PATENT BOX all’ITALIANA, perchè non funziona, non incentiva la ricerca, non è fiscalmente efficace

A MALTA c’è un vero IP (intellectual property) box collaudato, funzionante e nel rispetto delle norme OCSE e Europee.
Aiuta investimenti R&D, protegge con brevetti europei, è fiscalmente molto efficiente

In Italia sarà inefficace, complesso, costoso

Maltaway è business alla luce del sole, un modo di fare business trasparente, regolamentato, compliant con le norme OCSE ed Europee, capace di competere nel mondo non solo per il fantastico clima che Malta offre a burocrazia zero!

“La patent box contenuta nella Legge di stabilità appare quindi soprattutto come una mossa difensiva del nostro paese per ridurre gli incentivi delle imprese italiane a delocalizzare i beni immateriali.
È tuttavia evidente che difficilmente il nuovo regime produrrà un effetto attrattivo. Questo non solo perché le patent box offerte da altri paesi continueranno ad avere aliquote significativamente più basse e condizioni meno restrittive, ma soprattutto perché la costruzione di un sistema fiscale più efficiente non può essere affidata a interventi sporadici e va inserita in una strategia complessiva”

Grazie all’autore

maltaway_malta_IP BOX

MALTA, registro navale maltese primo in Europa con un grade di Low Risk ships riconosciuto nel mondo, stessa cosa per il registro aereo. Come trasformare l’efficienza burocratica in un business

MALTA, registro navale maltese primo in Europa con un grade di Low Risk ships riconosciuto nel mondo, stessa cosa per il registro aereo. Come trasformare l’efficienza burocratica in un business

Le ragioni non sono dettate da valutazioni esclusivamente economiche e fiscali, ma anche da un’efficienza burocratica e operativa che in molti Paesi, Italia in testa, appare un miraggio. A Malta ci si può rivolgere a un unico interlocutore che risponde 24 ore su 24 e 7 giorni su 7 a ogni tipo di richiesta.

Con MALTAway puoi trasferire e registrare a Malta imbarcazioni, yachts e aerei, la miglior location Europea per struttura costi, fiscalità ed efficienza burocratica….questo è business alla luce del sole

La barca in foto non è un rendering, esiste davvero e la potete trovare nelle acque e porti Maltesi, è stata costruita in Italia ma è registrata a Malta, si chiama MALTESE FALCON

maltaway_Maltese Falcon


The tyranny of the long term Let’s not get carried away in bashing short-termism

THE sheep in “Animal Farm” repeat the slogan, “Four legs good, two legs bad”. In the management world these days, the chant is “Long-termism good, short-termism bad”. TheHarvard Business Review constantly thunders against the evils of short-termism.

Perhaps the strongest argument for rewarding long-term investors is that they think more about sustained growth, whereas short-term ones will sacrifice this for a quick buck. This is true if companies do not trade in their own shares

Companies repurchase their shares when they think they are cheap, as a way of benefiting their long-term holders at the expense of those who sell. As it happens, their timing is often poor. However, what is more important is that the cash they spend on repurchases could often have been used on expanding into new markets, or on research and development, to generate long-term growth. One study found that a doubling of repurchases leads to an 8% fall in spending on R&D

Long-termism and short-termism both have their virtues and vices—and these depend on context. Long-termism works well in stable industries that reward incremental innovation. But it is a recipe for failure in such businesses as social media, where firms are constantly forced to abandon their plans and “pivot” to a new strategy, in markets that can change in the blink of an eye|hig|20-11-2014|

Deflation To Help Kick-Start European Shares In 2015

Deflation has been caused by three factors which are all positive “at the margin” for shareholders:

  1. lack of wage growth,
  2. falling base metals and energy prices,
  3. the move of a capital intensive economy to one that is rich in information technology.

Despite that deflation is painted as an advertisement for a moribund economy, it’s a positive development and will translate into higher profits over time

The Highest-Paying Programming Languages You Should Learn, Ranked By Salary

Based on that data, here are programming languages listed next to their average annual salary from lowest to highest:

12. PERL – $82,513

11. SQL – $85,511

10. Visual Basic – $85,962

9. C# – $89,074

8. R- $90,055

7. C – 90,134

6. JavaScript – $91,461

5. C++ – $93,502

4. JAVA – $94,908

3. Python – $100,717

2. Objective C – $108,225

1. Ruby on Rails – $109,460

While some of these coding languages can help you earn $100,000, train to become a Salesforce architect if you want one of the highest-paying jobs in tech and you can earn between $180,000 and $200,000.

Making Dumb Groups Smarter

When there are many who contribute to the process of deliberation, each can bring his share of goodness and moral prudence…some appreciate one part, some another, and all together appreciate all. The key is information aggregation: Different people take note of different “parts,” and if those parts are properly aggregated, they will lead the group to know more (and better) than any individual.

Many groups end up thinking that their ultimate convergence on a shared view was inevitable. Beware of that thought.

Leaders can refuse to take a firm position at the outset, thus making space for more information to emerge.

Smarter Groups?

Silence the leader.
“Prime” critical thinking.
Reward group success.
Assign roles.
Appoint a devil’s advocate.
Establish contrarian teams.
The Delphi method.

Does your jurisdiction offer favourable IP rates?

Does your jurisdiction offer favourable Intellectual Property (IP) rates?

Four countries – the UK, Luxembourg, Netherlands and Spain – disagreed with the OECD and 40 other states over how to stop governments poaching other countries’ tax revenues by offering reduced rates on the

Governments have thrown their weight behind sweeping rules to crack down on corporate tax avoidance, including steps to increase transparency, close loopholes and limit the use of tax havens.
However, countries could not agree on the design of a measure aimed at curbing unfair competition for patent income, which is widely viewed as contributing to the problem of tax avoidance.
Four countries – thought to be the UK, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Spain – disagreed with 40 other states over how to stop governments poaching other countries’ tax revenues by offering reduced rates on the income generated by intellectual property. These “patent box” schemes include Britain’s flagship tax break for intellectual property, forecast to cost nearly £1bn a year.
The rules unveiled ahead of this week’s G20 meeting of finance ministers in Australia are the first concrete result of a concerted push to stop the aggressive corporate tax planning that caused widespread public outrage in the wake of the financial crisis.
Pascal Saint-Amans, the top tax official at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development which is overseeing the clampdown on “base erosion and profit shifting” said: “The ambition of the G20 leaders has not been watered down in spite of the difficulties of the exercise. The only area where consensus has not been reached is one part of harmful tax competition.”
The bid to crack down on patent boxes follows fears they would lead to a “race to the bottom” and poach revenue from other countries. Germany last year described them as being at odds with the “European spirit”.
The UK and other opponents of this plan argue that the proposal, which would stop companies claiming the tax break if they outsource research to other parts of their group, breaches European law. They pushed for an alternative approach but this was rejected.
The rest of the measures – tackling opacity, arbitrage and treaty abuse – have been agreed by 44 countries representing 90 per cent of the world’s economy.
In the highest profile of the new rules, multinationals will be forced to reveal to tax authorities where they make their money and pay their taxes, in a bid to expose corporations shifting profits to low tax countries.
Another far-reaching measure lays out new standards designed to put an end to the abuse of tax treaties through treaty “shopping”. The move is likely to force multinationals to disband “letterbox” companies – with no real activities – that are used to route profits through countries such as the Netherlands and Luxembourg to take advantage of favourable tax treaties.
The measures also include a concerted attack on “hybrid” structures, widely-used schemes that rely on arbitrage to minimise tax bills by exploiting differences between countries’ tax rules.
The OECD also published on Tuesday a detailed report on how to tax digital companies. It ruled out specific measures on the grounds that the pervasive nature of internet technology made it impossible to ring fence the industry. But the report said that the problems in taxing digital companies would be addressed by broader-brush measures that are due to be unveiled next year, along with new recommendations on value added tax.
Saint-Amans said the crackdown on base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) had already started to have an impact. He said: “A large number of companies are reflecting on how to restructure their schemes to comply with BEPS.”
Businesses have been broadly supportive of the initiative so long as it creates greater certainty and reduces the risk of an escalation of disputes. But some fear that the proposals will lead to ambiguities and open the door to double taxation.
The political momentum behind the G20-led crackdown remains strong but there are still concerns that countries will break ranks by acting unilaterally. John Wonfor, head of tax at BDO, an international advisory group said: “I am very concerned we are entering turbulent times. Countries have tendency to cherry pick what they are like and not to take what they don’t like.”
The final and biggest part of the project is set to be completed next year but most of the rules will not come into force until they are translated into domestic law and tax treaties. A proposal to implement the treaty changes with a single multilateral agreement has been judged feasible by governments. The US is heavily involved in the BEPS project but tax experts think it is likely to make changes to its tax rules only in the context of wider corporate tax reform.
Source: The Financial Times

maltaway_balattiboardmember_intellectual-property income generated by intellectual property.