or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by asdasd

So it's basically a monitor. I don't think the licence inspectors accept that excuse. If you have a TV and it can get a signal then you should pay.
Hang on. You should pay if that TV ever worked ( and if it doesn't why do you have it?). Or you have accessed the BBC in other formats.
I think they are going to force it from income tax whether you own a TV or not. I don't trust the BBC either. If factually incorrect Apple have to sue.
You really aren't getting the existing or proposed laws.
Not just the EU. The UK is clamouring for corporation tax from apple. Sales tax makes some sense. Taxing corporations where they aren't is illegal lunacy.However it's consumers not companies who pay sales tax.
Sure, but thats going to be the case for many B2C transactions from now on. The whole thing, while necessary, is a big problem for small companies. 
Well the term "the transaction took place" is a grey grey area, however in general sales taxes should take place where the customer is, yes. 
 That's really nothing to do with this. This is Apple subsuming the new VAT changes from 2015, where people are charged where they are not where the digital service is ( thus the luxembourg VAT advantage is gone),  which will reduce the money they make and therefore the 70% passed onto devs.  Apple could have done a few things differently. 1) Keep the prices pre-VAT the same but add on VAT in the sales.2) subsume the VAT prices but reduce their take. In this case they are...
Apple should try and phase out the cheap tier over time. The race to the bottom is not a good thing.
3-5 business days is what I saw when I went online to buy from a local carrier. Which is fine, but you still can't walk in and get them.
New Posts  All Forums: