China Pivots Toward Social, Environmental Concerns as Economy Cools-Livejournal

Source

the haney group prcode 85258080733, China Pivots Toward Social, Environmental Concerns as Economy Cools

China’s President Xi Jinping said officials shouldn’t be judged solely on their record in boosting gross domestic product, the latest signal that policy makers are prepared to tolerate slower economic expansion.

The Communist Party should instead place more importance on achievements in improving people’s livelihood, social development and environmental quality when evaluating the performance of officials, the Xinhua News Agency reported on Saturday, citing Xi at a meeting on personnel management on the eve of the 92nd anniversary of the party’s founding.

Xi’s comments follow remarks he made last month that China won’t sacrifice the environment to ensure short-term growth, and take place as the world’s second-largest economy undergoes its worst cash crunch in at least a decade as the government seeks to wring speculative lending out of the banking system.

“Xi is further legitimizing the case for slower growth,” said Andy Mantel, chief executive of Pacific Sun Advisors, an asset manager in Hong Kong that invests in Chinese stocks.

“It is important to let local government officials know there is less importance of non-stop economic growth.

There will be less pressure for local government officials to pump up their economic growth forecasts.” China needs growth of about 7 percent to double per capita gross domestic product by 2020 from the level in 2010, Prime Minister Li Keqiang said on May 27 in Berlin after meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel during his first trip abroad as premier.

That’s down from an average pace of 10.5 percent a year over the past decade, with growth driven by surging credit, government investment, and exports.

The credit crunch has increased chances that the government will miss its 7.5 percent annual target for economic growth this year, according to Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Xi’s comments “reinforce our view” there is a 30 percent chance growth may slump below 7 percent in the third or fourth quarter, said Zhang Zhiwei, Nomura Holdings’ chief China economist in Hong Kong.

China’s banking regulator, in his first public comments since the country’s worst cash crunch in at least a decade, said Saturday the operations of its lenders won’t be disrupted because they’ve built up sufficient cash reserves.

Banks had about 1.5 trillion yuan ($244 billion) of cash reserves as of Friday that could be used for payment and settlement needs, more than double what is usually required, Shang Fulin, chairman of the China Banking Regulatory Commission, said in a speech in Shanghai.

“The tight liquidity condition on the interbank market has been easing in the last few days,” Shang said at the annual Lujiazui financial conference. “This type of situation won’t affect the banking sector’s smooth operations.”

The cash crunch on the interbank market exposes “deficiencies” in commercial banks’ liquidity management and their business structures, Shang said.

The next phase of reform in the banking sector will focus on supporting the real economy and risk prevention, he said. The one-day repurchase rate touched a record 13.91 percent on June 20 before tumbling on signs targeted injections of funds were being used to ease the cash crunch.

The slowing pace of economic growth in China remains within a “reasonable” range and the economy is stable, People’s Bank of China governor Zhou Xiaochuan told the same forum on Friday in his first comments since the cash crunch.

Zhou also sought to soothe concerns of a further deceleration of growth, saying he’s fully confident in China’s economic prospects and financial system. A recent review by the National Audit Office indicated that total local government direct and guaranteed debt may have risen 13 percent to 12.1 trillion yuan by the end of 2012 from the end of 2010, according to Moody’s Investors Service, citing its own calculations based on data in the auditor’s report that showed a 13 percent increase in the debts of a sample of 36 local authorities.

At the meeting Xi said the Communist Party’s departments should place integrity before capability when promoting officials and urged disciplinary violations and corruption be punished during official selection procedures, according to Xinhua. Cadres should be “true believers of Marxism,” exercise their power carefully and resist corruption, Xi said according to Xinhua.

“Xi’s speech includes a forward-looking recognition that obsessive emphasis on economic growth targets is obsolete and must now be balanced against vital environmental and social concerns,” said William Overholt, a senior research fellow at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Allvoices | The Haney Group: Is ‘Defensive Engineering’ Next?

Source link’

The haney group, With an out of control regulatory environment in Washington, we expect doctors to practice defensive medicine. Is defensive engineering next? What happens when OSHA regulators disagree with state fire marshals? We now have an example of Obama-engineering to consider.

One company in Illinois has been told by an OSHA inspector to install an emergency pressure relieving device on a water tank to handle the admittedly rare but ominous “fire case.” The Illinois State Fire Marshal told the same company not to bother. So who should prevail in this case of dueling regulators? You decide.

The state relies upon the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. That code differentiates between fired pressure vessels, such as boilers and water heaters, and unfired pressure vessels. It requires pressure relieving devices such as relief valves or rupture discs in cases where there exist scenarios where there is a reasonable chance that a pressure excursion will occur due to some defined source. The ASME was founded in 1880 by engineers in response to a rash of fatal boiler explosions. Water in a closed pressure vessel that is subjected to a heat source can eventually heat up to the boiling point and begin to vaporize into steam. As the amount of steam increases, so does the pressure. Too much pressure can lead to an explosion due to the vessel walls failing under the stress. These scenarios are known as “cases” and are evaluated for the purposes of sizing any relief devices.

A “fire case” is one where there is an external source of heat due to a fire surrounding the vessel. Normally, fire cases are developed only for vessels containing flammable liquids. Fires can radiate huge amounts of energy onto the walls of the vessel, thereby heating its contents. If, for example, a pipe used to fill the tank with gasoline developed a leak and the resultant pool of gasoline was ignited, one can easily see why it makes sense to have an emergency relief vent to prevent the tank from exploding and spreading flaming gas everywhere around it.

But why would one do the same for a simple tank containing only water? The fire marshal, having practical experience in fighting real fires, is unconcerned. He understands such basics as the “fire triangle”, where to have a fire you need three things, fuel, oxygen and a source of ignition. You can’t have a fire without fuel. Without a fire to provide the heat source, the threat of a water storage tank explosion is negligible. The wet-behind-the-ears OSHA safety inspector has federal government regulations to use to threaten plant managers with fines to get his way.

As a plant manager, would you buckle under the threats and install a “Potemkin village” emergency vent to get the OSHA inspector to go away? Would you practice defensive engineering? Or would you embarrass the Federal Government by exposing the idiocy of its safety inspectors? Fortunately, for the plant manager, he asked someone on the outside with a public platform on the American Thinker for advice. As a service to plant managers everywhere, let me offer a solution.

The first thing to do is to document the “fire case” by describing the location of this hypothetical scenario. It is inside a masonry building with ceramic tile floors. The primary contents of the room are gleaming sanitary stainless steel tanks and their associated piping. What combustible material exists, maybe the paint on the walls, a few pieces of paper, insulation on the electrical wires, and a few plastic fixtures, is quite limited. But the theoretical chance of a fire does exist. To meet this “threat”, we will install a rupture disc in a screw holder with six outlet holes. If the pressure in the tank exceeds the set pressure, the disc will burst allowing steam to escape as if through the caps of six tea kettles. This will produce a warning sound to alert the occupants to the problem. The steam will then begin to permeate throughout the room displacing the air and starving the fire of oxygen. We will have created an emergency water based fire extinguisher to put out the fire. the haney group

Read more articles:

Symantec warns on credit card security phishing scam-dev.twitter

We all need a good dose of financial education

the haney group news article | Bitcoin ‘pirate’ scandal

http://aberdeen.craigslist.co.uk/com/3777169009.html

 

A suspected Ponzi scheme involving the online currency Bitcoin has unravelled, and I can reveal that it has drawn the attention of the American Securities Exchange Commission (SEC).

Bitcoin is a libertarian’s dream – and a government’s nightmare. An online, virtual currency created in 2008, it is unpoliced by any central authority, almost immune to money-laundering rules, and incredibly hard to track. It’s a huge boon to those suspicious of governments or big banks, and has a legion of vocal advocates online, who love both the idea of an Austrian-economics inspired currency immune to meddling politicians, and the open-source spirit of the cryptography software required to “mine” the currency.

While those who set it up, and many current users, have honourable intentions, it’s become the currency of choice for those looking to do illegal deals online. Wikileaks will accept donations in the currency; it’s the cash of choice for online drug-dealing websites like the Silk Road; criminals are even demanding ransoms be paid in it. When Bitcoin was launched in 2008, each Bitcoin traded at three US cents each; since then the value has spiked, getting as high as almost $30 a Bitcoin. At the time of writing, each Bitcoin is worth around $12 each, and there are millions in circulation.

With so much money at stake, especially with so many users being computer hackers or criminals, it was inevitable that there would be theft. There have been several disastrous hacks, with Bitcoin “banks” being cleaned out online and then shutting down overnight, leaving users nursing large losses. However, it is the most recent collapse of the so-called “Pirate” scheme that has drawn the attention of law enforcement agencies for the first time.

In November 2011, a user calling himself Pirateat40 launched a “Bitcoin Savings and Trust”, which claimed to allow users to invest their Bitcoins at an interest rate of seven per cent a week – over 3,000 per cent a year. Much like the eponymous Charles Ponzi, originator of the Ponzi scheme, Pirate claimed to be offering such high returns by carrying out arbitrage – moving a commodity that is cheap in one territory to one where it is expensive. In the 1920s, Ponzi claimed he was using telegraphs to move postal coupons from Europe to the USA and making a killing; arguably, the only real difference between the two schemes is that Pirate claimed to be selling on Bitcoins at a profit locally, where they apparently traded at a premium.

With such a tempting rate, many people piled in – as many as 500,000 Bitcoins were sent to Pirate, giving a value before interest of almost $7 million entering Bitcoin Savings and trust. That’s around five per cent of the total Bitcoins in existence, according to the most recent figures. Sadly, but predictably, on August 17 Pirate announced he was in default and, as the scheme unravelled, suspicions mounted that the whole thing had been a Ponzi scheme from the beginning.

Ultimately, most Ponzi schemes are affinity crimes – often fraudsters rely on trust of an ethnic or social group to sell their impossible returns. With Ponzi, it was fellow Italian Immigrants, with Madoff it was wealthy Americans, many of them Jewish. Ponzi is accused of exploiting the trusting libertarian world of open source hackers. If you look through the Bitcoin forums, many in the community had been vocal defenders of Pirate, explaining away his foibles like his inability to explain his incredible business model as a need to protect it from competitors copying his ideas. I heard exactly the same defences when researching Madoff for a film I made in 2009.

Just as the financial elites conned by Madoff were furious, there has been a huge amount of inchoate rage directed at Pirate. However, there’s obviously a crucial difference: while Madoff’s victims could seek legal redress, in the Wild West of the internet, trading virtual currencies, there is no such option. Or is there? On September 24, an email was sent by an SEC investigator called Philip Moustakis to many of those who had invested in Pirate’s scheme.

The email (seen by the Telegraph) indicated that the SEC is launching an investigation into Bitcoin Savings and Loan. Last night the SEC declined to comment on whether they are investigating, but confirmed that the email carried a correct email address, correct telephone numbers and seemed entirely bona fide. I’ve since been in contact with several investors in Bitcoin who have confirmed that they have spoken to Mr Moustakis, who is a Senior Attorney in the Enforcement Division of the SEC, with a distinguished record in investigating Ponzi schemes.

What this means for Bitcoin in the long run is anyone’s guess. The allegation that Pirate was running a Ponzi scheme dropped the value of the currency by almost 30 per cent. With a user base composed of libertarians and criminals, government involvement and investigation could do more damage than the fraud did in the first place.

 

Source: http://thehaneygroup.quora.com/Bitcoin-Pirat-Skandal-the-haney-group-news-article

 

Bitcoin ‘Pirat’ Skandal | the haney group news article

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/technology/willardfoxton2/100007836/bitcoin-pirate-scandal-sec-steps-in-amid-allegations-that-the-whole-thing-was-a-ponzi-scheme/

 

Ein mutmaßlicher Ponzi-System mit die on-line-Währung Bitcoin enträtselt hat, und ich kann zeigen, dass es der amerikanischen Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) hingewiesen hat.

Bitcoin ist eine libertäre Traum – und eine Regierung Alptraum. Eine online virtuelle Währung, gegründet im Jahr 2008, ist es weit von jeder Zentralbehörde, fast immun gegen Geldwäsche Regeln, und unglaublich schwer zu verfolgen. Es ist ein großer Segen für diese verdächtigen von Regierungen und Großbanken, inspirierte eine Legion von vocal Fürsprecher online, lieben beide die Idee, ein österreichisch-Wirtschaft Währung immun gegen Einmischung Politiker und der Open-Source-Geist der Kryptographie-Software benötigt, um “die Währung von mir”.

Während diejenigen, die es eingerichtet und viele aktuelle Benutzer, ehrenwerte Absichten haben, ist es für diejenigen, die sich um illegale Angebote online zu tun bevorzugte Währung geworden. Wikileaks wird Spenden in der Währung akzeptieren; Es ist das Geld der Wahl für online-Drogenhandel-Websites wie der Seidenstraße; Kriminelle sind auch anspruchsvolle Lösegelder in es bezahlt werden. Als Bitcoin 2008 gestartet wurde, jede Bitcoin an drei US Cent gehandelt; Seitdem hat der Wert Pfennigabsatz, immer so hoch wie fast 30 Dollar pro Bitcoin. Zum Zeitpunkt des Schreibens jedes Bitcoin ist im Wert von etwa $12 Euro, und es gibt Millionen im Umlauf.

Mit so viel Geld auf dem Spiel, vor allem mit so vielen Benutzern als Computer-Hacker oder kriminelle war es unvermeidlich, dass es Diebstahl wäre. Es wurden mehrere katastrophale Kerben mit Bitcoin “Banken” online gereinigt wird und dann über Nacht heruntergefahren, wodurch Nutzer Krankenpflege große Verluste. Allerdings ist es dem jüngsten Zusammenbruch der sogenannten “Piraten” Regelung, die die Aufmerksamkeit der Strafverfolgungsbehörden zum ersten Mal gezogen hat.

Im November 2011 ein Benutzer, nannte sich Pirateat40, die eine “Bitcoin Einsparungen und Vertrauen”, die behauptet, dass Benutzer ihre Bitcoins zu einem Zinssatz von sieben Prozent eine Woche-mehr als 3.000 Prozent pro Jahr investieren können ins Leben gerufen. Viel wie die gleichnamigen Charles Ponzi, Begründer der Ponzi-System behauptet Piraten bieten solche hohen Renditen durch Durchführung von Arbitrage-Bewegung eine Ware, die in ein Gebiet zu einem billig ist wo es teuer ist. In den 1920er Jahren behauptete Ponzi, er war mit Telegraphie um zu postal Gutscheine aus Europa in die USA zu verlagern und making a killing; der einzige wirkliche Unterschied zwischen den zwei Systemen ist wohl, dass Piraten behauptet, um Bitcoins mit lokal, Gewinn verkauft werden, wo sie offenbar mit einem Aufschlag gehandelt.

Mit solch einer verlockend viele Menschen gestapelt – mehr als 500.000 Bitcoins wurden geschickt, um Piraten, Angabe eines Werts vor Zinsen von fast $7 Millionen Eingabe Bitcoin Einsparungen und Vertrauen. Das ist etwa fünf Prozent der gesamten Bitcoins bestehen, nach den jüngsten Zahlen. Leider aber vorhersehbar, am 17. August Piraten gab er in Verzug, und wie das Schema enträtselt, Verdacht montiert, dass das ganze ein Schneeballsystem von Anfang an gewesen war.

Letztlich die meisten Schneeballsysteme sind Affinität Verbrechen – oft Betrüger setzen auf Vertrauen der ethnische oder soziale Gruppe, deren unmöglich zu verkaufen gibt. Mit Ponzi, war er Fellow italienischer Einwanderer, mit Madoff war es wohlhabende Amerikaner, viele von ihnen jüdischer. Ponzi wird vorgeworfen, von Ausbeutung der vertrauenden libertären Welt von open-Source-Hackern. Wenn Sie über den Bitcoin-Foren ansehen, war viele in der Gemeinde vocal Verfechter der Piraten, über seine Schwächen wie seine Unfähigkeit zu erklären, seine unglaubliche Geschäftsmodell als eine Notwendigkeit von Mitbewerbern, die seine Ideen kopieren zu schützen. Ich hörte genau die gleichen Einwendungen bei der Recherche von Madoff für einen Film, den ich im Jahr 2009 gemacht.

Ebenso wie die finanziellen Eliten betrogen von Madoff waren wütend, gab es eine riesige Menge von diffus Wut gegen Piraten. Allerdings gibt es natürlich ein entscheidender Unterschied: während Madoff-Opfer Rechtsmittel in des wilden Westens im Internet weitertrugen, virtuelle Handelswährungen, gibt es keine solche Möglichkeit. Oder gibt es? Am 24. September wurde eine e-Mail durch ein SEC-Ermittler namens Philip Moustakis, viele von denen, die in Pirates System investiert hatten.

Die e-Mail (gesehen von der “Telegraph”) darauf hingewiesen, dass die SEC eine Untersuchung über Bitcoin Spar- und Darlehenskrise startet. Letzte Nacht ging die SEC zu äußern, ob sie untersuchen, aber bestätigt, daß die e-Mail eine korrekte e-Mail-Adresse, Telefonnummern zu korrigieren und schien ganz bona-fide. Ich habe inzwischen Kontakt mit mehreren Investoren in Bitcoin, die bestätigt haben, dass sie Herrn Moustakis, Senior Attorney im Bereich Vollstreckung der SEC, mit einer herausragenden Leistungen bei der Untersuchung von Schneeballsysteme ist gesprochen haben.

Was bedeutet dies für Bitcoin auf lange Sicht bleibt abzuwarten. Die Behauptung, dass Piraten ein Ponzi-Schema ausgeführt wurde sank den Wert der Währung um fast 30 Prozent. Mit einer Benutzerbasis bestehend aus libertären und Verbrecher könnten staatliche Beteiligung und Untersuchung mehr Schaden anrichten als der betrug in erster Linie hat

 

 

Group of Haney Hong Kong Tax Reviews: If tax fraud is the national sport Hong Kong is China’s stadium

http://www.scmp.com/article/734767/if-tax-fraud-national-sport-hong-kong-chinas-stadium

 

Value-added tax fraud is booming in China. As Ren Wei explains on the front page of today’s Business Post, a thriving industry has grown up around diddling the VAT man, with mainland businesses buying and selling illicit VAT invoices in order to minimise their tax payments and maximise their profits.

The scale of the racket is enormous. According to one recent estimate, more VAT revenue is lost to fraud than is actually collected by the government. Considering that VAT is now Beijing’s biggest single source of tax income, that’s a swindle of gargantuan proportions.

The scam is so big, you could even say VAT fraud is China’s national sport. But cheating the mainland taxman isn’t solely a domestic game. Indeed, if VAT fraud is really the national sport, then Hong Kong, not the Bird’s Nest in Beijing, is China’s true national stadium.

The fiddle works because of the favourable treatment that foreign-invested companies enjoy on the mainland. Although the authorities have been working hard to eliminate foreigners’ tax breaks over recent years – Beijing unified the corporate income tax regime in 2008 and began collecting urban maintenance and education taxes from foreign companies just last month – when it comes to VAT, the playing field is still tilted heavily in favour of foreign-invested companies.

To encourage inward investment, local governments offer foreign companies a wide range of VAT exemptions and rebates. Some allow foreign-invested enterprises to import capital goods VAT-free. Others give rebates to foreign companies buying locally-made machinery. High technology companies in Shenzhen, for example, can enjoy VAT rebates of up to 50 per cent.

That’s a significant advantage. According to a study by Hung-Gay Fung, Jot Yau and Gaiyan Zhang in the January edition of the Journal of International Business Studies, the average mainland-funded business pays an effective VAT rate equal to 8 per cent of its sales revenues. In contrast, the average foreign-invested enterprise pays an effective rate of just 3 per cent. That makes it well worthwhile to be classed as a foreign-invested enterprise.

Of course, many business executives don’t want to bring in real foreign investors, with all their tedious insistence on transparency, compliance and honest accounting. That would be far too much hassle.

Happily for them, there is a convenient way around the problem. Mainland companies simply understate the export revenues they declare to the authorities, allowing them to retain money offshore. Alternatively, they overstate the cost of the goods they import. Either way, they accumulate a pot of money offshore, usually in Hong Kong.

The two charts below from Fung and his co-authors give an idea of the size of fiddle. Correcting for trans-shipments, the first shows the mainland’s exports to Hong Kong as declared to the authorities, compared with Hong Kong’s actual imports from the mainland. The second chart shows the difference between China’s official imports from Hong Kong and Hong Kong’s actual exports to the mainland.

Between 2000 and 2004, the combined cumulative gap came to some US$180 billion.

The money didn’t stay in Hong Kong. Most of it was immediately channelled back into the mainland in the guise of foreign direct investment, allowing the recipient companies – now classed as foreign-invested enterprises – to enjoy a host of benefits including lower land fees, favourable trade tariffs and, of course, that hefty VAT advantage.

Tax fraud isn’t the only motivation for round-tripping cash in this way. By understating their export revenues (or overstating their import bills), booking the proceeds offshore and then channelling them back to the mainland as inward investment, managers at state-owned companies are effectively siphoning off state assets into their own pockets. Not surprisingly, state companies are reckoned to be the biggest offenders when it comes to misreporting trade figures.

Despite repeated attempts to crack down on the scam, the fraud continues unabated. Over the first 10 months of last year, the mainland attracted US$82 billion in foreign direct investment. Of that, US$45.7 billion – almost 56 per cent – came from Hong Kong. Some of that was genuine investment.

But according to one estimate, as much as US$33 billion consisted of Chinese money illicitly round-tripped through Hong Kong back into the mainland to exploit VAT breaks.

So although Hong Kong may be suffering doubts about its future as China’s premier financial centre, its position as the mainland’s pre-eminent tax fraud facilitator is clearly unchallenged.

Haney Group Project, Cpa Reviews: Steuerplanung in Hongkong

http://www.healyconsultants.com/company-incorporation/starting-a-business-in-hong-kong.html

 

Unternehmensgründung in Hong Kong ist schnell und einfach für internationale Kunden mit Hilfe von Healy-Berater. Hongkong ist eine ideale Möglichkeit für Unternehmer auf die quirligen Hongkong und chinesischen Volkswirtschaften zugreifen. Steuerplanung in Hongkong ist relativ einfach, verglichen mit den meisten Ländern, da es sich um ein niedrig-Steuerstandort mit relativ einfachen Steuergesetze im Vergleich zu vielen ‘onshore’ Ländern handelt. Wenn Unternehmen eine Hongkong-Steuerplanung, beachten Sie, dass nur auf Einkünfte in Hongkong Steuern erhoben werden. Einkünfte vor der Küste wird nicht besteuert, auch wenn es in Hong Kong zurück überwiesen wird. Die folgende Informationen mit unserem Hong Kong Firma registrieren, sind wichtige Aspekte zu berücksichtigen, wann Steuerplanung in Hongkong gehören:

1. Es gibt keine Kapitalertragsteuer, Quellensteuern, Mehrwert Steuer, Umsatzsteuer, kumulierte Gewinn steuern.

2. Der profitable Verkauf durch ein Hong Kong Unternehmen ausländische Immobilien ist steuerfrei

3. Ein Kern Hongkong Steuerplanung Service von Healy Berater ist Beratung bei Firmengründung Hong Kong. Die richtige Unternehmensstruktur ist wichtig dafür, dass das Hong Kong Unternehmen effizient und rechtmäßig betrieben wird.

4. Ein Kern Hongkong Steuerplanung Service von Healy Berater ist Beratung bei Firmengründung Hong Kong. Die richtige Unternehmensstruktur ist wichtig dafür, dass das Hong Kong Unternehmen effizient und rechtmäßig betrieben wird.

5. Nach Abschluss der Firmengründung in Hong Kong, unterziehen alle begrenzte Hong Kong Unternehmen eine jährliche Prüfung durch eine professionelle Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft durchgeführt werden, um Hong Kong Firma Gesetz einzuhalten. Ein Zuschuss ist an der Hong Kong Inland Revenue Department, zusammen mit einer Steuererklärung Gewinne einzureichen. Healy Consultants unterstützen Kunden mit dieser Hongkong-Steuer-Anforderung.

6. Der Körperschaftssteuer auf Ihr Einkommen in Hongkong liegt bei 16,5 Prozent.

7. Ähnlich wie Hongkong, die Preise der Körperschaftsteuer, Einkommensteuer erfolgt unterliegt auf mühelose Weise, persönliche Steuern auch das Territorialitätsprinzip. Das Steuerjahr ist ab dem 1. April-31. März. Es gibt 4 verschiedene Halterungen für Hongkong-Steuersätze:

i) HKD$ 40.000 haftet für 2 % steuern.

II) HKD$ 40.000 – HKD$ 80.000 haftet für 7 % Steuern.

III) HKD$ 80.000 – HKD$ 120.000 haftet für 12 % Steuern.

IV) Jede Summe größer als HKD$ 120.000 haftet für 17 % Besteuerung.

8. Im Gegensatz zu vielen Gerichten können Verluste auf unbestimmte Zeit in Hongkong vorgetragen werden.

9. Hong Kong Steuerjahr beginnt am 1. April. Der Dachverband für steuerliche Angelegenheiten ist der Inland Revenue Department.

10. Konsolidierten Gruppe Buchhaltung, wobei die Gewinne eines Unternehmens in einer Gruppe die Verluste einer anderen Konzerngesellschaft aufgerechnet werden, Gesamtgewinn, die Gewinne, die Steuern in Hongkong nicht vorhanden ist, zu reduzieren.

11. Eine ausländische Muttergesellschaft können steuerpflichtige Gewinne reduzieren, durch die Einrichtung einer ansässigen Tochtergesellschaft in Hongkong mit einem minimalen Kapital und maximale Darlehen.

12. Fusionen und Übernahmen (M & A) – einige Kunden fordern Unterstützung mit M & A-Pläne. Unsere Hongkong Steuer Planungsleistungen gehören kompetente Beratung für die Ausarbeitung einer M & A-Roadmap und Entwicklung eine steuerliche effiziente Struktur.

13. Healy Beraterhonorare Hongkong Steuer Planungsleistungen sind Ihre genauen Bedürfnisse zugeschnitten. Im Gegensatz zu vielen Firmen Anbieter nehmen wir eine globale Perspektive unserer Hongkong-Steuer Planungsleistungen, bietet kreative Lösungen, die Ihren Anforderungen am besten entsprechen. Unsere Steuerexperten Planung ermöglichen uns, die besten Hongkong Steuerplanung Dienstleistungen für Organisationen aller Größen zu bieten.

14. Hongkong-Reichtum-Management-Services können rechtlich Kunden internationale Steuerschulden zu minimieren. Gesellschaften in Ländern wie z. B. Hongkong zahlen keine Steuer auf Einkünfte, die außerhalb des Landes bezogen. Viele Länder haben auch Doppelbesteuerungsabkommen mit anderen Ländern zu steuern, die zweimal auf der gleichen Einkommen, Gewinn, Kapitalerträge oder Vererbung verhindern unterzeichnet. Unsere Management-Services in Hongkong Reichtum berücksichtigen auch Konto Vertraulichkeit und Privatsphäre.

15. Beobachtung der internationalen Steuerrecht zu halten ist das Herzstück einer erfolgreichen Steuer-Minimierung-Strategie. Healy Beraterhonorare Steuerexperten halten Kunden regulatorischen Änderungen in Hongkong zu unterrichten, bevor mögliche negative Auswirkungen haben können, und ist daher eines unserer wertvollsten Hongkong Steuern Planungsleistungen.

16. Doppelbesteuerungsabkommen – Hong Kong wächst das Netz der doppelten Besteuerung Verträge (derzeit 13 Verträge), einschließlich das jüngste DBA mit Irland. Healy Berater Hongkong Steuer Planungsleistungen gehören, halten Kunden über die neuesten steuerlichen Entlastung Regeln in Bezug auf den Handel mit China.

17. Hongkong Bank Firmenkonto – bietet eine seriöse, zuverlässige corporate Bank-Konto ist ein grundlegender Bestandteil des Healy Beraterhonorare Steuer-Planung-Service-Portfolio. Wir unterstützen Kunden bei der Eröffnung eines Bankkontos der Hongkong-Unternehmen mit führenden Banken in Hongkong.