Hero to Zero (Mo Farah content)?
Discussion
I always thought this story made Mo Farah sound like a bit of a tt;
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/athle...
I'm not entirely sure why he chose to share it with the world.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/athle...
I'm not entirely sure why he chose to share it with the world.
Blib said:
HonestIago said:
This WILL upset the BBC!
After all he is their poster boy for the resounding success of multiculturalism, diversity and enrichment provided by Muslims from the third world etc etc.
I trust that you booed him all the way around the track during the Olympics.After all he is their poster boy for the resounding success of multiculturalism, diversity and enrichment provided by Muslims from the third world etc etc.
HonestIago said:
Blib said:
HonestIago said:
This WILL upset the BBC!
After all he is their poster boy for the resounding success of multiculturalism, diversity and enrichment provided by Muslims from the third world etc etc.
I trust that you booed him all the way around the track during the Olympics.After all he is their poster boy for the resounding success of multiculturalism, diversity and enrichment provided by Muslims from the third world etc etc.
stevejh said:
Apparently Oregon has a personal income tax rate of 9.9% on taxable income over $125,000 (at least those were the figures last year) so you can't really blame him can you?
yes, but that will be on top of Federal Income tax, which does not allow deductions for paid taxes.Plus Oregon is one of the few states that has no sales tax.
for those who think Mo Farah or Paula Radcliffe have received funding in recent years, have a read
http://www.uksport.gov.uk/pages/how-the-funding-wo...
The funding is means tested. At their earning levels they won't have been getting a penny recently.
Not to say that they didn't receive funding earlier in their careers. Although I suspect Paula Radcliffe may have been self sufficient long before funding really kicked in. She was a world junior champion in the early 1990s and wouldn't have qualified then as she was living with her parents
http://www.uksport.gov.uk/pages/how-the-funding-wo...
The funding is means tested. At their earning levels they won't have been getting a penny recently.
Not to say that they didn't receive funding earlier in their careers. Although I suspect Paula Radcliffe may have been self sufficient long before funding really kicked in. She was a world junior champion in the early 1990s and wouldn't have qualified then as she was living with her parents
pork911 said:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I'm struggling to imagine how anyone could be a nondom because of their place of birth?It is automatically initially based on where you were born.
If you want to change your country of domicile, you have to take fairly extreme measures to ensure you abandon your original domicile.
Where you actually live is only one small part of the factors that are looked at when a person is trying to change their country of domicile.
Note "domicile" and "residence" are very different concepts in law.
As Eric Mc reminds us all Domicile and Residence are highly complex matters in relation to taxation. It does not surprise me that Mo Farrah is availing himself of the opportunities that living abroad for much of the year and not being a UK domicile by birth (which I understand to be the case) offers to him. His earing life is very short and his risk of injury and retirement significant.
I have suggested for some time on PH that tax avoidance has become very interesting to many UK nationals who seek the advantages of offshore status for taxation purposes. The saving are factors not percentages. The Jimmy Carr business demonstrated the economics effectively. Massive permanent savings. Always assuming HMRT continue to duck the issue and leave the Rangers case as it stands. Which clearly they are. Given Farrah's multiontinent lifestyle it seems to me to be entirely reasonable. My only concern would be to avoid the jagged claws of the USA IRS because the liability of native Americans is permanent and very heavily pursued. But in Farrah's case I think this is simply good housekeeping. I personally find the challenge of the legality of such matters sufficient interest. I am ignoring the moral questions which might involve philosophical matters which approach religious matters which are beyond my comprehension.
I have suggested for some time on PH that tax avoidance has become very interesting to many UK nationals who seek the advantages of offshore status for taxation purposes. The saving are factors not percentages. The Jimmy Carr business demonstrated the economics effectively. Massive permanent savings. Always assuming HMRT continue to duck the issue and leave the Rangers case as it stands. Which clearly they are. Given Farrah's multiontinent lifestyle it seems to me to be entirely reasonable. My only concern would be to avoid the jagged claws of the USA IRS because the liability of native Americans is permanent and very heavily pursued. But in Farrah's case I think this is simply good housekeeping. I personally find the challenge of the legality of such matters sufficient interest. I am ignoring the moral questions which might involve philosophical matters which approach religious matters which are beyond my comprehension.
HonestIago said:
No, more than anything it just amused me how on several occasions on the BBC that Farah was said to have "ended African dominance of distance running". I just find it rather false that Britain should claim credit for all his success. How do the good people of Somalia feel about it? Is he not a son of theirs?
They are proud of him too. His twin brother still lives in Mogadishu. His father couldn't bring the whole family to the UK. Farah is a product of the largely informal UK running system and shows what can be done with a lot of hard work and dedication built upon some natural ability.
Watchman said:
I think the whole concept of nationality is becoming anachronistic if we accepted him as British in the first place. Don't misunderstand me, I have no problem with it other than to ask whether nationality should be judged on criteria other place of birth (as it seems to be).
Do we need to judge anything? Why not just opt for a country and then be stuck with it for a year or perhaps two. So there would be an English team for whatever sport.For instance, if you believe you will not make the first squad for, say, English rugby without international experience then you could have you pick of the second level nations, or one of the emerging ones, like Scotland. After a season, then move on.
I'm half Irish so, if I'd been any good at rugby, I could have played for them despite only ever visiting for two weeks on holiday. That's rather silly. I had an uncle who was told he could have played football for Scotland as he'd been born in Berwick.
I've got my doubts about one or two players in the England first XV. I can't believe they were all born here.
I've got a Japanese daughter-in-law, an Irish son-in-law and my younger son's girlfriend can claim Polish nationality.
This is the 21st century. People move about.
I'm a big fan of F1 but it irritates me to hear anthems for the teams being played. What is that based on?
Steffan said:
As Eric Mc reminds us all Domicile and Residence are highly complex matters in relation to taxation.
Not especially. As posted earlier to determine residence you follow a relatively simple flowchart. IRS rules are even simpler. In most countries residence is determined by number of days physical presence. Domicile is a bit trickier but not complex unless someone chooses to make it so. Almost all of us, including millionaire international stars have a clear domicile. Farahs was almost certainly the UK previously (unless he had specific tax advice from a very early age) and in about 5 years if he's still resident in the states, perhaps applied for a green card and states his intention to remain he can switch to the states. Steffan said:
My only concern would be to avoid the jagged claws of the USA IRS because the liability of native Americans is permanent and very heavily pursued.
The IRS is a nightmare for Americans, particularly those with foreign interests but so long as he remains an alien its relatively easy to leave, he just files a 1040c, pays any taxes due and leaves. The whole discussion around him 'avoiding tax' is a nonsense, I'll wager his effective tax rate remains about the same (or higher depending on Oregons tax rate and double taxation treatment) the complexity of his returns is about to go through the roof though! The US is not a place one takes up residence to to avoid taxes!Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff