# U2 to face tax protest at gig in Glastonbury



## Brendan Burgess (24 Jun 2011)

[broken link removed]


Protesters are plotting disruption at U2’s long-awaited headline gig at Glastonbury tonight.
The Irish band is expected to face a visual protest from campaigners angry at the group’s alleged tax avoidance in Ireland.
Direct  action group Art Uncut is planning to unfurl a giant inflatable before  the BBC cameras as the band take to the Pyramid Stage.


----------



## TarfHead (24 Jun 2011)

The concert is live on Setanta tonight


----------



## Purple (24 Jun 2011)

This was on the radio  few weeks ago. 
U2 is a large corporation who pay some tax in Holland. As far as I know the band members still pay their income tax here.


----------



## Sunny (24 Jun 2011)

Why aren't they protesting outside to Dail to get the laws changed rather than targeting U2? Are they going to protest outside Google, Intel or another large multinational employer?

They should take some drugs and enjoy the show like everyone else.


----------



## Shawady (24 Jun 2011)

I thought the issue was that U2 were quick to lecture the government on how much of taxpayers (our) money should be spent on forgien aid. But when the government changed the artist exemption and it meant they would have to contribute more to the excheqer, they moved their business operation to Holland.
Do as I say, not as I do?


----------



## Sunny (24 Jun 2011)

Shawady said:


> I thought the issue was that U2 were quick to lecture the government on how much of taxpayers (our) money should be spent on forgien aid. But when the government changed the artist exemption and it meant they would have to contribute more to the excheqer, they moved their business operation to Holland.
> Do as I say, not as I do?


 
To be fair, Bono lectures. Always strikes me that the rest of U2 couldn't give a damn!
Everyone is guilty of double standards when it comes to tax. People took advantage of shopping in the North when VAT was much lower but still gave out about the state of our health system.


----------



## Protocol (24 Jun 2011)

I think it's just the music publishing part of their operations that moved to NL.


----------



## TarfHead (24 Jun 2011)

Shawady said:


> I thought the issue was that U2 were quick to lecture the government on how much of taxpayers (our) money should be spent on forgien aid. But when the government changed the artist exemption and it meant they would have to contribute more to the excheqer, they moved their business operation to Holland.
> Do as I say, not as I do?


 
The two positions are, IMHO, compatible. Multinationals are in this country because of the favourable treatment for corporate taxation. U2 moved some of their business to the Netherlands to reduce their tax bill. Bono is 20% of U2. His campaign is not that of the band.

They all live and pay income tax in Ireland. As citizens and taxpayers, each of us are entitled to articulate an opinion on how that money should be spent. Bono's profile means his opinions are heard more readily that yours or mine.

Bono's campaign is to Government in general, and not limited to Ireland.


----------



## truthseeker (24 Jun 2011)

Sunny said:


> They should take some drugs and enjoy the show like everyone else.


 
lol.

Will there be tax to be paid on the drugs?


----------



## Deiseblue (24 Jun 2011)

TarfHead said:


> The concert is live on Setanta tonight



Thanks for the warning !


----------



## Brendan Burgess (24 Jun 2011)

Sunny said:


> To be fair, Bono lectures. Always strikes me that the rest of U2 couldn't give a damn!
> Everyone is guilty of double standards when it comes to tax. People took advantage of shopping in the North when VAT was much lower but still gave out about the state of our health system.




I don't think it's appropriate for someone who, presumably benefits hugely from the artist's tax exemption and from the relocation of his company to the Netherlands to mouth on about how we should give more to the third world. If he wants to, he can give some of the tax he has avoided to the third world.

I agree that there is a strong hypocrisy in Ireland in complaining about people using tax havens to avoid Irish tax when we are one of the biggest tax havens ourselves. 

Brendan


----------



## Sunny (24 Jun 2011)

Brendan Burgess said:


> I don't think it's appropriate for someone who, presumably benefits hugely from the artist's tax exemption and from the relocation of his company to the Netherlands to mouth on about how we should give more to the third world. If he wants to, he can give some of the tax he has avoided to the third world.


 
Not sure. They still pay their tax obligations whether it is here or in some other Country and he is lecturing every Country not just Ireland. They are a global company just like any other multi-national. It's like saying that because I avail of tax relief for my pension contributions, I am not entitled to ask for more money to be spent on education.

He bores me when he goes on about it but I don't think he is a hypocrite. Reminds me of that joke of when they were doing a concert in Croke Park and he starting clicking his fingers saying every click meant a child had died in Africa and a guy shouts, 'well stop ******* doing it then'.


----------



## One (24 Jun 2011)

Sunny said:


> Not sure. They still pay their tax obligations whether it is here or in some other Country and he is lecturing every Country not just Ireland. They are a global company just like any other multi-national. It's like saying that because I avail of tax relief for my pension contributions, I am not entitled to ask for more money to be spent on education.


 
Very well said. I fully agree. I admire people like Bono and Bob Geldof immensely for what they do for the third world.


----------



## Betsy Og (24 Jun 2011)

2 points - first is that, to best of my recollection the artists exemption is now subject  to the high earner restriction, so effectively they pay 30% tax

I also heard a rumour they transferred the publishing back to Ireland.

Even if these celebs are doing it out of ego I can guarantee Bono has done more for the third world than most of us. Even if you argue there's some hypocrisy, some good is some good, everyone seems obsessed with purity and saintliness  - would people be happier if he said nothing and counted his millions or more important would the plight of Africans be better if he said never started his boring self-righteous campaigns - lets suffer the man for the greater good if thats how you feel about it.


----------



## Purple (25 Jun 2011)

Well said Betsy Og. 
The artists exemption is limited to the first €250k. That may sound like alot but many artists will have no income for a few years and then get paid for three years of work in a few weeks.

BTW, I ended up watching about an hour of the gig last night. It was excellent.


----------



## callybags (25 Jun 2011)

Who are the protesters?  Irish?
Spending all their hard earned cash or social welfare (I know of two that went over who are not working)

Very patriotic.


----------



## Complainer (25 Jun 2011)

callybags said:


> Who are the protesters?  Irish?


Nice try but no, they're not Irish;


----------



## zxcvbnm (25 Jun 2011)

Complainer said:


> Nice try but no, they're not Irish;



Well if they're not Irish then why do they care?


----------



## Complainer (25 Jun 2011)

zxcvbnm said:


> Well if they're not Irish then why do they care?



Because Bono's hypocrisy crosses borders. As does his income stream.


----------



## zxcvbnm (25 Jun 2011)

Complainer said:


> Because Bono's hypocrisy crosses borders. As does his income stream.



Bono is not in anyway hypocritical on this issue. That's some soundbite that people throw out but under scrutiny it doesn't stack up at all.


----------



## Purple (25 Jun 2011)

Complainer said:


> Because Bono's hypocrisy crosses borders. As does his income stream.



Is it your opinion that being rich disqualifies people from the right to social comment?
Be careful because the gap between Bono and you (and I) is less in real terms than the gap between us and the people Bono is seeking to help.

In short, one doesn’t have to be a middleclass suburbanite socialist to be an activist; in fact you don’t even have to be a socialist to have a social conscience.


----------



## Complainer (25 Jun 2011)

zxcvbnm said:


> Bono is not in anyway hypocritical on this issue. That's some soundbite that people throw out but under scrutiny it doesn't stack up at all.



We don't all get (or want or need) the ego-massaging that goes with choosing where our good works get done. We pay tax, and it gets spend on public services and (in small part) overseas aid. Bono avoids paying tax, drops a few crumbs from his fulsome table and lords it up in front of the cameras with Clinton, Blair and other egotists pretending to be the saviour of the world. Any man who appears in ads for American Express and Louis Vitton while pretending to care about those who are starving is a hypocrite.


----------



## Purple (25 Jun 2011)

Complainer said:


> We don't all get (or want or need) the ego-massaging that goes with choosing where our good works get done. We pay tax, and it gets spend on public services and (in small part) overseas aid. Bono avoids paying tax, drops a few crumbs from his fulsome table


He pays far more tax than you or me. One of the businesses he is a major shareholder in moved its domicile to Holland to minimise its corporation tax bill. You seem to have a problem with wealthy people.



Complainer said:


> and lords it up in front of the cameras with Clinton, Blair and other egotists pretending to be the saviour of the world. Any man who appears in ads for American Express and Louis Vitton while pretending to care about those who are starving is a hypocrite.


 Where's the link between American Express and Louis Vitton and Starvation?
What world leaders do you think do more for the third world than Clinton or Blair? Obviously you must be a fan of George W Bush considering all he did for AIDS in Africa.


----------



## Sunny (25 Jun 2011)

Complainer said:


> We don't all get (or want or need) the ego-massaging that goes with choosing where our good works get done. We pay tax, and it gets spend on public services and (in small part) overseas aid. Bono avoids paying tax, drops a few crumbs from his fulsome table and lords it up in front of the cameras with Clinton, Blair and other egotists pretending to be the saviour of the world. Any man who appears in ads for American Express and Louis Vitton while pretending to care about those who are starving is a hypocrite.



Dont know how you manage to type with that chip on your shoulder. I would love to know how you can say that because Bono appears in a few ads, he is 'pretending' to care about those who are starving. I dont particulary like Bono but I never doubted his dedication to this cause. Would it make you feel better if he took a vow of poverty and went off to work with the missionaries?


----------



## Complainer (25 Jun 2011)

Sunny said:


> Would it make you feel better if he took a vow of poverty and went off to work with the missionaries?


It would make me feel better if he either;

1) Paid his fair share of taxes and let Governments get on with providing public services, or 
2) Stopped preaching to Governments about how to spend their dwindling funds.

Take your pick, little man (if you're reading this, which I seriously doubt).


----------



## Purple (25 Jun 2011)

Complainer said:


> It would make me feel better if he either;
> 
> 1) Paid his fair share of taxes and let Governments get on with providing public services, or
> 2) Stopped preaching to Governments about how to spend their dwindling funds.
> ...



He does pay is fair share of taxes, as decided by the government of this country. I fully accept that you may well know better but unfortunately 'till we all wise up and put you in charge then that's the way it's going to stay.

So here’s your choice;
1)	Accept that the man is tax compliant and so pays his fair share of taxes as required under the law of this land or
2)	Admit that you just have a chip on your shoulder and are looking for more than just a personal dislike to justify your feelings.

Take your pick, if your reading this, (which I seriousy doubt since I'm on your ignore list  )


----------



## Bronte (27 Jun 2011)

Complainer said:


> We don't all get (or want or need) the ego-massaging that goes with choosing where our good works get done. We pay tax, and it gets spend on public services and (in small part) overseas aid. Bono avoids paying tax, drops a few crumbs from his fulsome table and lords it up in front of the cameras with Clinton, Blair and other egotists pretending to be the saviour of the world. Any man who appears in ads for American Express and Louis Vitton while pretending to care about those who are starving is a hypocrite.


 
Yikedy yikes your vitriol is outstanding.  I can't stand Bono but you take the biscuit.  I mean come on he's just a pop star why so much hatred?


----------



## zxcvbnm (27 Jun 2011)

Complainer said:


> We don't all get (or want or need) the ego-massaging that goes with choosing where our good works get done. We pay tax, and it gets spend on public services and (in small part) overseas aid. Bono avoids paying tax, drops a few crumbs from his fulsome table and lords it up in front of the cameras with Clinton, Blair and other egotists pretending to be the saviour of the world. Any man who appears in ads for American Express and Louis Vitton while pretending to care about those who are starving is a hypocrite.


 
Wow !!That is pretty spiteful alright. Haven't seen anything like that in a while.

Pretends to care about those that are starving?? Nasty.


----------



## TarfHead (27 Jun 2011)

Complainer said:


> .. drops a few crumbs from his _fulsome_ table ..


 
Eh, _fulsome_ does not mean what you assume it to mean  !


----------



## TarfHead (27 Jun 2011)

Purple said:


> BTW, I ended up watching about an hour of the gig last night. It was excellent.


 
+1

I managed just 40 minutes before the Mrs threw a strop, but have the whole coverage recorded. As an Irish Times [broken link removed] said today, there's a lot to be said for U2 focussing on their back catalogue.


----------



## RMCF (27 Jun 2011)

TarfHead said:


> +1
> 
> I managed just 40 minutes before the Mrs threw a strop, but have the whole coverage recorded. As an Irish Times [broken link removed] said today, *there's a lot to be said for U2 focussing on their back catalogue*.



Lets be honest, their last few CDs have proved that they are on the decline artistically. Their old work is their best work, so play what people like I say.


----------



## Complainer (27 Jun 2011)

RMCF said:


> Their old work is their best work


Absolutely. It all went down hill after the Joshua Tree.



TarfHead said:


> Eh, _fulsome_ does not mean what you assume it to mean  !


"Of large size or quantity; generous or abundant" ???



Bronte said:


> Yikedy yikes your vitriol is outstanding.


Thanks, you are too kind.


----------



## TarfHead (27 Jun 2011)

Complainer said:


> "Of large size or quantity; generous or abundant" ???


 
Depends on which resource you trust . The original meaning is "_excessively complimentary or flattering’_'. However, this term has become so extensively misused by people thinking they're using a derivation of the word '_full_' that many dictionaries have given up and allow the misuse to become acceptable.

So, in your opinion, Bono has an _excessively complimentary or flattering_ table ?


----------



## Complainer (27 Jun 2011)

Most of the Merriam Webster definitions apply to Bono or his table, e.g. 

_a_ *:* *characterized by abundance **:* copious <describes in _fulsome_ detail  — G. N. Shuster> <_fulsome_ bird life. The feeder overcrowded  — Maxine Kumin>    _b_ *:* generous in amount, extent, or spirit <the passengers were _fulsome_ in praise of the plane's crew  — Don Oliver> <a _fulsome_ victory for the far left  — Bruce Rothwell> <the greetings have been _fulsome_, the farewells tender  — Simon Gray>    _c_ *:* being full and well developed <she was in generally _fulsome_, limpid voice  — Thor Eckert, Jr.> 
2
*:* *aesthetically, morally, or generally offensive *<_fulsome_ lies and nauseous flattery  — William Congreve> <the devil take thee for a…_fulsome_ rogue  — George Villiers> 

3
*:* *exceeding the bounds of good taste **:* overdone <the _fulsome_ chromium glitter of the escalators dominating the central hall  — Lewis Mumford> 

4
*:* excessively complimentary or flattering *:* effusive <an admiration whose extent I did not express, lest I be thought _fulsome_  — A. J. Liebling>


----------



## zxcvbnm (27 Jun 2011)

Just getting back to the original issue of this thread.
The fact of the matter is that u2 are fully tax compliant.

With those people protesting they are effectively saying to u2 "We know you have paid your taxes and are fully tax compliant but is there any chance you will give us some more of your cash anyway because we are kind of skint"!

It's a bit cheeky to ask someone that don't you think? Basically begging.
And to protest in the manner they did (i.e. effectively go begging so publicly)  was just pathetic.

And given that they are not even irish makes them absolute idiots !
They are basically begging on behalf of irish people. Irish people that never asked them to in the first place. !! 

To sum up - i would deem them pathetic idiots.

And for the record - it most definitely did not go down hill after joshua tree.
Achtung baby was their best album. And zooropa after that was also brilliant.

'All that you can't leave behind' was also a great album - although not as good as their best going by their high standards.But still a quality album nonetheless.


----------



## Sunny (27 Jun 2011)

zxcvbnm said:


> Just getting back to the original issue of this thread.
> The fact of the matter is that u2 are fully tax compliant.
> 
> With those people protesting they are effectively saying to u2 "We know you have paid your taxes and are fully tax compliant but is there any chance you will give us some more of your cash anyway because we are kind of skint"!
> ...


 
Good post Bono!


----------



## Latrade (27 Jun 2011)

I'm not even a fan of U2, but I can't hold the tax issue against them too much. I am a fan of the Beatles and Rolling Stones and they did the exact same thing and the surviving band members continue to do the exact same thing, and I don't blame them either.

There's much more to it than a few record sales and or live fees. You have stuff like 3 nights at Croke Park sold out. There's lots of tax made there. Then there's those who stayed in hotels. Bit more tax there. They went to pubs, bars, restaurants, shopping. Bit more tax there. They needed fuel for the car, bit more there too. 

Music on that scale generates sales, generates tax. 

But you've other issues to consider: who does their album art? Who does the mastering? Where is it recorded? If that's in Ireland, then there's a bit more tax for you. 

Huge sales at HMV or other record shop? Sales tax, plus wages of employees paid, plus rents, plus corporation tax, plus local authority fees. 

And yes, I hate the preaching Bono does as much as every one else, but before I get the blood angered I'd just like to know:

If U2 where based here how much tax would they have had to pay to the exchequer?

If U2 didn't exist, how much money would the country have lost?

How do those two numbers compare?

How many more records can one band make with the guitarist playing one chord for every song?


----------



## Shawady (27 Jun 2011)

Latrade said:


> And yes, I hate the preaching Bono does as much as every one else,


 
I think thats the nub of the problem. Bono likes to preach.
It's my recollection that Bono used one of U2's concerts in Ireland to complain that the Irish government was not meeting it's agreed obligation to donate a certain % of income to third world causes. Then when the government introduced a policy that would (in theory) increase their tax take, U2 moved their business to Holland, therefore depriving the government of it's tax. I think he tried to justify it at the time by saying something along the lines of "People expect their rock stars to live a lavish lifestyle". 
In the grand scheme of things it won't make a difference but if you're going to use your position as a celebrity to make a protest then you leave yourself open public scrutiny.

The irony is of course, that if Bono wasn't interested in causes such as third world debt, he wouldn't be leaving himself open to accusations of hyprocisy.


----------



## Complainer (27 Jun 2011)

zxcvbnm said:


> With those people protesting they are effectively saying to u2 "We know you have paid your taxes and are fully tax compliant but is there any chance you will give us some more of your cash anyway because we are kind of skint"!


Nope, you're missing the point.

What they are saying is 'Would you ever stop lecturing us all about HOW the Govt spends its taxes when you're doing everything you can to reduce the amount of money available to the Govt to spend."


----------



## Latrade (27 Jun 2011)

Complainer said:


> Nope, you're missing the point.
> 
> What they are saying is 'Would you ever stop lecturing us all about HOW the Govt spends its taxes when you're doing everything you can to reduce the amount of money available to the Govt to spend."


 
I take advantage of every tax break/entitlement I can. I only pay the taxes I absolutely have to. The only difference is scale. The only difference is that Bono and U2 have contributed more to the tax take than I ever will and probably all in one go with one gig/album release.


----------



## Complainer (27 Jun 2011)

Latrade said:


> I take advantage of every tax break/entitlement I can. I only pay the taxes I absolutely have to. The only difference is scale. The only difference is that Bono and U2 have contributed more to the tax take than I ever will and probably all in one go with one gig/album release.


If you look at it on a % basis, you'll find that you and I have contributed much more than Bono and his mates. And lectured much less.


----------



## Latrade (27 Jun 2011)

Complainer said:


> If you look at it on a % basis, you'll find that you and I have contributed much more than Bono and his mates. And lectured much less.


 
Why a % basis though? Why shift how we measure this just to add to a moot argument? What's wrong in saying Bono and U2 will have directly contributed far money actual money in taxes than I ever will? What's wrong with saying that the "art" of U2 has led to more money coming into the economy and government than anything I'm likely to ever do or achieve?


----------



## Complainer (27 Jun 2011)

Latrade said:


> Why a % basis though?


Because tax is calculated as a % of income.


----------



## Sunny (27 Jun 2011)

Complainer said:


> If you look at it on a % basis, you'll find that you and I have contributed much more than Bono and his mates. And lectured much less.


 
How do you know what percentage of tax Bono pays? The move abroad is related to the company and not personal taxes. If Bono was so inclined, I am sure it would make more sense for him to move to Monoco or Switzerland instead of staying in Dublin. If our tax laws were so generous to people like Bono, every pop and movie star would probably be moving over here.


----------



## Purple (27 Jun 2011)

Complainer said:


> Because tax is calculated as a % of income.



You don't understand the difference between the income of a business and the income of the person or persons who own that business. You are getting angry about something that you don't understand. Relax, educate yourself and you'll be less angry.


----------



## Purple (29 Jun 2011)

By the way, Bono has always said that trade is far more important than aid.
See here for details of the opinions of the lobby group "ONE" that he and Bob Geldof helped form.


----------

