ENGLISH PROFICIENCY, hai una strategia?

ENGLISH PROFICIENCY, hai una strategia?

ENGLISH PROFICIENCY = More INNOVATION + Stronger ECONOMY

Si, lo sappiamo, la foto è un po’ malandrina, ma il sesso è uno degli elementi con cui siamo biologicamente programmati e forse smuove le acque… ma questa cosa della conoscenza dell’ Inglese va presa molto seriamente!

Leggi questo post, guarda il video e contattaci per una soluzione di Education a Malta and much more …

Sei un individuo, un genitore, uno studente, un lavoratore, un professionista, un manager, un CeO di una società ?

MALTAway ha la soluzione di Education adatta a Malta per i corsi di di Inglese, gli studi Universitari, un MBA … in un contesto internazionale con 35 diverse nazionalità, un clima ed una sicurezza invidiabile, alta qualità certificata e prezzi imbattibili

Guarda queste informazioni con il dettaglio dei servizi e dei prezzi e contattaci

//players.brightcove.net/2071817190001/default_default/index.html?videoId=5325501235001

How Non-English-Speaking Countries Stack Up on English Proficiency

In the aviation industry, miscommunication can be fatal. More than 1,000 deaths in plane crashes have been due to communication failures, often between crews that speak English and crews that don’t.

Since 2001, English has been the international language of pilots and air traffic controllers, and airlines across the world have invested in English training programs for pilots, flight attendants, and other customer-facing staff.

In its pivot to English, the aviation industry is not unique: Around the world, companies and industries are recognizing the need for a lingua franca, or common language. We’ve published research that shows countries with higher English proficiency tend to be more innovative and have stronger economies. Corporate leaders, such as Rakuten CEO Hiroshi Mikitani, talk openly about the benefits of “Englishnization.” Tsedal Neeley, an associate professor of organizational behavior at Harvard Business School, has written about the benefits of setting English as the corporate language. She argues that businesses with strong English skills can buy from and sell to a more diverse range of customers and business partners. They also have better internal communication across geographically dispersed workforces. All of these benefits apply to industries as well.

Until now, it has been difficult to find data about the actual English skills — and skills gaps — of industries worldwide. Given the importance of English for companies’ competitiveness, we conducted a global study of workforce English, surveying 510,000 professionals across 16 major industries in 40 countries. These professionals work for more than 2,000 different companies, with sales that range from less than $1 billion to more than $60 billion.

Our findings reveal some unexpected patterns across industries and countries and within companies — and they suggest opportunities for global companies to gain a competitive edge.

Simply put, we’re still far from a fully English-speaking world. Five findings in particular stood out:

On average, women have better English language skills than men in most countries, industries, and job functions. This skills gap might reflect an education gap: Women receive more years of formal education than men, are more likely to attend university, and are more likely to study the humanities.

Executives usually have lower English levels than the managers they oversee.Looking at global averages across industries, even the most junior staff outscored executives. This pattern is most likely a result of generational differences, as English skills tend to be lower among older adults than younger professionals. The result suggests that many executives from non-English-speaking countries may have trouble directing an English-speaking team, reading detailed reports in English, or taking the lead in complex meetings held in English.

There are wide skills gaps between industries. Certain industries where English-language communication seems critical, including the logistics industry and the aviation industry, show low levels of English proficiency. Only two industries surveyed — consulting and professional services and engineering — had consistently strong English skills.

English ability varies among companies of different sizes. On average, firms with sales of $10–$60 billion have higher proficiency scores than firms making less than $10 billion or more than $60 billion. It’s not surprising that smaller companies lag behind larger companies, which tend to be more global, but it is surprising that the largest companies do not perform better than midsize companies. It could be that the largest companies sampled are more mature businesses, where executives have not traditionally needed to use English. Another possibility is that these companies are structured differently, such that they have many employees who work exclusively on a national scale and don’t need to speak English.

 

English proficiency in companies is low in most countries. Professionals speak at least some English in all of the countries surveyed. However, global workforce English levels are generally low, with an average score of 52.56 on our 100-point scale and national scores ranging from 73.83 in the Netherlands to 33.64 in Iraq. Not a single country surveyed has workforce English proficiency that qualifies as “advanced” — level C1 or C2 on the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. Despite a near universal recognition of English as the international language of business, wide gaps in workforce English proficiency persist between countries.

The lack of strong English skills presents an opportunity for forward-thinking business leaders, and yet, as our data shows, many companies are not taking advantage of that competitive edge. Their hesitation to embrace English seems to be reflected even at the very top of the company.

We have several recommendations for business leaders who want to strengthen the English skills of their workforce.

  • Benchmark English proficiency. Employee testing can give you an immediate view of the linguistic strengths and deficiencies of your workforce.
  • Link English proficiency to business objectives. The most-effective English training programs motivate learners by highlighting the advantages of English proficiency for each job function.
  • Dedicate adequate resources to skills improvement. It is important to recognize that English-language training is a strategic investment akin to any other change in management.
  • Recognize the need for personalized sector-specific training. A one-size-fits-all English course may not adequately address the varying skill levels across your workforce.

In today’s globalized economy, these language skills can become a critical advantage. Therefore, as Neeley argues, every company should be thinking about the critical question: What is your language strategy?

https://hbr.org/2016/11/research-companies-and-industries-lack-english-skills?referral=00060

Comp and skills of the 7 most promising finance jobs

Comp and skills of the 7 most promising finance jobs

When it comes to careers, “finance” is a sweeping term.

So before you hit Wall Street, you’ll need to figure out which role is right for you.

LinkedIn broke down the top finance jobs of 2017, based on high median salaries, job openings, year-over-year-growth, and potential for promotion.

MALTAWAY BUSINESS ADVISORY

Improve your Business fitness to meet the challenges of tomorrow

Comparison of Ideas and Actions for the Corporation and its Board , the Entrepreneur and his Company

ef835-6a00d83451df4569e201b8d0edd1ad970c-200wi

Here are LinkedIn’s top seven picks:

1. Financial analyst

Median base salary: $62,000

Job openings: 1,700+

Top skills: Financial analysis, financial reporting, accounting, Microsoft Excel, financial modeling

2. Underwriting manager

Median base salary: $102,000

Job openings: 100+

Top skills: Underwriting, general insurance, commercial insurance, property and casual insurance, liability

3. Quantitative analyst

Median base salary: $105,000

Job openings: 200+

Top skills: Quantitative finance, derivatives, visual basic for applications, quantitative analytics, Matlab

4. Scrum master

Median base salary: $100,000

Job openings: 500+

Top skills: Scrum, Agile methodologies, Agile project management, software development, requirements analysis

5. Data analyst

Median base salary: $63,000

Job openings: 1,000+

Top skills: SQL, SAS, statistics, databases, Microsoft Excel, data mining

6. Product manager

Median base salary: $99,000

Job openings: 500+

Top skills: Product management, product marketing, product development, competitive analysis, product launch

7. Credit analyst

Median base salary: $52,500

Job openings: 400+

Top skills: Financial analysis, credit risk, credit, banking, loans

http://www.businessinsider.com/best-finance-jobs-of-2017-2017-2

Swiss unstable about corporate tax reforms

Swiss unstable about corporate tax reforms

Bern must rethink rules after 60% dismiss proposal to cut overall rates in referendum

Switzerland a more UN-stable and less competitive country … a growing mood against establishment and global corporations special tax regime …no more discretionary and advantageous rules. Www.maltaway.com for a very stable country and a fully OECD and EU compliant jurisdiction

maltaway-fighting-corporate-tax-abuse

Switzerland’s attempts to overhaul its corporate tax regime have suffered a setback after voters decisively rejected reforms to bring the country’s practices in line with international standards. The government had hoped to secure approval for changes that would keep corporate tax rates globally competitive while abolishing special treatment for many multinational companies. In a referendum on Sunday, however, the plan was rejected by 59.1 per cent of voters — a much larger margin of defeat than opinion polls had suggested. Bern and the Swiss cantons must now rethink the proposals in the face of threats that important trading partners could take retaliatory action. The defeat is a blow for the business lobby in Switzerland, which fears damaging uncertainty over future corporate tax bills. The defeat meant Switzerland would no longer fulfil its promises to abolish special privileges by 2019, said Ueli Maurer, finance minister. He feared companies would quit Switzerland, or no longer move to the country as a result of the uncertainty created by Sunday’s vote. Read more Luxembourg expects more companies to leave over tax scrutiny Finance minister expects some international groups to follow lead set by McDonald’s Switzerland faced increasing international tax competition — including possibly from the UK, “so we don’t have much room for manoeuvre,” Mr Maurer warned. Given the scale of the government’s defeat, he expected it would take at least a year to draw up a revised reform package — with legislative approval following afterwards. The result had created “great insecurity”, according to Swissmem, the Swiss industry association. A revised reform package was “urgently needed” to preserve the country’s competitiveness. Ahead of the vote, Switzerland was warned that failure to dismantle practices considered harmful by other countries could result in an international backlash. “Switzerland’s partners expect that it will implement its commitments in a reasonable timeframe,” Pascal Saint-Amans, head of tax at the Paris-based OECD, said. The unexpectedly clear No vote suggested that the global anti-establishment mood had reached Switzerland. The reforms had been backed overwhelmingly by the two chambers of the Swiss parliament as well as the government, with opposition largely from leftwing parties. Since the second world war, multinational companies have helped the small Alpine economy become one of the world’s most successful economies. Under the reform plans, the country’s 26 cantons would have continued to compete to offer companies the most favourable tax rates, but multinationals would have paid the same rates as other businesses. To avoid imposing much larger bills on multinationals, the cantons announced plans to slash corporate tax rates for other companies, while the federal government in Bern said it would help fill shortfalls in tax revenues. The canton of Geneva, for example, planned to cut its general corporate tax rate from about 24 per cent to 13.5 per cent. Opponents led by the Swiss Social Democratic party argued, however, that the new system would have been too generous to business and led to large gaps in cantons’ budgets, which in turn would have hit public services. Further alienating voters was a complex system of internationally acceptable tax reliefs that would have been available under the new system, for instance for research and development or income from patents and on shareholders’ equity. Critics argued they would have simply boosted the income of tax advisers, lawyers and shareholders. Opponents also argue the reforms could be modified relatively easily — a point disputed by supporters, who said that the package took years of careful negotiation between the cantons and federal government. What happens next is unclear. The cantons could still push ahead with corporate tax changes that bring them into line with international standards — but without help from the federal government. Jan Schüpbach, economist at Credit Suisse, said: “Switzerland has promised to abolish the special status [of many multinationals], so we think retaliation is unlikely in the short term, if the government comes up soon with a Plan B.” “What actually happens will depend on whether there is international pressure on companies, and the cantons feel obliged to offer them a tax regime which is internationally acceptable. But the leeway for cantons to lower taxes is now less because they won’t get the extra federal funding.” Supporters of the reforms have argued that by securing Switzerland’s competitiveness, they would boost jobs and investment. Critics, however, have said that multinationals like Switzerland because of other factors — including its high quality transport infrastructure and skilled workforce.

https://www.ft.com/content/92a6ec56-f113-11e6-95ee-f14e55513608

TASSAZIONE A MALTA PER RESIDENTI NON DOM

TASSAZIONE A MALTA PER RESIDENTI NON DOM

Un chiarimento utile da parte dell’ Avv. Rossella Gianazza, abilitato in Italia e a Malta, partner di MALTAway

I principali sistemi di tassazione mondiali sono due : quello della world wide taxation e quello di territorialita’.

Il sistema tributario della “worldwide taxation ” , si basa sulla tassazione su base mondiale secondo cui si assoggettano a tassazione i redditi ovunque prodotti nel mondo da parte di una persona fisica residente e non solo quelli prodotti nel territorio dello Stato.

E’ soggetto a questo regime tributario ad esempio la persona fisica cittadino italiano residente in Italia che deve quindi pagare le tasse all’erario italiano sulla base di tutti i redditi prodotti in Italia o nel mondo.

Diverso e’ il sistema di tassazione su base “territoriale” che si applica ai soggetti non domiciliati che sono tenuti a pagare le tasse nel paese di residenza solo sui redditi ivi prodotti .

E’ soggetto a questo regime tributario ad esempio la persona fisica cittadino italiano che ha trasferito la residenza a Malta che viene considerato non domiciliato.

Bisogna fare chiarezza sul concetto di domicilio di derivazione anglosassone e non confonderlo con il domicilio anagrafico previsto dal Codice Civile Italiano inteso come il luogo in cui la persona ‘’ha stabilito la sede principale dei suoi affari e interessi’’. (art 43 C.C.)

Un cittadino italiano che sceglie di trasferire la propria residenza all’estero per non essere assoggettato a tassazione in Italia dovra’ pertanto rispettare alcuni criteri base sia formali sia sostanziali ed i principali risultano essere:

  • vivere fuori dal territorio italiano piu’ 183 giorni
  • avere dimora abituale all’estero
  • iscriversi all’anagrafe residenti estero AIRE
  • avere il centro degli interessi professionali e personali all’estero

Pertanto un cittadino non maltese, che trasferisce la residenza a Malta, nel rispetto delle norme in materia, acquisisce lo status di residente non domiciliato detto anche NON DOM.

Come RESIDENTE NON DOM a Malta paghera’ le tasse:

  • sul reddito in qualsiasi forma prodotto a Malta e sul capital gain ivi prodotto
  • sui redditi da fonte estera solo se trasferiti a Malta

Come RESIDENTE NON DOM a Malta NON paghera’ le tasse:

  • sul ‘’clean capital’’ rimesso a Malta
  • sul ‘’capital gains’’ prodotto all’estero e parzialmente o totalmente trasferito a Malta.

 

Ecco la fonte normativa sull’INCOME TAX a Malta

CHAPTER 123 / INCOME TAX ACT / To impose a Tax upon Incomes./ Amended by: XVII. 1994.35

http://justiceservices.gov.mt/DownloadDocument.aspx?app=lom&itemid=8658&l=1

Per specifiche categorie di reddito e casi di doppie imposizioni, occorre fare riferimento ai numerosissimi trattati vigenti tra Malta e oltre 70 giurisdizioni

Per ogni necessità in tema di consulenza legale e residenza per Individui e Imprese contattateci qui

Professional services, are Clients Loyal to Your Firm, or the People in It?

Professional services, Are Clients Loyal to Your Firm, or the People in It?

MALTAWAY BOARD GOVERNANCE AND NON EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (NED)

Furthermore having a NED with international experience in the BOARD, reinforce widely the diversity, independence and compliance requirements for a better Corporate Governance, Leadership and Business results

e38e3-digitalcurrency

Employee turnover can be a big challenge for companies. But it creates a unique problem for professional services firms, which have to worry about employees taking clients with them if they leave.

Because of the client-facing and customized nature of service work, such as in law or consulting, clients can become loyal to individual employees rather than firms. This impacts firms of all sizes, and it can be quite costly. For example, when bond manager Bill Gross left Pacific Investment Management Co (Pimco) in 2014 to join rival firm Janus Capital, his clients quickly withdrew over $23.5 billion from Pimco funds. The industry was then thrown into intense competition to win over these clients over, with a number of them choosing to follow Gross. Small business owners and entrepreneurs also focus on increasing their client retention rates should their employees leave. However, due to data limitations, large-scale empirical research on this subject has been lacking.

I decided to look at the issue in the context of the federal lobbying industry. In a forthcoming study in the Strategic Management Journal, I empirically investigated when clients follow federal lobbyists who switch firms. The Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 (LDA) and Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 (HLOGA) mandate that lobbying firms file reports for every client they actively lobbied for on a biannual (LDA) or quarterly (HLOGA) basis. These reports include the lobbyists registered to each client, the dollar amount of lobbying revenue earned from that client, and the specific issues lobbied for on their behalf. This data let me link individual lobbyists to their clients over time and observe when clients followed lobbyists who switched firms. My final sample consisted of over 1,800 lobbyists who switched firms between 1998 and 2014. I analyzed the decisions of approximately 18,000 clients (to stay with their current firm or follow their lobbyist).

There were a few significant findings. First, the duration of a client’s relationship, with both the lobbyist and the lobbying firm, influenced where client loyalty resided. I found evidence that, on average, the probability that a client follows an employee who switches firms increases by nearly 2% for each six-month period that the client works with the lobbyist, but decreases by approximately 1% for each six-month period that the client enlists the services of the lobbying firm. This means that a client who hires a lobbying firm and works with a specific lobbyist from day one will be more likely to follow the lobbyist to another firm than a similar client whose relationship with the firm preceded the relationship with the lobbyist. The relative magnitude of these effects is not small: On average, the probability that a client follows a lobbyist doubles after the lobbyist serves the client for 3.5 years.

The way that a client relationship is structured is also important. Clients served by teams are much less likely to follow an employee who quits than those who work with single individuals. To put that in perspective, on average, the probability that a client follows a lobbyist decreases by approximately 2.5% with each additional team member who works directly with the client. In fact, using teams even helps firms retain clients who have an extensive history of working with one lobbyist. The vast majority of clients in my sample worked with teams.

The characteristics of team members matter as well. When clients work with teams of specialists, they are more likely to stay loyal to the firm than when they work with teams of generalists. By specialists, I mean employees who focus on a single area; in the context of lobbying, specialists are those who lobby primarily on a single issue, be it defense, education, energy, or any other of the 79 defined issue topics. Generalists tend to lobby across the board on a variety of issues. My analysis suggests that although teams are helpful for guarding against client loss, they’re more effective when the team comprises specialists rather than generalists. I reason that more specialization and division of labor within teams makes it harder for any individual lobbyist to replicate the services that the team can provide.

That said, one risk of using teams to manage clients is that team members may collectively leave to join a competitor or start their own firm. About 19% of lobbyists quit with a coworker, a phenomenon we call “co-mobility.” When this happens, the likelihood that a client follows skyrockets — but only if team members had jointly served the client prior to exit. In other words, if two employees quit together but a client has only worked with one of them, the client is not more likely to follow. This highlights the precarious position that managers are in when it comes to maintaining client relationships. Because professional service firms are increasingly serving clients with collaborative teams, firms should try to find ways to reduce the incentive for whole teams to quit.

My study focused on lobbyists, but these effects should generalize to other professional services firms, which share a number of characteristics with lobbying firms. Outside of the professional services industry the results are less clear, but we could imagine similar patterns for customer-facing positions in settings outside of professional services. That said, some important questions remain. For example, do firms benefit from hiring employees who bring clients from their old firms? The answer may seem to be yes, but recruiting these employees could result in a winner’s curse where hiring firms overestimate the value these employee will create and systematically overpay them. Another area worth investigating is how and when firms use nonsolicitation clauses to legally prevent employees from taking clients when they leave. Ultimately, however, clients may move as they please, so my findings provide initial evidence that can help managers identify which clients are most at risk of defecting as well as some advice on how to structure relationships to keep their loyalty.
https://hbr.org/2017/01/research-are-clients-loyal-to-your-firm-or-the-people-in-it