Thank you Richard, your a good man & people don't know what Freeport's are. They certainly won't get accurate answers from the government. Thank you again.
David Cameron gave up the idea according to tabloids, and Boris pushed for freeport agreements in 2019, to be set for a few key regions as well as the north of england and scotland, and to sell them as 'green'. The news after the proposal of new UK freeports in 2019 mentioned the denmark 200bn money laundering scandal, noted as the biggest scandal in europe, linked to freeports
Try finding out if these Freeport 'bonded warehouses' have the goods checked by Customs (and I mean a physical inspection ), please let me know if you have any success: I eventually gave up, *but* I eventually did find a slither of information on what % of imported goods UK Customs *actually* checked, in this 2017 exchange: "18.The NAO {national audit office, I guess} notes that, due to the high volumes of freight and traffic and the infrastructure constraints, such as limited numbers of searching bays, border officials are only able check a small percentage of traffic. A risked-based, intelligence-led system is used to determine which goods and vehicles are checked.19 *As a result, documentary checks of non-EU goods are carried out on less than 3% of imports (compared to less than 1% of lorries arriving at Dover or through the Channel Tunnel).* publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmhaff/540/54004.htm#footnote-069 " tariff inversion", looks like a variation of the raw material > finished goods price differential scam to me www.ft.com/content/7ee9e853-bea6-4797-9119-f7e20cdae3c0
Freeports (or special economic zones) have nothing to do with Brexit. There are several freeports in the EU and nothing in EU law forbids it. Actually during their membership to the EU the UK closed down freeports because the extra effort to run them did not really pay. #ATAD #IndyRef2
As you fully well know, membership to the EU restricts freeport status immensely, which is why, after maastricht, the UK government simply didn't renew freeport status for UK free trade zones. I know that you know, because I've told about this before. So I know that you have _ulterior motives_ and one in particular. Apart from the fact that you are an E27 individual with neither residence nor voting rights in the UK, you advocate and agitate for the breakup of the UK. afaic you are an *enemy* of the UK and I treat you as such. We are *not* "rejoining" the EU and Scotland will *not* be leaving the UK, and nor will NI. Most of the agitators for this are EU *ENEMIES* of the UK. Like you are.
No as contracts will be going to parent company of P & O go ferries . Owned by a dubi oil rich company / country with human rights issues and much much worse . The government are trading with death and misery by employing a rich country/ company famously for human rights abuses. Ethics and corruption , that’s the current UK government, same as some other countries with All national assists should be national assists .
Large ships can travel no further than Westminster on the River Thames. There are large immovable bridges under which no large cargo vessel could fit under. No towns on the thames have airports either. What would be the point, when the freeports are designed to attract foreign manufacturers and are not likely to increase the competitivity of foreign goods in the domestic market?
Greetings, thanks. The other factor is that you can add value and sell out of the UK very competitively. And the main idea is to regenerate areas through commercial success. There's not going to be any people trafficking because this will be done alongside the the "uk border 2025" strategy. So it won't be done in a vacuum.
Fine, but: - What value is added, when vat and tax is not taken in? Value for whom exactly, since shipped goods are lower in price - That’s value for the buyer, not the seller. - Who is today getting profits for area regeneration? The owners, not the users (tenants), and not the workers/builders. In a freeport area they can legally be foreign to the UK, and can’t be taxed by the UK. Even so for future workplace staff, they could invoice instead of taking wages, and incorporate within the freeport. No added value. - Ensuring the coming guidelines on people trafficking can be cumbersome in a freeport. What jurisdiction does UK institutions keep in the area? What kinds of crime will officials have to overlook to not overstep the Freeport’s legal status? Can a trained, on duty UK police officer even do that, legally? Or can a freeport be granted rights to police itself, according to which law and court in that case? - The whole idea seems to cater to financial growth alone, and will create social and legal black spots for the UK’s much loved sovereignty. Any goods trade from within the UK will still need market willingness to buy from them. Easy UK export does not cause easy import for the buyer. That’s entirely up to the receiving buyer’s state arrangements, not the seller’s.
@@musiqtee You seem to totally misunderstand the concept of adding value. When buy in raw materials such as timber and turn it into a dining table, you have added value. When you sell that on, "value added tax" is a tax on the value your manufacturing process has added. For the purposes of taxation, Freeports are considered to be out of the country and do not attract taxes. Therefore a manufacturer can source timber, bring it to a workshop in a freeport zone, build a dining table and even varnish it. The manufacturer can then sell those goods on to another country without attracting domestic taxes on the added value or facing import customs. Selling them into the EU will raise a value added component because the EU has a value added tax. But the price of the goods will be very low and easily compete with the domestic market. That's how it works. It's like shipping the raw materials and building the dining table in transit. Freeports are also known as Free zones or special economic zones. If the goods are sold into the domestic market, they will attract taxes. Freeports are not meant to bypass taxes on goods sold into the domestic market. Just to enable manufacturers to source goods and add value, to sell out, without being priced out of international markets. Though, costs can be lower for the domestic market also, with economies of scale and strong purchasing power.
@@civis.revixit Oh, well… I seem to understand financialisation the same way the author of the video does. So I understand the difference between financial capitalism and the traditional producing/trading capitalism - which we do need. So for SMBs and individuals, yes I agree. For major transnational corporations and banking - Not at all. It’s a totally different mechanism to make money by financial means. Much more money (10-12 X) than the “real” economy by numbers. Research has shown for 40 years that it never “trickles down”, not the way it somewhat did in the 50s and 60s. What you yourself may understand (or not) is not up to me to judge. 👍
@@musiqtee Your post showed a complete lack of understanding about the concept of adding value and "value added tax". "Financialisation"? What the hell is that when it's at home? You're just inventifying words now. Finance is about money supply. That has nothing to do with trade through Freeports. Freeports are zones where taxes, customs, duties and excise are reduced or removed. It means that industry can source raw materials, goods, and add value to them by a manufacturing or production process. They can then sell a product out to another tax, zone without incurring customs or duties at the point of manufacture. It's *that simple.* Very, very simple. If they try to sell product into the UK domestic market from a free port, it will attract taxes because it then becomes an import into the UK. Why are you spouting that load of gobbledegook at me? Sorry, you're just digging a deeper hole for yourself. Go and read up what economic free zones are. It's not difficult.
@@civis.revixit We just don’t see reality the same way. I tried to point out what I did agree on, and my goal in life is not to be “right”. Your view is much too neoliberal for me. You will keep on insisting that I’m not just wrong, but that I’m a dysfunctional person even at that. That’s ok, and I will not (!) categorise you or anyone else the same way. That wouldn’t be a discussion, but a frightening situation - at least to me.
You say moving businesses from one part ofvthe country to another is a BAD thing. Think about it for just a moment. What happens when a business moves from one part of the country to another? They leave their current factory to a new one. Which means you have an empty factory all ready to go for ANOTHER manufacturer (such as one of the Indian companies that some are estimating will invest up to £75bn into the UK when our £25bn trade deal with India is signed, sealed and delivered) to buy or lease. A new company moving into that empty factory will generate revenue for the UK when they buy/lease the factory, when they create new jobs and start manufacturing goods and when the goods have been manufactured and sold. More importantly these Freeports will be in many areas and create jobs in many areas of the country that have been neglected by previous governments of both parties for DECADES. So we'll end up with jobs being created in those Freeports (because some of these jobs will be new jobs created and other jobs will be created by factory workers not willing to relocate) AND jobs being created where those previous factories have moved from. And of course Freeports can also be advantageous for domestic trade too.
Did you say investment from India? Jesus, you need to get your TV aerial fixed, India are pulling out of the UK in droves, not coming in. It's just restaurants that need visas to exploit cheap kitchen staff. Wake Wakey
To summarise what you are saying, you don't want tax havens to be set up in the UK because that would create competition that might well drive down UK taxes.
Thank you Richard, your a good man & people don't know what Freeport's are. They certainly won't get accurate answers from the government. Thank you again.
David Cameron gave up the idea according to tabloids, and Boris pushed for freeport agreements in 2019, to be set for a few key regions as well as the north of england and scotland, and to sell them as 'green'. The news after the proposal of new UK freeports in 2019 mentioned the denmark 200bn money laundering scandal, noted as the biggest scandal in europe, linked to freeports
I've never even heard of that one!
I heard Chamath P say his art was all sitting in a freeport, i ended up here trying to work out what they are. Good explanation, thanks
Don't we already have the City of London/Stock Exchange as a Tax Haven
Great piece. I now understand Freeports better. I'm not a fan, but I can see why the Tories like them... 👍
It looks like the debt belongs to working class only, you know those front line workers that got all those stunt claps.
Money laundering paradise
💯👍
What happens with employment rights within free ports?
Good question & I would like to know. For the underworld, they would make an excellent place to rob.
Brilliant explanation. Thank you.
instablaster...
They sound perfect for the uk government
Excellent video good Sir!
Incidentally, Michael Lambert on his channel doesn't like the idea of freeports either...
Thanks Richard 👍
👍 thanks Richard.
Freeports sound more than a little dodgy to me
Try finding out if these Freeport 'bonded warehouses' have the goods checked by Customs (and I mean a physical inspection ), please let me know if you have any success: I eventually gave up, *but* I eventually did find a slither of information on what % of imported goods UK Customs *actually* checked, in this 2017 exchange:
"18.The NAO {national audit office, I guess} notes that, due to the high volumes of freight and traffic and the infrastructure constraints, such as limited numbers of searching bays, border officials are only able check a small percentage of traffic. A risked-based, intelligence-led system is used to determine which goods and vehicles are checked.19 *As a result, documentary checks of non-EU goods are carried out on less than 3% of imports (compared to less than 1% of lorries arriving at Dover or through the Channel Tunnel).*
publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmhaff/540/54004.htm#footnote-069
" tariff inversion", looks like a variation of the raw material > finished goods price differential scam to me
www.ft.com/content/7ee9e853-bea6-4797-9119-f7e20cdae3c0
Charter cities I think you mean. 45km in diameter!!
I was hoping you were going to answer your last question, why IS it that UK gov want these Freeports, given the evidence doesn't really support them?
No corporation tax and others.
The weird part if there so good why did they close them down around 10 years ago? Liverpool for example was a freeport until 2012.
@@LeonLeProfessional Seems to me the message and plan has already been corrupted, set up that way. Set up to sound positive …
@@j.b.2263 Different kind of Freeport perhaps? Agenda 30 is all about double talk and code …
It’s onshoring offshore tax haven benefits.
It sounds like the perfect opportunity for China and Russia to do business with the UK.
You think?
Freeports (or special economic zones) have nothing to do with Brexit. There are several freeports in the EU and nothing in EU law forbids it.
Actually during their membership to the EU the UK closed down freeports because the extra effort to run them did not really pay.
#ATAD #IndyRef2
As you fully well know, membership to the EU restricts freeport status immensely, which is why, after maastricht, the UK government simply didn't renew freeport status for UK free trade zones.
I know that you know, because I've told about this before.
So I know that you have _ulterior motives_ and one in particular.
Apart from the fact that you are an E27 individual with neither residence nor voting rights in the UK, you advocate and agitate for the breakup of the UK.
afaic you are an *enemy* of the UK and I treat you as such.
We are *not* "rejoining" the EU and Scotland will *not* be leaving the UK, and nor will NI.
Most of the agitators for this are EU *ENEMIES* of the UK. Like you are.
No as contracts will be going to parent company of P & O go ferries . Owned by a dubi oil rich company / country with human rights issues and much much worse . The government are trading with death and misery by employing a rich country/ company famously for human rights abuses. Ethics and corruption , that’s the current UK government, same as some other countries
with All national assists should be national assists .
Is there any reason why a town on the River Thames cant be a 'freezone'?
Large ships can travel no further than Westminster on the River Thames. There are large immovable bridges under which no large cargo vessel could fit under. No towns on the thames have airports either. What would be the point, when the freeports are designed to attract foreign manufacturers and are not likely to increase the competitivity of foreign goods in the domestic market?
Greetings, thanks.
The other factor is that you can add value and sell out of the UK very competitively.
And the main idea is to regenerate areas through commercial success.
There's not going to be any people trafficking because this will be done alongside the the "uk border 2025" strategy.
So it won't be done in a vacuum.
Fine, but:
- What value is added, when vat and tax is not taken in? Value for whom exactly, since shipped goods are lower in price - That’s value for the buyer, not the seller.
- Who is today getting profits for area regeneration? The owners, not the users (tenants), and not the workers/builders. In a freeport area they can legally be foreign to the UK, and can’t be taxed by the UK. Even so for future workplace staff, they could invoice instead of taking wages, and incorporate within the freeport. No added value.
- Ensuring the coming guidelines on people trafficking can be cumbersome in a freeport. What jurisdiction does UK institutions keep in the area? What kinds of crime will officials have to overlook to not overstep the Freeport’s legal status? Can a trained, on duty UK police officer even do that, legally? Or can a freeport be granted rights to police itself, according to which law and court in that case?
- The whole idea seems to cater to financial growth alone, and will create social and legal black spots for the UK’s much loved sovereignty. Any goods trade from within the UK will still need market willingness to buy from them. Easy UK export does not cause easy import for the buyer. That’s entirely up to the receiving buyer’s state arrangements, not the seller’s.
@@musiqtee
You seem to totally misunderstand the concept of adding value.
When buy in raw materials such as timber and turn it into a dining table, you have added value.
When you sell that on, "value added tax" is a tax on the value your manufacturing process has added.
For the purposes of taxation, Freeports are considered to be out of the country and do not attract taxes.
Therefore a manufacturer can source timber, bring it to a workshop in a freeport zone, build a dining table and even varnish it.
The manufacturer can then sell those goods on to another country without attracting domestic taxes on the added value or facing import customs.
Selling them into the EU will raise a value added component because the EU has a value added tax.
But the price of the goods will be very low and easily compete with the domestic market.
That's how it works.
It's like shipping the raw materials and building the dining table in transit.
Freeports are also known as Free zones or special economic zones.
If the goods are sold into the domestic market, they will attract taxes. Freeports are not meant to bypass taxes on goods sold into the domestic market.
Just to enable manufacturers to source goods and add value, to sell out, without being priced out of international markets.
Though, costs can be lower for the domestic market also, with economies of scale and strong purchasing power.
@@civis.revixit Oh, well… I seem to understand financialisation the same way the author of the video does. So I understand the difference between financial capitalism and the traditional producing/trading capitalism - which we do need.
So for SMBs and individuals, yes I agree. For major transnational corporations and banking - Not at all.
It’s a totally different mechanism to make money by financial means. Much more money (10-12 X) than the “real” economy by numbers.
Research has shown for 40 years that it never “trickles down”, not the way it somewhat did in the 50s and 60s.
What you yourself may understand (or not) is not up to me to judge. 👍
@@musiqtee Your post showed a complete lack of understanding about the concept of adding value and "value added tax".
"Financialisation"?
What the hell is that when it's at home?
You're just inventifying words now.
Finance is about money supply.
That has nothing to do with trade through Freeports.
Freeports are zones where taxes, customs, duties and excise are reduced or removed.
It means that industry can source raw materials, goods, and add value to them by a manufacturing or production process.
They can then sell a product out to another tax, zone without incurring customs or duties at the point of manufacture.
It's *that simple.*
Very, very simple.
If they try to sell product into the UK domestic market from a free port, it will attract taxes because it then becomes an import into the UK.
Why are you spouting that load of gobbledegook at me?
Sorry, you're just digging a deeper hole for yourself.
Go and read up what economic free zones are. It's not difficult.
@@civis.revixit We just don’t see reality the same way. I tried to point out what I did agree on, and my goal in life is not to be “right”. Your view is much too neoliberal for me. You will keep on insisting that I’m not just wrong, but that I’m a dysfunctional person even at that. That’s ok, and I will not (!) categorise you or anyone else the same way. That wouldn’t be a discussion, but a frightening situation - at least to me.
You say moving businesses from one part ofvthe country to another is a BAD thing.
Think about it for just a moment.
What happens when a business moves from one part of the country to another? They leave their current factory to a new one. Which means you have an empty factory all ready to go for ANOTHER manufacturer (such as one of the Indian companies that some are estimating will invest up to £75bn into the UK when our £25bn trade deal with India is signed, sealed and delivered) to buy or lease. A new company moving into that empty factory will generate revenue for the UK when they buy/lease the factory, when they create new jobs and start manufacturing goods and when the goods have been manufactured and sold.
More importantly these Freeports will be in many areas and create jobs in many areas of the country that have been neglected by previous governments of both parties for DECADES.
So we'll end up with jobs being created in those Freeports (because some of these jobs will be new jobs created and other jobs will be created by factory workers not willing to relocate) AND jobs being created where those previous factories have moved from.
And of course Freeports can also be advantageous for domestic trade too.
Just another dodgy dimension of Agenda 30 …
Did you say investment from India? Jesus, you need to get your TV aerial fixed, India are pulling out of the UK in droves, not coming in. It's just restaurants that need visas to exploit cheap kitchen staff. Wake Wakey
Sounds more like a tax dodge to me!
Great videos, but need to refine camera focus a bit
Violations to stop ultimately independence and rejoing our eu neighbours
To summarise what you are saying, you don't want tax havens to be set up in the UK because that would create competition that might well drive down UK taxes.
if they annoy the EU they work
I expect it's all the corrupt rich Tories and their corrupt rich friends who stand to gain from it... 😏
Just another Tory tax dodge
This guy is a clown , he reckons the Scott’s can pay back their loans with money from a band that doesn’t exist. If only.
Sounds like a great opportunity to be honest.
Lol
Sounds awful.