The problem with the BBC and Brexit – Response to Scientists for the EU

maxresdefault
Published on 1 Apr 2018

BBC have failed public on quality education over Brexit. As they launch an investigation into themselves – here’s how they could fix the problem with a more evidence-based approach.

Follow “Scientists for EU” on Facebook, G+ and Twitter (@Scientists4EU), subscribe to our YouTube channel – and see our website (scientistsforeu.uk)

Posted to europeannewsweekly

Posted by Shaun McGee aka arclight2011

2 April 2018

Some food for thought here.. On the 1st January 2019 the EU will enact a new policy concerning tax policy and transparency issues concerning the same. Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/business/company-tax/anti-tax-avoidance-package/anti-tax-avoidance-directive_en

And the BBC has a pension fund;

“…BBC pension fund

One can also look at the top 20 equity holdings held by the BBC pension fund – of course, the BBC being behind the Panorama programme which aired on Sunday night on the Paradise Papers.The scheme has substantial investments in the following:

Google (Alphabet Inc)

Amazon

Facebook – like its other online friends, it has, of course, suffered criticism for lack of UK tax payments.

Apple Inc One can also see the funds that the pension scheme invests in by reviewing the annual report for the pension scheme…..” https://www.enterprisetax.co.uk/5444-2/

Of course tax avoidance is endemic in the UK and that was discussed last week during a Parliamentary committee meeting discussing Russian corruption. However, during the meeting the issues of tax avoidance came up as well as the fact that dodgy Russian money is coming into the UK at the rate of about 1 billion Pounds Sterling a week and that Liam Fox and many other politicians were getting some of this money (not well reported on the BBC ). If you want a laugh at the topics discussed and the xenophobic responses, here is the full meeting (worth a view as the BBC made it into a sound-bite of minuscule proportions) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FkfYKjkYKnk

Then read what the BBC “Journalist” reported LOL .. http://www.bbc.com/news/business-43574268

Lastly, if you watch the Parliamentary committee video, bear in mind that the facts that did come out were quite an eye opener and the corruption is MUCH wider than just Russian issues.. Basically, the anti tax avoidance directive and losing the 1 billion a week (plus other billions a week from various countries) would crash the city, pensions and complicity of politicians, security services etc etc

Keep up the good work but you dont stand a chance. Any right minded people would be calling for a 2nd referendum and thats why the BBC and main stream media prefer the choice of the royal flowers etc .. One last link to rap this up http://citywire.co.uk/wealth-manager/news/bbc-employee-attempted-suicide-after-tax-avoidance-crackdown/a1102942

Be careful though, remember the Fusion Doctrine and RIPA now makes legal what the Home office has been illegally doing to Journalists/researchers who have a moral backbone! (see my channel especially the series in 2013 on the death of the Magna Carta and btw I was supposed to be a part of the #pitchford Inquiry but the terms were narrowed to make the Inquiry worthless) http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/met-anti-terrorism-database-holds-more-2000-records-relating-journalists/

If I was a betting man I would say that the UK Gov will use Pesco funding and EU citizens rights as a bulwark against the EU Tax avoidance law and concede to a Norway style EEA agreement.. but they surely are not doing that? It is what the Atlantic Alliance would go for (ie NATO) as the UK could then continue as the leading country defending Northern region Fascist Latvia etc as agreed last year giving EU PESCO command of the southern region. So actually all this is a distraction for the plebs and copy for the journalists .. Just saying

UPDATE; Another helpful EU agency is apparently ESMA (security and markets authority) they have currently scared the living daylights out of many companies selling high risk financial ‘trading’ services…

ESMA agrees to prohibit binary options and restrict CFDs to protect retail investors

27 March 2018

The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) has agreed on measures on the provision of contracts for differences (CFDs) and binary options to retail investors in the European Union (EU)…..

 

https://www.esma.europa.eu/press-news/esma-news/esma-agrees-prohibit-binary-options-and-restrict-cfds-protect-retail-investors

That doesnt work from Ireland so this Cached version does work for me..

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:nAFAercvO-YJ:https://www.esma.europa.eu/press-news/esma-news/esma-agrees-prohibit-binary-options-and-restrict-cfds-protect-retail-investors+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ie&client=ubuntu

#JTRIG ?

Screenshot from 2018-04-02 12:21:19

And when I reported the error;

Screenshot from 2018-04-02 12:23:07

And I tried again and again LOL No progress!

Here is the text;

The agreed measures include:

1.    Binary Options – a prohibition on the marketing, distribution or sale of binary options to retail investors; and

2.    Contracts for Differences – a restriction on the marketing, distribution or sale of CFDs to retail investors. This restriction consists of: leverage limits on opening positions; a margin close out rule on a per account basis; a negative balance protection on a per account basis; preventing the use of incentives by a CFD provider; and a firm specific risk warning delivered in a standardised way.

In accordance with MiFIR, ESMA can only introduce temporary intervention measures on a three monthly basis. Before the end of the three months, ESMA will consider the need to extend the intervention measures for a further three months.

Significant Investor Protection Concern

ESMA, along with National Competent Authorities (NCAs), concluded that there exists a significant investor protection concern in relation to CFDs and binary options offered to retail investors. This is due to their complexity and lack of transparency; the particular features of CFDs – excessive leverage – and binary options – structural expected negative return and embedded conflict of interest between providers and their clients; the disparity between the expected return and the risk of loss; and issues related to their marketing and distribution.

NCAs’ analyses on CFD trading across different EU jurisdictions shows that 74-89% of retail accounts typically lose money on their investments, with average losses per client ranging from €1,600 to €29,000. NCAs’ analyses for binary options also found consistent losses on retail clients’ accounts.

These measures were agreed by ESMA’s Board of Supervisors on 23 March 2018.

Steven Maijoor, Chair, said:

“The agreed measures ESMA is announcing today will guarantee greater investor protection across the EU by ensuring a common minimum level of protection for retail investors. The new measures on CFDs will for the first time ensure that investors cannot lose more money than they put in, restrict the use of leverage and incentives, and provide a risk warning for investors. For binary options, the prohibition we are announcing is needed to protect investors due to the products’ characteristics.

“The combination of the promise of high returns, easy-to-trade digital platforms, in an environment of historical low interest rates has created an offer that appeals to retail investors. However, the inherent complexity of the products and their excessive leverage – in the case of CFDs – has resulted in significant losses for retail investors.

“A pan-EU approach is required given the cross-border nature of these products,  and ESMA’s intervention is the most appropriate and efficient tool to address this major investor protection issue.”

CFDs – agreed measures  

The product intervention measures ESMA has agreed under Article 40 of the Markets in Financial Instruments Regulation include:

1.    Leverage limits on the opening of a position by a retail client from 30:1 to 2:1, which vary according to the volatility of the underlying:

·         30:1 for major currency pairs;

·         20:1 for non-major currency pairs, gold and major indices;

·         10:1 for commodities other than gold and non-major equity indices;

·         5:1 for individual equities and other reference values;

·         2:1 for cryptocurrencies;

2.    A margin close out rule on a per account basis. This will standardise the percentage of margin (at 50% of minimum required margin) at which providers are required to close out one or more retail client’s open CFDs;

3.    Negative balance protection on a per account basis. This will provide an overall guaranteed limit on retail client losses;

4.    A restriction on the incentives offered to trade CFDs; and

5.    A standardised risk warning, including the percentage of losses on a CFD provider’s retail investor accounts.

Next steps

ESMA intends to adopt these measures in the official languages of the EU in the coming weeks, following which ESMA will publish an official notice on its website.  The measures will then be published in the Official Journal of the EU (OJ) and will start to apply one month, for binary options, and two months, for CFDs, after their publication in the OJ.

Translated versions: BG CS DA DE EL ES ET FI FR HR HU IT LT LV MT NL PL PT RO SK SL SV

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “The problem with the BBC and Brexit – Response to Scientists for the EU

  1. Reblogged this on nuclear-news and commented:

    If I was a betting man I would say that the UK Gov will use Pesco funding and EU citizens rights as a bulwark against the EU Tax avoidance law and concede to a Norway style EEA agreement.. but they surely are not doing that? It is what the Atlantic Alliance would go for (ie NATO) as the UK could then continue as the leading country defending Northern region Fascist Latvia etc as agreed last year giving EU PESCO command of the southern region. So actually all this is a distraction for the plebs and copy for the journalists .. Just saying

    UPDATE; Another helpful EU agency is apparently ESMA (security and markets authority) they have currently scared the living daylights out of many companies selling high risk financial ‘trading’ services…

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s