Author Topic: U2 and Taxes  (Read 1389 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline JFW

  • Party Girl/Boy
  • **
  • Posts: 741
  • Wondering why I still walk the earth
Re: U2 and Taxes
« Reply #15 on: June 14, 2017, 08:26:01 AM »
U2 in Texas?

Offline Luzita

  • Wanderer
  • *
  • Posts: 88
Re: U2 and Taxes
« Reply #16 on: July 09, 2017, 09:07:41 PM »
As I understand it U2 moved just one of their companies from Ireland to Holland to take advantage of a better tax rate. This is nothing like the shady tax avoidance of some companies, it is totally legit and even still within the EU. It is rediculous some have decided to criticize this.

Offline codeguy

  • Elevated
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,787
  • If there is a light, don't let it go out
Re: U2 and Taxes
« Reply #17 on: July 25, 2017, 03:27:00 PM »
Ireland introduced a property tax in 2010 (NAMA), and it required anyone using property in Ireland as anything other than a principle residence to register it as a vacation or business property with the authorities, otherwise they would be treated as a resident for tax purposes. All of U2's Irish residences are registered as principle residencies with this authority, which means that all four members of the band are still Irish residents for tax purposes. Since Principle Management is a Dutch corporation, it's within the EU jurisdiction, and therefore all payments to the four band members are directly taxable in the countries in which they reside. So U2's company may pay a 1.5% tax on their global earnings, but all four band members subsequently pay Irish income tax at a  40% rate, plus 11% social taxes.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The criticism of the band over this is based, not on fact, but on people not wanting Bono preaching about debt relief. The law that taxed U2 on their worldwide earnings and prompted their move to the netherlands was introduced around the same time as Bono was meeting President Bush, doing Live8, Gleneagles, etc.

Offline Smee

  • Numb
  • **
  • Posts: 920
  • Im Eddie and im a Monkey
Re: U2 and Taxes
« Reply #18 on: August 09, 2017, 11:06:15 AM »
I was just about to say (until codedguy beat me to it) that the band members still pay something like 45% tax on their personal income, to Irish Coffers.
As Paul McGuiness said, only 1% of u2's income is generated in Ireland, so u2 acted within the rules and moved u2 (The Business_, to Netherlands, for tax efficiency purposes (as many other stars, like Rolling Stones, Paul McCartney and many others have done). I believe in America, the big stars there do similar thing, within the Camen islands.

Offline Will21st

  • Wanderer
  • *
  • Posts: 62
Re: U2 and Taxes
« Reply #19 on: August 12, 2017, 10:50:07 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Ireland introduced a property tax in 2010 (NAMA), and it required anyone using property in Ireland as anything other than a principle residence to register it as a vacation or business property with the authorities, otherwise they would be treated as a resident for tax purposes. All of U2's Irish residences are registered as principle residencies with this authority, which means that all four members of the band are still Irish residents for tax purposes. Since Principle Management is a Dutch corporation, it's within the EU jurisdiction, and therefore all payments to the four band members are directly taxable in the countries in which they reside. So U2's company may pay a 1.5% tax on their global earnings, but all four band members subsequently pay Irish income tax at a  40% rate, plus 11% social taxes.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The criticism of the band over this is based, not on fact, but on people not wanting Bono preaching about debt relief. The law that taxed U2 on their worldwide earnings and prompted their move to the netherlands was introduced around the same time as Bono was meeting President Bush, doing Live8, Gleneagles, etc.

Never understood this whole malarkey about their taxes... they've paid more taxes in a lot of countries than 99% of the people that live there, not to mention the economic benefits their tours bring to the territories they play, employees wages etc etc....

some people just need to spread their misery rather than improving their own lives best they can.

Offline Bono in love with himself

  • Wanderer
  • *
  • Posts: 90
Re: U2 and Taxes
« Reply #20 on: August 21, 2017, 07:22:02 PM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Visiting Limerick a couple of years ago to see a friend, it was Bono's comments on tax when Ireland was in recession that grated our friend and her family.

Bono belongs to the new, cool, post-political Ireland; but by turning back to the old, hungry, strife-torn nation, now rebaptised as Africa, he could bridge the gap between the two. Even so, he has not been greatly honoured in his own notoriously begrudging country, or elsewhere. Harry Browne recounts the (perhaps apocryphal) tale of the singer standing on stage clapping while declaring: "Every time I clap my hands, a child dies." "Then stop f****** doing it!" yelled a voice from the crowd.

Paul David Hewson's rise to fame also coincides with the postmodern decline of politics into spectacle. What more suitable politician than a rock star in an age of manufactured sentiments and manipulated images? Having strayed in from showbusiness, Bono can present himself as outside the political arena, speaking simply from the heart; but his fame as a musician also means that he has a constituency of millions, which means in turn that the political establishment are eager to have him on the inside. For all his carefully crafted self-irony (how ridiculous for me, an overpaid rock star from working-class Dublin, to be saving the world!), the inside is a place he has never betrayed any great reluctance to occupy. Since an outsider is unlikely to know much about global economics, he is likely to take his cue from the conventional wisdom of the insiders, which is why Bono is both maverick and conservative.

One result of his campaigning has been a kind of starvation chic. In this impressively well-researched polemic, Browne recounts how Ali Hewson, Bono's wife, praised the work of her company's Paris-based clothes designer for being influenced by dusty African landscapes. She admired "the way some of the clothes look like they've been worn before and sort of restitched to incorporate the continent, in a sense". Hewson's Messianic husband, or "the little t**t with the big heart", as Viz magazine once dubbed him, has been trying to incorporate Africa into his image for a good few decades now. Like Geldof, he inherited the social conscience of the 1960s without its political radicalism, which is why he has proved so convenient a front man for the neo-liberals.

If Bono really knew the history of his own people, he would be aware that the Great Irish Famine of the 1840s was not the result of a food shortage. Famines rarely are. There were plenty of crops in the country, but they had to be exported to pay the landlords' rents. There was also enough food in Britain at the time to feed Ireland several times over. What turned a crisis into a catastrophe was the free market doctrine for which the U2 front man is so ardent an apologist. Widespread hunger is the result of predatory social systems, a fact that Bono's depoliticising language of humanitarianism serves to conceal.

Browne's case is simple but devastating. As a multimillionaire investor, world-class tax avoider, pal of Bush and Blair and crony of the bankers and neo-cons, Bono has lent credence to the global forces that wreak much of the havoc he is eager to mop up. His technocratic, west-centred, corporation-friendly campaigns have driven him into one false solution, unsavoury alliance and embarrassing debacle after another. The poor for him, Browne claims, exist largely as objects of the west's charity. They are not seen as capable of the kind of militant mobilisation that might threaten western interests.

Put the NO back into Bono.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Turns out he did eventually find what he was looking for and it was lots of money and a team of sharp accountants.


Offline Inishfree

  • Up With the Sun
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,958
Re: U2 and Taxes
« Reply #21 on: October 05, 2017, 07:44:23 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As I understand it U2 moved just one of their companies from Ireland to Holland to take advantage of a better tax rate. This is nothing like the shady tax avoidance of some companies, it is totally legit and even still within the EU. It is rediculous some have decided to criticize this.


I think that's what I read too.  Just the song writing royalties. 

Bono and Edge own properties in the states and would pay the home owner's tax.   It can differ in percentage of value from state to state.  U2 also pays taxes for every show they perform, again in the states.  Plus, federal earnings.  I don't know what the tax laws are for international. 

Offline Smee

  • Numb
  • **
  • Posts: 920
  • Im Eddie and im a Monkey
Re: U2 and Taxes
« Reply #22 on: October 07, 2017, 10:03:08 AM »
As i understand it, u2 pay taxes in something like 70+ countries. So they contribute to many countries income!

Offline miryclay

  • Up With the Sun
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,018
  • http://www.u2gigs.com/myshows/31519
Re: U2 and Taxes
« Reply #23 on: October 07, 2017, 10:36:42 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As i understand it, u2 pay taxes in something like 70+ countries. So they contribute to many countries income!

Better than sitting on one's ar*e.