Gluestick

I perceive the beginnings of a flame war here, people! Please don't waste anymore of your time, SD: most members will already have made reached some conclusions about the last few posts and value SD's very valuable contributions and knowledge.  

Very droll Chris! [:D] But since it is an area of 90 feet X 12 feet, it will cost a fortune anyway! I can buy a pallette, shipped, at circa $1,200  and have quite a bit over: and I am sure someone will buy the surplus.  

From the earlier research I carried out and the knowledge of both French friends and English friends (one who is a retired lawyer who until a few years ago practice as an Advocate in France and keeps himself up to speed on French law, politics and so on) it seems that the idea of all houses bing on main drainage is just that: a nice idea. If one looks at the vast numbers of small communes, spread out all over metropolitan France, the sheer distances involve and not last the cost.................. Apparently, the nearest that some communes can achieve, is to organise a central sewerage bio-processing plant. However, the next problem is who is going to pay for it? The communes certainly can't; the departements can't and won't. The residents? Many are retired and live on a small fixed income. The state? Eh, no: they are presently trying to cut the budget and this concept figures very low on the packing order. I believe that this target will, like so many nice ideas, be re-jigged. Apparently there are some new concepts in small individual stand-alone treatment plants. Friends near us have only just had one installed. I will update once I have the details on the next trip over.  

Chris, amongst other will probaby slaughter me for this [blink], but has anyone considered bamboo flooring fo conversion/renovation? OK, in the right property nothing can beat original spec floors, be it oak, cedar, redwood whatever. However, when I do convert the loft, I want to install good real wood flooring. Looked at the bamboo and it comes with a 25 year guarantee and I can import a pallet direct from the USA at a very good price. 15 m.m. thick and this on top of (sorry Chris!) some 15 m.m. chipboard would make a very strong and robust and nice looking floor. The bamboo comes ready lacquered, too. I want to install a suspended floor and also fit insulated plaque de plâtre on the top of the downstairs beams, to promote sound insulation, provide a cavity for wiring , provide a nice decorative finish for downstairs (rather than the rather nasty micro-thin pine T&G, and heat insulation too, as the upstairs will not be used very much. Can't stand the type of conversion where the floor is laid direct on the downstairs beams and when anyone walks about upstairs you hear every footfall, and creak and groan from the floorboards! Anyone ever used it? Any feedback?  

A neat example of why using a professional adviser can pay dividends and the awesome power of the Revenue was in the media yesterday. The guy who originally owned Matalan apparently sold shares he had been given, when the shares peaked. He banked some £7 million. He completed his own Self Assessment tax return and paid some £2.4 million CGT. So far so good. Then later, he discovered that he could have deducted the share's cost from the gain: thus lowering his CGT bill. He therefore appealed and his appeal was thrown out: so he went to the High Court: the judge rejected his claim and said that whilst he had "every sympathy", he was bound by the law; he also refused leave to appeal. The overpayment, with interest lost, is about £1 million. He can lodge an appeal with the IRC Special Commisioners, but they can cite the Five Year rule and reject his claim! BTW, the Five Year Rule only works one way: in IRC's favour! They can go back as long as they like in cases of evasion! And they determine whether mistake is evasion! Object lesson here?  

Of course, if a person or corporation sets up its affairs carefully, it can avoid most taxes. A few years ago in the states, Exon, the largest corporation in the World received a tax rebate! Bank of America paid a miserly few dollars. The USA has vastly reformed its tax legislation since then. One remember a woman called Leona Hemsley, who inherited her husbands large hotel chain in the USA. In the hearing of her maid, in her palatial mansion she was heard to boast to a sycophant, "taxes are for the little people!" She finished up in jail: the maid, who Hemsley treated abysmally (as she did all her staff) "snitched" to the IRS. It's invariably the way.  

Here's a clever little schema: an Excel file which calculates the power requirements for a standby generator. Simply input the power requirement of your specific equipment and it will produce a total. Handy! http://www.yorpower.com/domestic-generators.htm (Edit: original URL failed to work: calculator is right at the bottom of the page reached by the above URL.)      

No, actually (and perversely, probably!) Steve, I did mean "Up". All I meant to say was for example, the freezer must be "Up" for a minimum to ensure the temp doesn't drop beneath the safe level. It's been a tough January and my brain hurts now! [8-)]  

The central heating uses at least three pumps: one for the fuel pump; another for the brûleur; and a third for the circulating pump. The freezer uses another motor. So you must allow for the surge current. Additionally, you must check the duty cycle (l'autonomie). Small generators will only, safely, run for probably 2.5-3 hours before over-heating. If you "cycle" the use, (i.e. switch it in and switch it out for say two hours at the time with an hour's rest in between), then you can get away with a small unit. By selectively cycling (changing) the consuming device, i.e. heating- freezer-etc, you can ensure each system has a minimum "up" time during the power-outage. As Will says- words of wisdom as always! -  if you can buy a bigger unit than the demand indicates, this is a good choice. With any sort of kit, compressors, boilers, freezers, power tools, whatever, I have always gone for what I perceive as demand: and added 1/3rd! As American engineers say, so graphically," there aint never no substitute for grunt!" (or "horses" if it's cars!)  

Sorry to bang on reference my favourite bleat, however, if one is disposing of an asset worth £450K surely it is worth consulting a professional? Even better, consult the professional prior to arriving at the problem! A notaire will invariably charge the most effective (to the state) tax position they can dream up, since they are, as a state employee, tasked with extracting the most tax they can! The day I hear about any state employees placed in a position of enviable power who assists taxpayers to optimise their tax charges, that day I will revert to believing in Père Noël, Fairies, Flying Pink Pigs and the philanthropy of One Eyed Brown!  

The headlamps should be Lucas (or pattern, Wipac etc) sealed beams and are simple and cheap to replace. New LH dipping lamps are all you need on the Spitfire, I seem to recall? Depends on the year, of course. Don't think the nacelles are different. LHD and RHD.  

Personally, I absolutely hate UPVC glazing! My windows (in France) are hardwood and whilst needing painting (a previous owner covered 'em in green paint!) there is nothing wrong and no rot. I am gradually routing out the glazing rebate and installing double glazed inserts. French windows seem to be far deeper than UK versions and thus there is plenty of space for a generous airgap and still enough meat left in the frame to be secure. The units cost me just £12 per side. (basis two casements per window). When finished they will look traditional and will last for a number of years to come: and won't have cost me anywhere near the cost of new windows, plastic or wood! Finally, I will strip off the urgggh green paint and finish with clear varnish (non-gloss) to match the new shutters. There does seem to be a sort of ethos of junking perfectly servicable kit, which goes against my ecological spirit!  

This thread is becoming awful convoluted! Firstly, this IR&C site does provide some clarity: http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/cnr/faqs_general.htm#2nr Residence:  This is determined by principally, your main centre of economic interest. Next comes a raft of other qualifiers, such as property, dependant relatives, activities and personal volition. It is NOT clear cut, however! It is mainly up to the individual taxpayer to take the necessary essential steps to "prove" their residence and determination and defined lifestyle. Registering with the (e.g.) French fiscal and health authorities can be considered a major "Proof" of residency, as is de-registering from home state official bodies, notification of Revenue, DWP and so on, of move abroad. Merely doing nothing and floating backwards and forwards on the "I'm Jack the lad, no one can catch me!", basis is an open invitation to be taxed twice at top rates by both states! Domicile:  In  order to ireevocably change your natural domicile, the taxpayer must take robust steps; these can include all the above, plus applying for citizenship in the new country; making arrangments to be buried/cremated there and etc. Persauding one's natural revenue authorities of an irrevocable change of domicile is not easy nor is it easy! Dual Taxation Treaties: The core internationally accepted principle of these is that a person or body corporate or indeed a non-incorporated firm can only suffer taxation on the same source of income or gain once. If an income or gain attracts tax twice (two states) then it will finally be taxed at the rate applying in the state of residence. There are caveats to this and that is what tax lawyers and international firms of accountants earn their large fees doing! For the average person, however, if one income suffers tax in two states, then the tax paid in the country of non-residence will be credited against the tax due in the state of residence; if the tax rates are different, and the tax in the state of residence is lower than the tax rate in the state where the income or gain arises is higher, then normally, a tax credit of the difference should be due. Again, there are exceptions! Income and gain sources are normally taxed in the state where the income or gain arises. e.g. pensions, income from land and property. Again, there are exceptions: for example, by appropriate tax planning, whilst immovable real property would be essentially taxed in the state in which rents are arising, by creating on offshore holding company (in a state which enjoys a dual taxation treaty with the income arising country) it is possible to minimise tax arising. Again, there are caveats, since various anti-avoidance measures are continually introduced to harvest tax, including Withholding Taxes etc. Ownership of "Foreign" based shares and remittance of dividends and capital gains, has been tightened up by new rules considerably, in the past few years: as has the wheeze (used by Sir Richard Branson and many others) of setting up an offshore Beneficial (or other) Trust and vesting principle ownership of equity in the trust. Worth mentioning, here, for example, that Philip Green, owner of Top Shop, BHS etc,  has transferred circa £2 billion in dividends, tax free, to his co-owner, Mrs Green, who just happens to be a Monaco citizen! If you really want to avoid tax, then buy a flat in Andorra; apply for citizenship; base your money and investments there: visit France et al for no more than three months at any one time and become a Permanent Traveller! Warning: even a studio appartment  in Andora now costs upwards of £200,000; I wonder why?[:D] Final comment: again: a few pounds spent on professional advice before you make irrevocable decisions, can repay itself many times over. These boards and ideas and propositions contained herein do not constitute proper profesional advice: they merely indicate what might and might not apply. Above is given in good faith as indicative and informative only and cannot be relied upon as legally correct and no professional responsibility can thus be accepted. Always take appropriate professional advice in all matters pertaining to legal and financial and taxation subjects.    

To power a single phase electric motor you must cater for the starting or "Surge" current and the power factor. Can I suggest that you PM Nick Trollope? he's the Guvnor as he is a fully qualified electronics engineer and working in France as a registered electrician. http://www.completefrance.com/cs/user/Profile.aspx?UserID=103841 If you are going to invest in a standby generator, it will pay to buy one large enough to provide power for not only the Fosse pump, but the lights (as already suggested) and the central heating boiler (if you have one) and also perhaps the freezer. Most power cuts happen in Winter! Also look at an automatic changeover switch: not cheap, running at circa £650, but worth the investment. If you have oil heating then buy diesel and run the genny on red diesel, 'cos it's far cheaper than pump fuel! Plenty of new diesel gennys on the web with good endurance times. Last cut in the Nord pas de Calais was 24 hours! Small units only run for 5 or 6 hours. I am also looking at this right now: no power no heat, no lights no nuthin'!  

There is an old saw that states "The only certain things in life are death and taxes!" Over the years, I have many "Smart Arses" who were convinced that they were smarter than those dull civil servants in their boring jobs............................ As I have pointed out for many years, those "Dull" civil servants have both endless resources and awesome powers. They can also throw many people into a target, whereas the clever people have to live, earn a living and try to evade their responsibilities, all at the same time. Now if it was Superman, perhaps. The wheels of justice may well grind awful slow, but grind they do. And eventually..........................................[6]    

Yes, I quite agree, andy. It is possible for a person to be classed as resident in more than one state: however, since physically, one can only be in one place at any one time, it therefore behoves the taxpayer to endeavour to minimise tax attraction by convincing the tax authorities in the different jurisdictions that they are only in fact resident, principally, in one. Then the tax treaties can be used to optimise income and taxation. Tax authorities, as I said, will, if given the chance, intepret their jurisdication and resulting tax to the detriment of the taxpayer! That's what forward tax planning is all about! In my experience many employers are quite cavalier about sorting out their own employment bases and thereby exploit the poor old long-suffering employee even more!  

This is perhaps a useful source. http://www.taxationweb.co.uk/forum/discuss.php?id=4620    

[quote] it is ultimately the law and the authorities who decide where you are fiscally resident, rather than you.[/quote] Absolutely, Will. And, as the Bard may have said "And herein lies the rub!" Normally, revenue authorities will determine an assessment on the worst case to the taxpayer: it is then up to the taxpayer to, as you say, fight their corner and dispersaude them! As always with law, there are significant anomolies and unusual situations. Fixed property, for example, is taxed in the state where it is, since it obviously cannot change its domicile or residency! Additionally, gradually, withholding taxes are being introduced to try and combat tax avoidance, particularly in the EU. Tax treatment of incorporated businesses and remittances, (and remittances from people too!) therefrom are also being tightened.The globalisation of business and capital markets has also created a desire for harmonisation of both tax treatments and accounting rules, since different corporation tax rules create various unlevel playing fields and problems with equities. Professionally, I would invariably advocate taking good professional advice, well before making any core changes and moves, as retrospective tax planning don't work too well! As I keep telling many of my clients! [blink] I used to be quite involved with offshore work and tax havens: not these days, I have enough headaches and the rules seem to change each day! The Accounting Standards Board and Audit Practices Board are enough, without the European Accounting Standards and International Accounting Standards Committees....................[B]

[quote user="allanb"]I have a question about the application of tax treaties.  I am personally affected by three treaties to which France is a party, so I have some knowledge of how they work in principle.  However, they always seem to contemplate a simple situation in which the taxpayer is resident in country X and receives income in (or from) country Y, and the treaty tells you which country has the right to tax the income.[/quote] Not at all: large transnational trading corporations with various physical presences around the World, adjust their fiscal affairs to optimise their tax charges. With a person, however, they can only, quite obviously be Resident, per se in one state at the time. Also Domicile comes into this: a multinational corporation, for example, carefully selects its domicile to optimise its global tax charges. Divisions of the holding parent, however can be physically based - and thus resident - in many different tax jurisdictions. Shell Tankers for example are based in Bermuda: many international banks are too: however they both havetrading arms resident in various other states. Therefore your residence will be determined by either tax authorities, or yourself, if you can mount significant evidence to prove residence, using the normal tests. [quote] What if it isn't clear in which country he is resident?  Is it possible that both X and Y might consider him to be resident?  If so, does the treaty become irrelevant?[/quote] It is, in basic terms, up to the taxpayer to convince any tax authority of their residence, in the case of dissention [quote] This question has been prompted by recent discussion of the 183-day rule, for example.  As others have pointed out, the 183-day rule applied by the UK doesn't necessarily have any effect on the French rules for tax residence. [/quote] The French rules for residence are similar to those pertaining throughout all member states of the EU. "Visitors" are allowed a finite term: thereafter they must take some definitive action, such as leaving for a few weeks, or registering, or applying for an extended stay permit or whatever. This is where EU rules are still "Woolly" it seems. What does seem clear is that PTs (Permanent Travellers), who spend just less than 90 days in each jurisdiction can escape the TAX net. Where this leaves them for other matters such as Health Care is a matter for other debate! It seems that in your unusual case, professional advice may well pay dividends.  

And, of course, if a vast majority of electricity consumers switched to an Off Peak Tariff, then "Off Peak" would change to daytime! Core rule of the free markets. And if a vast majority of homes junked their gas, oil, wood whatever heating, then the markets would react; again.  

Talking of flooring, I am considering using bamboo, when I convert Le Grenier.  Does anyone have any experience of this? Seems incredibly hardwearing, comes pre-finished and apparently a 25 year expected life. Mainly 15 m.m. thick: I can import a quantity direct from the USA (which very strangely is far cheaper than importing from China!!): and I will need "A quantity"!  

I can quite believe it, Hastobe. These days, in a matter of the allegation of serious evasion - particularly where we knew it was not right - we would immediately pass the case over to one of the major "Big Ten" firms we can work with, who defend on a No Win No Fee basis: once they are confident that taxpayer is not telling porkies! Thereafter, they seek to recover costs from the Revenue: and usually succeed. However, with major cases then the client is rather on their own! As all professionals, these days, I have to attend mandatory CPD (Continuing Professional Development) seminars and earn sufficient Brownie Points to have my Practise Certificate renewed each year. A few years back, one of our lecturers was the guy (ex senior Customs VAT officer, like so many on the basis Gamekeeper turned Poacher!) who was involved in defence on the famous McVitie case on whether Jaffa Cakes were in fact a cake or a biscuit! If a biscuit it was deemed to be essential foodstuff: if a cake, it would be a luxury item and attract VAT. Since Customs were seeking VAT back for many years, the case was millions to the Treasury. Customs lost and McVitie won. The fees on both sides, however, were awesome! I still have the lecturer's card since one day it may well come in handy! [6] However the case was typical: Customs served a notice of assessment: i.e.pay up or prove we are wrong!  

Something which is invariably forgotten is the power of Revenue authorities in most states, these days. They can  - and do! - invoke a blanket rule which reuire YOU, not them, to "Prove" whatever. If a revenue authority suspects a person is trying to escape from their net, then they can and do issue a demand: and thereafter, it is up to you to prove them wrong! Expensive and unless one has deep enough pockets to employ very specialised tax lawayers and accountants this can be costly. Remember that the central premise on which tax and revenue bodies work today, os to make those who disagree with their determinations take the initiative and process, by appeal, the matter through the courts. With high profile tax cases in the UK, for example, these invariably end up in the House of Lords. The Revenue don't mind: it's not their money! Normally, however, such cases are "Flagship" items, where the Revenue seeks to upset a mechanism currently in use for tax avoidance and usually fought by major global corporations. The results thereafter become precedent tax law. Another thing most do not know, in a business sense, is that the professional costs of defending oneself againt any investigation, unfair, incorrect assessment, are in themselves not a tax qualified expenditure for a business: these costs must be defrayed from Taxed Income! Which is why more and more businesses now carry insurance against investigation and defence costs. In order to have no problems, one should seek to make certain decisions on residence and domicile (where appropriate) and plan one's tax affairs around this decision. One can usually "Visit" EU member states for up to 90 days, with no tax implications. However, without the body of proof essential to defend one's position to whichever Revenue authority might attack, it becomes hard!  

Good old Nick! Some pragmatics here. All the data I have seen - from the manufacturers of course - seems to tell the same boring tale of something for nothing, with the basic laws of physics being ignored. Next it will be free heating, from an alternator powered by a perpetual motion machine............

This might assist, Jonz. The links are useful, too. Whatever the "Experts" tell you add 30%! [;-)]