How many of these top talent people been given the job, knocked up a strategy to fix it, been instantly rewarded for it and then have that strategy fail. Rinse and repeat.
It is utterly barmy. In the Thames case, it seems the sole strategy is to hire someone who can successfully lobby the government and regulators, and other relevant parties, to ramp up service costs for customers and/or taxpayers. I constantly hear that the failure to successfully implement a strategy is due to competing or conflicting limitations or restrictions imposed by various government bodies, whether independent or not. This makes the situation seem even more ridiculous, especially when considering the high salaries of these executives.
Why as a bonus though, why not just in base pay?
A cash bonus must be classed as PAYE though I would imagine, can't see it being ok to not collect tax or NI on a cash bonus. Shares yeah I can see there's probably different rules there.
How are you supposed to pay a dividend to someone that isn’t a shareholder? And even if management do hold shares, you can’t just pay a dividend to specific shareholders only.
David Owens awarded all contracts to a specific company, then quit to go work for that same company.
The ship is not sinking as much as it was when the curent bloke took over... That's probably the starting point.
You can pay internal shareholders, on the basis of it being necessary interest on the loan investment. You'd need someone better versed in taxes to explain it, but it's perfectly legal in most cases.
Yes, because:
EA - You will invest much more money into protecting the environment, and meet all these new regulations we came up with.
I've worked in tax for over a decade and am still none the wiser on what you're suggesting.
Something to do with cumulative or accrued dividends and preferential shares set to pay on a specific date, whereby the company is legally obliged to pay those shareholders without having to pay out to any others?
sounds like a (premium?) bond.
Is it not related to the class of shares. A shares and B shares relate to internal investors versus external or somesuch? I know the big tech companies operate such as system. Either way it's a capitalism blag.
Yes, but that is by issuing different classes of shares to different shareholders to enable different dividends to be paid. Preference shares are debt-like in that they typically accrue a fixed dividend, rather than being discretionary, but are treated as equity for tax. There’s nothing particularly clever about this as the coupons are non deductible for the payer and generally non taxable for a corporate recipient (not an individual). They are a cash repatriation mechanism rather than a tax ruse, and are commonplace.
They aren't the best people, despite how much they are paid. They are professional BS'ers.
