Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×
Jools

The Brexit Thread

Recommended Posts

41 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

No it's not, which is why I didn't say it.

 

Answer to everything? Put the straw down, chap. I do, however, believe that an increase in tax on those that can afford it most is a preferable alternative to slashing spending and forcing people to go without essential services. Personally I would also look at forms of taxing wealth as opposed to income, perhaps even instead of in some instances.

 

I'm very intrigued, what small business is yours that would be heavily impacted by a corporation tax and an increase in income tax above £80k? What sort of profits are you making?! Are you telling me that if you had to pay an extra 7% corporation tax on your profits you'd suddenly have to look at job losses!? And if you were earning £100,000, you'd currently pay £27,500 in income tax. Under Corbyn's income tax proposals you would be paying £28,500 in income tax. You'd have £83.33 less in your monthly pay packet.

You'd need to make people redundant. Under those circumstances. Whilst your small business is making a profit.

I'm smelling something that comes out of a bull's backside.

Well, it's interesting that you think so. I have a full-time job, and also support a business in which I am a director and 50% shareholder, which employs a handful of people. I personally don't draw a salary from this, and my shares do not earn a dividend. We are self-funded and have no external investors.

Whilst my business partner runs things full-time, I regularly work 60 hour weeks (and very often more) to support our products, and am absolutely essential to the revenue streams keeping our business afloat. In addition to corporation tax, we also pay substantial VAT on our services rendered. Our employees are employed on a full-time basis, and as I'm sure you're aware, we contribute revenues via employer's NI, pension contributions and so on. At some point I hope to be able to switch to a full-time position, although this is some way off. I can assure you that we certainly do not take huge salaries and dividends from our company, and I know of other small businesses who operate in the same manner simply for tax efficiency.

If corporation tax begins to increase, along with increases in personal taxes for higher earners, we would re-assess the business in its entirety and either convert to a partnership arrangement or simply chuck things in altogether. I certainly wouldn't bother working so many hours without financial compensation to try and build for the future, when I could be "living the dream" on a four-day week, and I am fairly sure my business partner would feel the same. I cannot begin to tell you the amount of unpaid time, effort and stress we have contributed over the last decade or so to get to even the modest place we are today, and it is very frustrating to be lumped in with serial tax-dodgers like Amazon and Facebook, who I doubt would even feel the impact on a corporation tax increase anyway.

You are free to call BS if you like, but quite frankly we should be looking at tax reductions on small companies turning over less than a few million, not increases. The real issue is that neither the Conservatives, or Labour (in all their bluster) actually have the nuts to do anything about the big boys when they know how much revenue is contributed in other means via PAYE and VAT, and the revenues that trickle down to the smaller sub-contractors. Instead Labour try to appeal to a certain demographic by promising an increase in corporation tax, knowing full well that it isn't the problem.
 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SwindonCanary said:

You've all got the 'wrong end of the stick'  It was Lord Sugar in reply to Corbyn saying he doesn't know a millionaire, When he is one himself !  

dear god, do you never stop lying ?

or perhaps you can tell us all when and where Corbyn said he does not know a millionaire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ian said:

You are free to call BS if you like

do you have a number to call ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bill said:

do you have a number to call ?

I would give it to you, but you would probably disappear like you normally do when proven wrong? 👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, canarydan23 said:

I do, however, believe that an increase in tax on those that can afford it most is a preferable alternative to slashing spending and forcing people to go without essential services. Personally I would also look at forms of taxing wealth as opposed to income, perhaps even instead of in some instances.

and increase in tax revenue by the simle expedient of ensuring that all tax that is due is paid

that crafty loopholes are closed would be a good start

which I'm sure would impact immensely on those on a low income who voted brexit 🤣

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ian said:

I would give it to you, but you would probably disappear like you normally do when proven wrong? 👍

when might be that be my dear old crank ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Bill said:

dear god, do you never stop lying ?

or perhaps you can tell us all when and where Corbyn said he does not know a millionaire

Can't remember what he actually said but it was something like I don't know a millionaire or he's not friends with one but it still stands true. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Bill said:

when might be that be my dear old crank ?

Well, the numerous times you've accused multiple posters of being one and the same, that time you talked about battery technology improving in recent times (Li-Ion was about in the 70s), and that other time you accused me of lying when I said the European Anthem was actually never ratified.

They're just the ones I can think of off the top of my head, but anyway, the thread in question has long since gone so I'm happy for you to pretend it never happened!

I'm sure everyone would prefer it if you stayed on-topic Bill. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Ian said:

Well, it's interesting that you think so. I have a full-time job, and also support a business in which I am a director and 50% shareholder, which employs a handful of people. I personally don't draw a salary from this, and my shares do not earn a dividend. We are self-funded and have no external investors.

Whilst my business partner runs things full-time, I regularly work 60 hour weeks (and very often more) to support our products, and am absolutely essential to the revenue streams keeping our business afloat. In addition to corporation tax, we also pay substantial VAT on our services rendered. Our employees are employed on a full-time basis, and as I'm sure you're aware, we contribute revenues via employer's NI, pension contributions and so on. At some point I hope to be able to switch to a full-time position, although this is some way off. I can assure you that we certainly do not take huge salaries and dividends from our company, and I know of other small businesses who operate in the same manner simply for tax efficiency.

If corporation tax begins to increase, along with increases in personal taxes for higher earners, we would re-assess the business in its entirety and either convert to a partnership arrangement or simply chuck things in altogether. I certainly wouldn't bother working so many hours without financial compensation to try and build for the future, when I could be "living the dream" on a four-day week, and I am fairly sure my business partner would feel the same. I cannot begin to tell you the amount of unpaid time, effort and stress we have contributed over the last decade or so to get to even the modest place we are today, and it is very frustrating to be lumped in with serial tax-dodgers like Amazon and Facebook, who I doubt would even feel the impact on a corporation tax increase anyway.

You are free to call BS if you like, but quite frankly we should be looking at tax reductions on small companies turning over less than a few million, not increases. The real issue is that neither the Conservatives, or Labour (in all their bluster) actually have the nuts to do anything about the big boys when they know how much revenue is contributed in other means via PAYE and VAT, and the revenues that trickle down to the smaller sub-contractors. Instead Labour try to appeal to a certain demographic by promising an increase in corporation tax, knowing full well that it isn't the problem.
 

What are you doing with your profits if you are paying out corporation tax and not issuing a dividend? I'd be having a stern word with your accountant.

I'm confused though, you said if Corbyn required people earning over £80k to pay 45% on earnings above said £80k, or raised corporation tax to a level still lower than Germany, France and Italy, you would have to let one of your low-earning staff go. Now you're saying you'd consider winding the company up all together. Which is it? If you're not making significant (or any) profit or paying anyone over £80k, the truth is you won't be affected in the slightest by the tax proposals, will you?

And if you want Amazon and Facebook targeted, there is a multi-national organisation instigating several measures to tackle global corporations slithering out of their tax obligations. It's called the EU. We could maybe stay in it?

And as for living the dream on a four-day week, you should consider it. I've been doing it since my wife went back to work part-time after our first child was born. Back then it was financially sensible as what I would have had to pay in childcare almost reached my post-tax daily earnings; however, now my in-laws have relocated to Norfolk and I'm thankfully earning a lot more than I was in 2010 it doesn't make sense from a financial perspective, but I get to spend more time with my kids during their formative years, don't have to miss their class assemblies, can attend school trips and be a regular on the school runs. And the productivity gains are immense to the point that in the company when I made the change to four days, I was almost doing as much as I was in five days, so it actually worked out for my employers too. I've moved companies two a half times since then (one change was between companies in the same building owned by the same people) but have continued "living the dream", with my 28 hour working week.

Edited by canarydan23

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SwindonCanary said:

Can't remember what he actually said but it was something like I don't know a millionaire or he's not friends with one but it still stands true. 

no, that is just you lying again as you have posted up something that you not know "what he actually said"

now why not use Google and see what comes up ?

 

ps I did, that's why I know you are lying ☹️

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SwindonCanary said:

Can't remember what he actually said but it was something like I don't know a millionaire or he's not friends with one but it still stands true. 

Go back a couple of pages where I called you out for the duplicitous, habitual liar that you are. I posted the video where he said what he said and pointed you to the minute and second that he said it. His words were "I don't know any billionaires", as I suspect you know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ian said:

Well, the numerous times you've accused multiple posters of being one and the same, that time you talked about battery technology improving in recent times (Li-Ion was about in the 70s), and that other time you accused me of lying when I said the European Anthem was actually never ratified.

They're just the ones I can think of off the top of my head, but anyway, the thread in question has long since gone so I'm happy for you to pretend it never happened!

I'm sure everyone would prefer it if you stayed on-topic Bill. 

so how do you know the 'accusations are false ?

can't remember the others, nor can I remember disappearing.... though I will shortly as I am meeting up before the game so will have to forego your imagined guff

 

ps you are not Swindo are you... he gets things wrong on a regular basis - mostly through making up stuff ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, canarydan23 said:

Go back a couple of pages where I called you out for the duplicitous, habitual liar that you are. I posted the video where he said what he said and pointed you to the minute and second that he said it. His words were "I don't know any billionaires", as I suspect you know.

and therein lies the problem with btrexit ... lies

never before have we had the means to check and verify information as we now have with the internet

yet it seems, as with brexiteers, that never before have we had so much misinformation and lying put out

it would have taken Swindo less than a minute or so to check BEFORE his post, but as ever his only thought was to post up something that would defend his idiotic idea.....by denegrating' the other side', irrespective of any truth in his post

I hope he nver finds himself in court with witnesses against him having the same level of honesty as himself

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, canarydan23 said:

What are you doing with your profits if you are paying out corporation tax and not issuing a dividend? I'd be having a stern word with your accountant.

I'm confused though, you said if Corbyn required people earning over £80k to pay 45% on earnings above said £80k, or raised corporation tax to a level still lower than Germany, France and Italy, you would have to let one of your low-earning staff go. Now you'd considered winding the company up all together. If you're not making significant profit or paying anyone over £80k, the truth is you won't be affected in the slightest by the tax proposals, will you?

And if you want Amazon and Facebook targeted, there is a multi-national organisation instigating several measures to tackle global corporations slithering out of their tax obligations. It's called the EU. We could maybe stay in it?

And as for living the dream on a four-day week, you should consider it. I've been doing it since my wife went back to work part-time after our first child was born. Back then it was financially sensible as what I would have had to pay in childcare almost reached my post-tax daily earnings; however, now my in-laws have relocated to Norfolk and I'm thankfully earning a lot more than I was in 2010 so it doesn't make sense from a financial perspective, but I get to spend more time with my kids during their formative years, don't have to miss their class assemblies, can attend school trips and be a regular on the school runs. And the productivity gains are immense to the point that in the company when I made the change to four days, I was almost doing as much as I was in four days, so it actually worked out for my employers too. I've moved companies two a half times since then (one change was between companies in the same building owned by the same people) but have continued "living the dream", with my 28 hour working week.

I won't bother doing the maths for you as you seem a clever chap, but I'm sure you're aware that paying shareholders via dividends is often used as a more tax-efficient way of paying people than via larger salaries. Increases in corporation tax are going to reduce that efficiency, and as we don't operate with big profits in real terms, that's going to have an impact on whether it's feasible for us to continue expanding in the way we have.

From a personal perspective, if any profitability is further taxed (and let's be honest, that 7% increase would never be the end of it under profit-hating John/Jeremy) I just wouldn't bother putting the effort in, and who knows what impact that would have on the business in general.

As for the EU, are you not of the opinion that it is really quite beneficial to corporations in general; particularly with regards to securing cheaper labour, tariffs, raw materials and so on?. The occasional highly-publicised anti-trust fine handed out to the biggest of the big doesn't really alter that fact.

Whether you believe what I say or not is irrelevant, it seems that you do agree with me that corporation tax isn't actually going to impact on any of the big companies who are able to reduce their liabilities by using overseas property/trading loopholes? What do you suggest is the reasoning behind it then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ian said:

As to your point about the threat being laughable; I assume that as part of the non-Jewish majority, I am not sure that you and I get to decide if this is the case?

Thought this might interest you. Does she and her family get to decide? Bercow? Jon Lansman? Members of Jewdas?

No, not those Jews, they're not the right Jews. Listen to the ones who don't like Corbyn, please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Bill said:

so how do you know the 'accusations are false ?

can't remember the others, nor can I remember disappearing.... though I will shortly as I am meeting up before the game so will have to forego your imagined guff

 

ps you are not Swindo are you... he gets things wrong on a regular basis - mostly through making up stuff ?

Well, I know that I'm not Swindon Canary or Van Wink or RTB, so that is proof enough for me.

Before I forget, another one is that time you accused me of being a technophobe Brexiteer (or words to that effect), when I'm a software developer, but you've probably forgotten that one too...

Enjoy the match, hopefully I will be able to get there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, canarydan23 said:

Thought this might interest you. Does she and her family get to decide? Bercow? Jon Lansman? Members of Jewdas?

No, not those Jews, they're not the right Jews. Listen to the ones who don't like Corbyn, please.

Did it take 4 hours to find that example?

I'm not sure what you're trying to suggest here; I thought we established previously that I don't think Jeremy is really an anti-semite, it's more the fact that he seems completely unable/unwilling to deal with something that some Jewish Labour supporters/MPs believe is becoming a real threat. This has escalated to the extent that he has been embarrassed in such a public and humiliating way, which I think could have a real impact on his appeal to those all-important swing voters.

In my opinion it's often difficult to believe that Boris Johnson and his front-bench is anything other than a bad joke, and I think he would be absolute toast with any reasonable opposition. The fact he is somehow still clinging on, and that the Tories appear to STILL be favourites in the polls is a real testament to the quality of Labour's leadership at the current time.

Anyway I think we've done this to death, so we'll just have to agree to agree on this one, even if we disagree on the implications. I also think we're on very tenuous ground if you start suggesting that the opinion of minority members only carries weight if they agree with you. Or am I misreading what you are suggesting?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ian said:

I won't bother doing the maths for you as you seem a clever chap, but I'm sure you're aware that paying shareholders via dividends is often used as a more tax-efficient way of paying people than via larger salaries. Increases in corporation tax are going to reduce that efficiency, and as we don't operate with big profits in real terms, that's going to have an impact on whether it's feasible for us to continue expanding in the way we have.

From a personal perspective, if any profitability is further taxed (and let's be honest, that 7% increase would never be the end of it under profit-hating John/Jeremy) I just wouldn't bother putting the effort in, and who knows what impact that would have on the business in general.

As for the EU, are you not of the opinion that it is really quite beneficial to corporations in general; particularly with regards to securing cheaper labour, tariffs, raw materials and so on?. The occasional highly-publicised anti-trust fine handed out to the biggest of the big doesn't really alter that fact.

Whether you believe what I say or not is irrelevant, it seems that you do agree with me that corporation tax isn't actually going to impact on any of the big companies who are able to reduce their liabilities by using overseas property/trading loopholes? What do you suggest is the reasoning behind it then?

You told me you didn't get paid anything via a shareholder's dividend. Now you're telling me you do?

The EU certainly has been beneficial to corporations and less sizeable businesses alike, but the last part of the Anti Tax Avoidance Directive kicks in in the New Year which should make it a lot more difficult for the Amazons of this world to channel their profits into low tax nations. I'm all for that, aren't you?

I'll be honest, I am struggling to believe you, you seem to be contradicting yourself. One minute Corbyn's draconian new tax regime will mean you have to sack someone and you don't pay dividends, next minute Corbyn's draconian new tax regime will make you and your business partner consider winding everything up and you do in fact pay dividends. You can see why I'm cynical, can't you?

Edited by canarydan23

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ian said:

Or am I misreading what you are suggesting?

Yes. It's whether you are doing it deliberately that intrigues me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, canarydan23 said:

You told me you didn't get paid anything via a shareholder's dividend. Now you're telling me you do? You'd need to be closing in on £40,000 before it became more tax efficient to be paid for from a dividend anyway.

The EU certainly has been beneficial to corporations and less sizeable businesses alike, but the last part of the Anti Tax Avoidance Directive kicks in in the New Year which should make it a lot more difficult for the Amazons of this world to channel their profits into low tax nations. I'm all for that, aren't you?

I'll be honest, I am struggling to believe you, you seem to be contradicting yourself. One minute Corbyn's draconian new tax regime will mean you have to sack someone and you don't pay dividends, next minute Corbyn's draconian new tax regime will make you and your business partner consider winding everything up and you do in fact pay dividends. You can see why I'm cynical, can't you?

Just because I don't take a shareholder's dividend doesn't mean that other directors don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ian said:

Just because I don't take a shareholder's dividend doesn't mean that other directors don't.

Directors? I thought it was just you and your partner?

Are you telling me you're regularly signing a Deed of Waiver whilst your business partner takes a dividend payment?

Sounds dangerous...

Edited by canarydan23

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, canarydan23 said:

Yes. It's whether you are doing it deliberately that intrigues me.

Okay, I'll try and reinterpret then.

Because some Jewish Labour supporters don't believe Jeremy is an anti-semite, therefore we don't need to worry about the opinions of those ex-Labour MPs who at the very least think he is not dealing with what they believe is becoming an increasing issue within their party?

PS. It's not like Austin is the first MP to resign over his handling of the issue either is it...?
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, canarydan23 said:

Directors? I thought it was just you and your partner?

Are you telling me you're regularly signing a Deed of Waiver whilst your business partner takes a dividend payment?

Sounds dangerous...

Quite right, I should have said other directors and shareholders. Actually the director part is irrelevant, as I am sure you know, it just so happens that my partner also is a shareholder. My understanding (limited) is we have a different preference of share, but I leave that all in the (hopefully) capable hands of our accountants...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Ian said:

Okay, I'll try and reinterpret then.

Because some Jewish Labour supporters don't believe Jeremy is an anti-semite, therefore we don't need to worry about the opinions of those ex-Labour MPs who at the very least think he is not dealing with what they believe is becoming an increasing issue within their party?

PS. It's not like Austin is the first MP to resign over his handling of the issue either is it...?
 

No, Chuka Umunna resigned on antisemitism, months after saying that he had never encountered any antisemitism within Labour whatsoever. I think Angela "funny-tinge" Smith did as well, a woman horrified at the prospect of not getting a £22,000 financial package if she loses her seat at the general election after her party musical chair routine. Chris Leslie, Mike Gapes and the sort, these are people that the left of the party have been calling Red Tories for years.

51 minutes ago, Ian said:

Quite right, I should have said other directors and shareholders. Actually the director part is irrelevant, as I am sure you know, it just so happens that my partner also is a shareholder. My understanding (limited) is we have a different preference of share, but I leave that all in the (hopefully) capable hands of our accountants...

So let me get this straight. You frequently sign a Deed of Waiver so as to not accept your dividend payment, or you have been issued a different class of share that does not yield a dividend. The former would certainly raise an eyebrow or four at the HMRC, the latter perhaps just an eyebrow or two.


But you, a holder of 50% of the shares in the business, who puts several hours a week into the company with no salary, allow your more minor shareholders to receive a dividend payment whilst you waive your reimbursement? And it is the case that at least one other of these shareholders (your initial post implied it was just you and one other business partner who ran things, but now you seem to be suggesting there are several shareholders, which means you own more of the company than anyone) who works full time for the company and therefore must be taking a salary (£12,500 minimum) and then get an unspecified dividend payment on top of that each year, whilst you get diddly squat?

This all smells too fishy for me. If I was a betting man I'd be wagering that you've made the whole thing up to try and make a weak argument against the merits of Corbyn's very modest policies (an extra £1,000 tax a year from people on £100,000 salaries and corporation tax to a level less than France, Germany, Italy and the UK under a few years of Thatcher) to bring in more cash for services from profitable companies and well-paid individuals.

You now have a chance to leave me with egg on my face by telling me all about your company, what it does, its website etc. I suspect my face will remain eggless.

 

Edited by canarydan23

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

No, Chuka Umunna resigned on antisemitism, months after saying that he had never encountered any antisemitism within Labour whatsoever. I think Angela "funny-tinge" Smith did as well, a woman horrified at the prospect of not getting a £22,000 financial package if she loses her seat at the general election after her party musical chair routine. Chris Leslie, Mike Gapes and the sort, these are people that the left of the party have been calling Red Tories for years.

So let me get this straight. You frequently sign a Deed of Waiver so as to not accept your dividend payment, or you have been issued a different class of share that does not yield a dividend. The former would certainly raise an eyebrow or four at the HMRC, the latter perhaps just an eyebrow or two.


But you, a holder of 50% of the shares in the business, who puts several hours a week into the company with no salary, allow your more minor shareholders to receive a dividend payment whilst you waive your reimbursement? And it is at least one other of these shareholders (your initial post implied it was just you and one other business partner who ran things, but now you seem to be suggesting there are several shareholders, which means you own more of the company than anyone) who works full time for the company and therefore must be taking a salary (£12,500 minimum) and then get an unspecified dividend payment on top of that each year, whilst you get diddly squat?

This all smells too fishy for me. If I was a betting man I'd be wagering that you've made the whole thing up to try and make a weak argument against the merits of Corbyn's very modest policies (an extra £1,000 tax a year from people on £100,000 salaries and corporation tax to a level less than France, Germany, Italy and the UK under a few years of Thatcher) to bring in more cash for services from profitable companies and well-paid individuals.

You now have a chance to leave me with egg on my face by telling me all about your company, what it does, its website etc. I suspect my face will remain eggless.

 

I don't hold 50% of the shares, not sure where you have that from. I am, however, one of two directors. I would suggest that you are quite correct with the class of share differential.

Given your rather sinister mention of HMRC, and the fact I don't particularly want to waive any more anonymity on the Internet, I'm afraid you will just have to take my word for it. I'm a very peaceful person and have no desire to see your face covered in egg.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

canarydan23 quoted you in a topic: The Brexit Party
1 hour ago

Bill quoted you in a topic: The Brexit Party
1 hour ago

Bill quoted you in a topic: The Brexit Party
1 hour ago

TCCANARY quoted you in a topic: The Brexit Party
5 hours ago

canarydan23 quoted you in a topic: The Brexit Party
5 hours ago

Bill quoted you in a topic: The Brexit Party
18 hours ago

Hoola Han Solo quoted you in a topic: The Brexit Party

18 hours ago

canarydan23 quoted you in a topic: The Brexit Party
Yesterday at 15:23

Hoola Han Solo quoted you in a topic: The Brexit Party

Seems like the same old remainers are having a go at me. Give it a rest, your'e not going to win.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SwindonCanary said:

canarydan23 quoted you in a topic: The Brexit Party
1 hour ago

Bill quoted you in a topic: The Brexit Party
1 hour ago

Bill quoted you in a topic: The Brexit Party
1 hour ago

TCCANARY quoted you in a topic: The Brexit Party
5 hours ago

canarydan23 quoted you in a topic: The Brexit Party
5 hours ago

Bill quoted you in a topic: The Brexit Party
18 hours ago

Hoola Han Solo quoted you in a topic: The Brexit Party

18 hours ago

canarydan23 quoted you in a topic: The Brexit Party
Yesterday at 15:23

Hoola Han Solo quoted you in a topic: The Brexit Party

Seems like the same old remainers are having a go at me. Give it a rest, your'e not going to win.

 

 

Shut up. Liar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ian said:

I don't hold 50% of the shares, not sure where you have that from. I am, however, one of two directors.

Oh Ian. Oh Ian, Ian Ian...

1 hour ago, Ian said:

I have a full-time job, and also support a business in which I am a director and 50% shareholder

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×