Perhaps it's more streamlined in the UK, but generally in Europe you will have to go to a notary.
The process is often 1) notary (incorporation deed creates the entity), 2) followed by setting up a bank account (get the initial capital in) and 3) do some additional registrations for your new entity, such as corporate and VAT number.
While it can take a while depending on the country, it in all honesty isn't as bad as portrayed. But since he was setting up a holding entity to hold the shares before he could incorporate his actual operating company, he had to go through it twice.
400 million revenue, 20 billion acquisition price. Sounds like free market to me? They paid up to protect their business and everyone walked away happy.
Why wouldn’t they be happy? Nothing bad has happened to them. I know some are grumpy on Twitter but none have articulated a real harm. It’s just as likely this is good for them, like how Microsoft really improved GitHub.
Gas is a precondition for renewables. Without gas there's no reliable energy source, that can be turned on and off at will. That is renewables without gas can not keep the lights on, when the sun's out and there's no wind. (Oil, Coal and Nuclear takes longer to turn on and off, and so will not be able to respond to the sudden changes in electricity production, brought on by renewables.)
It's very likely that Russia has been supporting green parties across Europe for three major actions:
Why can't nuclear not be turned on and off at will? I understand you can't just fire up and down a reactor, but you can control the steam flow to the generator, and let that redirect directly to the cooling tower at will?
Turning on and off quickly is difficult and/or expensive for all of CCGT/OCGT gas, coal and nuclear. Turning up/down is much less so however, and in reality that's often how it works.
The problem for Europe right now is that wind turbines and solar panels don't product natural gas. In Germany for instance, only 25% of gas usage is accounted for by electricity production.
That is not true. Wind output is highly correlated across the continent. Days in which wind output is very low happen regularly. In fact, every couple of years there is an entire week like that.
Relying on this seems to imply strongly overbuilding for the worst case. Meaning all regions should have enough wind power capacity to compensate for the occasional lack of wind everywhere else.
The advantage of nuclear is that it will work almost certainly, albeit possibly at a high cost. We should continue to invest into wind and solar where that makes economic sense. On the off chance that a magic energy storage technology comes along we can then phase out nuclear again. However, betting the future of an entire continent on the coming into existence of such a technology is wildly irresponsible.
Germany built out their electrical grid with twice the Solar capacity it needs to power the country. Problem is it achieves that kind of sun a few days a year. Germany is not California. Sorry. Not smart. It's a disastrous policy that will kill people.
> Germany built out their electrical grid with twice the Solar capacity it needs to power the country.
Not so.
Germany used 568.8 TW⋅h of electricity in 2021[0], or 64.9 GW on average.
Even the nameplate capacity of PV is 58.7 GW, so less than use rather than double it, but the actual capacity factor — which is included in any reasonable definition of the capacity needed to power a country — brings it down to just under 10% of demand.
All renewables together are just under half of demand right now.
Where are you based? If you are able to speak English well, the honest answer is that you can be making the same as EU/US based peers. But perhaps not at the same company.
Usually landing a remote position creates significant opportunities. My girlfriend, a talented senior designer, has increased her compensation nearly 5 fold from her previous work situation and now also works from home.
IIRC Based on the latest numbers 70+% of Turks do hold their savings in foreign currency. So it’s accessible and widely used. It’s probably one of the reasons Turkey is weathering the storm better than expected, though it’s still a pretty bad situation. This corroborates with my personal experience as well.
Which is fine. It's fine to get paid. That's the deal -- you are getting a bag of cash (more than you could ever make as an employee) for an asset. You lose all say over it once you have gotten your bag of cash.
It seems weird you are forced to distribute the dividend in BGN. Pay the withholding tax, yes. But the dividend itself? Most accountants can calculate the corresponding currency equivalent for the dividend being declared on the payout day. Worth looking into.
Also, does Bulgaria support interim dividends? The loan set-up, while not an issue, can perhaps be avoided by use of interim dividends.
Based on my limited knowledge it seems possible. The US allows you to exclude $106k USD in foreign income if you’re not a US resident. You can also add some housing costs to bump it up.
Many countries won’t tax you if you work there and a) all your income and work is outside the country, b) you do t spend enough time there to become a tax resident (I’ve seen 180 days for some).
So if you’re willing (and able) to split your time between 3 countries, not go back to the US and get all of your income from outside those 4 countries, you could effectively pay little to no income tax and it would be legal.
It may be possible; maybe not 2.5%, but total tax rate below 10% is possible =legally= in some places. Yes, it is a punch in the face from the governments to people that pay huge taxes like 50-70% in most of Europe, but this is what governments are very good at doing: discriminating.
Indeed it is possible. I could be getting away with legal, accounting and bank fees only and paying 0% but I prefer this way.
Through the history there are loads of examples: Warren Buffer paying lower tax rate than his secretary (ever got interested how?), Eduardo Saverin denouncing US citizenship in favor of Singapore citizenship and saving hundreds of millions in taxes.
Right now I hire contractor developers in Ukraine and they pay 5% on their income + minor accounting fees.
There are loads of government incentives around the globe, especially for the IT people.
US is the worst of citizenship in terms of taxes. You pay taxes citizenship-based on your worldwide income, while most of other countries tax residents, not citizens.
In a short, move away from a high-taxation country in a low-taxation country and enjoy the benefits. Or become a perpetual traveler and be a tax resident of NO country. There are loads of countries that offer good balance between taxes and life quality.
From certain countries you cannot move out as a tax resident to become a "no country resident". For example if you are a Romanian citizen living in Romania and you move abroad, you cannot remove your Romanian tax residency unless you prove you are a tax resident in another country for at least 6 months. As a slave you can change your master, but you cannot get free.
Plenty of first/second world country have more friendly tax laws. Many don’t tax foreign income, and if you live outside the US for 300 days per year, you get a $100k tax write off up front.
There are many legal ways to live in nice places and pay low tax.
VAT is typically charged to customers and then compensated with the VAT you pay if you as a freelancer have expenses.
For instance in Spain I have to increase my clients invoices by 21%, but if those invoices are for software, you have almost no purchases to offset that, so I need to pay that 21% quarterly.
So to earn 50k€ in net terms, I would need to charge 25k€ extra just on income tax, plus 3.5k€ on direct taxes on freelancing (because Spain), plus 21% VAT.
Is vat not a tax? I think every government cost that is a percentage of income or spending should be calculated as your expense for the government. I think inflation also should be kept in mind as it is a hidden tax. Maybe harder to calculate.
VAT is a tax on consumption. But it is only levied when you take a certain action with your funds -- i.e. consume it. You could also (re)invest and let your capital compound.
So yes, if you spend all your money to the last penny, that would be your tax rate. But many (higher income) people do not.
But all your income is meant to be spent. All people invest so they get to buy more in the future, not for the sake of it. If you don’t pay VAT today, you will in the future.
You forgot to mention you do have a wealth tax. For wealthy people, those tend to be one of the "worst" taxes, because it is payable regardless of whether your investments do well or bad.
You’re right, I missed commenting on the Wealth tax.
However, it’s equally ineffective - there are multitudes of ways to avoid paying it, as the wealthy here continuously do. Further, the percentage itself is quite small:
- 0.58% for 30k-100k
- 1.34% till ~1MM
- 1.68% afterwards.
It is hilarious to me, that 30k is considered “wealth”. This means saving for your children’s studying expenses (rent, food, etc), would require exceeding 30k and paying taxes.
The wealthy are wealthy. It doesn’t seem to affect them at all. Instead, people like you and I have to think about the arbitrary amount of money the gov wants to extricate from our small savings.
The process is often 1) notary (incorporation deed creates the entity), 2) followed by setting up a bank account (get the initial capital in) and 3) do some additional registrations for your new entity, such as corporate and VAT number.
While it can take a while depending on the country, it in all honesty isn't as bad as portrayed. But since he was setting up a holding entity to hold the shares before he could incorporate his actual operating company, he had to go through it twice.