Latest news with #doubleTaxation
Zawya
02-06-2025
- Business
- Zawya
Qatar, Kuwait sign agreement on double taxation avoidance
Kuwait: The State of Qatar, represented by the Ministry of Finance, and the State of Kuwait, represented by the Ministry of Finance, signed on Sunday an agreement on the avoidance of double taxation on income and the prevention of tax evasion and avoidance. The agreement was signed by the Minister of Finance HE Ali bin Ahmed Al Kuwari, representing the Qatari side, and the Minister of Finance and Minister of State for Economic Affairs and Investment of the State of Kuwait HE Engineer Noura Sulaiman Al Fozan, representing the Kuwaiti side. On this occasion, HE Ali bin Ahmed Al Kuwari emphasized the importance and effectiveness of the agreement, stating: "This agreement will contribute to supporting international standards of transparency through the exchange of verified financial information, as part of both countries' commitment to strengthening coordination and cooperation in tax matters and economic relations.' The agreement aims to establish a legal framework for tax treaties between the two countries to eliminate all instances of double taxation. It also seeks to enhance commercial cooperation, broaden investment opportunities for government entities and individuals, combat tax evasion, and support neutrality and fairness in the treatment of taxpayers. © Dar Al Sharq Press, Printing and Distribution. All Rights Reserved. Provided by SyndiGate Media Inc. (
CBS News
17-05-2025
- Business
- CBS News
Downtown Miami homeowners slam Development Authority over spending in new ad
A group of downtown homeowners is calling for a separation from the Miami Downtown Development Authority, accusing the agency of wasteful spending and releasing a new online ad to pressure city leaders to put the issue on the ballot. "We want the divorce (from Miami DDA) and the reason we want the divorce is we have this condo crisis and we're being double taxed," said TJ Sabo, one of several critics featured in the campaign. Homeowners push back on DDA funding The controversy centers on how the DDA spends its budget, particularly its investments in entertainment and sports partnerships. Property owners in downtown Miami, Brickell, and Edgewater fund 58% of the agency's budget, on top of the standard taxes paid by other Miami residents. "Look at what they're spending money on," said Kristen Browde, a downtown homeowner. "You're like excuse me?" "It's double taxation," said Jens Klapatsh, another homeowner. "It feels like we're being taken advantage of," added Laura Okamura. James Torres, president of a local neighborhood alliance, released the online ad Friday, targeting recent DDA expenses such as giving hundreds of thousands of dollars to FC Barcelona for opening offices downtown and nearly $200,000 to support college football events tied to next year's national championship in South Florida. DDA defends budget priorities Miami DDA board member Gary Ressler, who chairs the agency's Quality of Life Committee and owns a business downtown, defended the spending. "Nobody likes to pay taxes," Ressler said. "But the fact is that the investment is brought back to the streets to the residents in a very efficient way." Of the $12 million in the agency's budget last fiscal year, $7 million went toward quality-of-life initiatives such as public safety, homelessness efforts, and keeping downtown clean, according to Ressler. Ressler also argued that sports investments attract attention and revenue that benefit the community. "If you think back to when LeBron James came to Miami, he came to downtown Miami," Ressler said. "But you remember the message was he was going to South Beach. That's not the message anymore. I think downtown is a more viable, relatable neighborhood that hopefully will succeed greatly in the future." But critics like Sabo remain unconvinced. "When you pay $450,000 to an organization that's worth over $5 billion dollars or $100,000 to (UFC which is) worth over $11 billion, my gut instinct is it does nothing for them and it was really not part of their decision to choose Miami," Sabo said. "It took money out of other people's lives that were supposed to be improved by this."
The Independent
07-05-2025
- Business
- The Independent
The right's attack on the India trade deal is opportunistic, envious fakery
The India-UK trade agreement is a good deal that will promote growth by a small amount – every little helps – but it is being attacked by the Conservatives, Reform and the right-wing press in a welter of hypocritical opportunism. The deal's critics know perfectly well that it contains a sensible tax measure that will not increase the number of visas issued to Indians, but they have seized on the chance to put 'national insurance contributions' and 'cut' in the same sentence to pretend that this is favourable tax treatment for immigrants. It is no such thing. The deal includes a clause that will extend protection from being taxed twice for Indian workers temporarily posted to the UK and for British workers temporarily posted to India. These arrangements to prevent 'double taxation' are standard and already exist between Britain and many other countries. Indeed, one already exists between Britain and India, but it allows only one year of protection; that will now be increased to three years. It means that Indian workers on short-term contracts who are posted to the UK and who continue to pay social security contributions in India will be exempt from paying national insurance contributions here for up to three years. And vice versa. It does not mean that more Indian workers will come to Britain because the visa regime is unchanged. It does not mean that Indians will be treated more favourably than British workers because they will still be paying the equivalent of national insurance contributions at home. It is a good deal for the taxpayer because it will make the UK more attractive to highly paid Indians who will pay more tax here as a result. Kemi Badenoch knows all this, because she was trade secretary 10 months ago, leading the British negotiations on the deal. She says that she refused to agree to this tax change, which she would have done only on the grounds that it could look bad if it were misrepresented by political opponents. Nigel Farage may not be so well versed in the detail but he too knows that the deal is a reasonable one. He also sees an opportunity, and the incentive structure of current politics means that he cannot allow Badenoch to outflank him. As for Badenoch and Farage's cheerleaders in the press, they also know exactly what they are doing, but the temptations of headlines of 'tax cuts for immigrants' are too strong to resist. One of the reasons that Badenoch and Farage advocated leaving the European Union was so that Britain could negotiate its own free-trade deals with countries around the world. Yet when the Labour government succeeds in a complex negotiation that protects the British national interest, especially on the sensitive subject of visa numbers, they pretend it is something it is not. 'I think what frustrates them is we've done a deal that they couldn't deliver on,' Jonathan Reynolds, the trade secretary, said this morning. Reynolds can be faulted, possibly, for failing to prepare the ground with the British media; he appeared to have been taken by surprise by Narendra Modi, the Indian prime minister, suddenly announcing on Tuesday that the deal was done. The attacks on 'two-tier tax' were already all around the world on social media before the Labour Party's rebuttal machine had got its boots on. The bottom line is that this is a good deal and its critics ought to be ashamed of themselves. Are Badenoch and Farage now going to demand to scrap double taxation agreements with 50 other countries? Of course not. They ought to join principled free-trade Brexiteers such as Daniel Hannan, the Tory peer, in welcoming the deal. He said on Tuesday: 'A comprehensive deal in goods and services is a win-win. A pity to see so much misinformation about it tonight.' Then they should congratulate Keir Starmer and Jonathan Reynolds on securing a trade deal with the US, which according to the Financial Times might be announced this week, and then another with the EU, which will be unveiled at a summit at Lancaster House in two weeks' time.
Sky News
07-05-2025
- Business
- Sky News
UK-India trade deal: Is Farage right to call out 'big tax exemption'?
Britain's trade deal with India has created a pocket of controversy on taxation. Under the agreement, Indian workers who have been seconded to Britain temporarily will not have to pay National Insurance (NI) contributions in the UK. Instead, they will continue to pay the Indian exchequer. The same applies to British workers in India. It avoids workers from being taxed twice for a full suite of benefits they will not receive, such as the state pension. Politicians of all stripes have leapt to judgement. Nigel Farage has described it as a "big tax exemption" for Indian workers. He said it was "impossible to say how many will come," with the Reform Party warning of "more mass immigration, more pressure on the NHS, more pressure on housing." Be wary of any hasty conclusions. In the absence of an impact assessment from the government, it is difficult to be precise about any of this. However, at first glance, it is unlikely that some of Reform's worst fears will play out. 0:43 Firstly, avoiding double taxation is not the same thing as a "tax break.' This type of agreement, known as a double contribution convention, is not new. Britain has similar arrangements with other countries and blocs, including the US, EU, Canada and Japan. It's based on the principle that workers shouldn't be paying twice for social security taxes that they will not benefit from. 1:27 Indian workers and businesses will still have to pay the equivalent tax in India, as well as sponsorship fees and the NHS surcharge. Crucially, the deal only applies to workers being sent over by Indian companies on a temporary basis. Those workers are on Indian payroll. It does not apply to Indian workers more generally. That means businesses in the UK can't (and won't) suddenly be replacing all their workers with Indians. The conditions for a company to send over a secondee on a work visa are restrictive. It means it's unlikely that these workers will be replacing British workers. However, It does mean that the exchequer will not capture the extra national insurance tax from those who come over on this route. The government has not shared its impact assessment for how many extra Indians they expect to come over on this route, how much NI they will escape, or how much this will be offset by extra income tax from those Indians. The net financial position is therefore murky.
