feck all tax. Again where is the uproar about this ? It's selective reporting
    I agree that focusing on Bono only is selective reporting. My point was intended to be more general: why are people who earn 100+ times what I earn allowed to pay - proportionally - less in tax?
  12. Originally posted by badirishcharlie:[..]
    There are thousands of people working in my industry who are self employed as contractors...this allows them to set up Ltd companies domestically and pay feck all tax. Again where is the uproar about this ? It's selective reporting


    It’s not really.

    The revelations are wide-scale and the general implication is that a significant sum of the 1% are going to far ends to avoid paying their fair share.

    I can’t comment on it in every nation, but to my knowledge self-employed people get relatively free grants or support from the British and Irish governments, which is the trade-off with the taxation you’ve mentioned.

    Secondly; Bono isn’t just an easy target. When all assets are counted he’s a billionaire who has spent the last 40 years publically advocating justice and fairness, an end to poverty, and increased government aid towards projects like drugs for AIDS. Meanwhile we find him developing his assets in Lithuania through a Maltese holding company to avoid paying more tax in Lithuania (with the greatest of respect, not exactly the wealthiest region in Europe).

    Fan of the band or not, do you not see the problem with that?