|
Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Students and Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
igorG
Joined: 10 Aug 2010
Posts: 1473
Location: asia
|
 Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2012 1:15 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| wangdaning wrote: |
| igorG wrote: |
The new tax is ridiculously introduced and given the circumstances it also is unjust to foreigners in the country. |
No was or will be, is there some info we don't know about. I don't see how it is particularly unjust. It has been noted over and over on this board that foreign workers in most countries pay into the benefits scheme. I understand not being happy about it but to pretend it is unprecedented is a joke unto itself.
In the future please do not misuse quotes. I clearly pointed to forbes as a non credible source. Cyber then made it clear it came from SCMP. I did not say don't trust what is in print. Either way their numbers are off and make them look ridiculous. |
Not to "misuse quotes", here is the whole post. I apologize for taking the "I would not trust what is in print..." out of the poster's context, which i thought may have been the gist then. In any case, "forbes" only echoed the story, didn't it? And, how sure are we what numbers aren't ridiculous?
In fact, there is nothing new as we both have pointed out on this very thread. However, we ought to pay attention to how businesses, institutions and local governments handle the mandated regulation and we shouldn't forget the fact that the requirement is unequal to the local employees as well as it is unclear to how we will benefit or claim the taxes. Agreeably, it has been discussed but can we afford to be ignorant?
One thing to watch out for is the visa regulations, which may put us in precarious situations. How would you collect your benefits, if you had to leave?
But back on the topic, the tax is unequally high for both employers and foreign employees, which is completely against the competitive working environment and perhaps the commitment to WTO. Yes, it all has been mantioned on previously.
| Quote: |
steve:
The criteria is 11% from the employee, which my rudimentary mathematics tells me on a 5K monthly salary the deduction would be 550y |
Yes, foreign employees with monthly salaries of 5-7 K may not suffer as much as the ones that make more. The criteria is 11% plus the existing 10%, which would significantly reduce earnings of the ones that make more. With the high inflation, hostile terms and conditions and increasing pollution added to all the nuisance, it will be a much more difficult trade-off than it has been so far.
Like i have said before, the article and the situation in individual provinces suggest a split in the party and their leadership. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
steve b
Joined: 31 May 2011
Posts: 293
Location: China
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2012 1:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And don't forget there is an upper limit set according to the local average wage.
As for those earning more will suffer more? Absolute rot. They will PAY more but 11% is STILL 11% therefore everyone "suffers" an 11% deduction. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hochhasd
Joined: 03 Jul 2008
Posts: 422
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2012 1:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| igorG wrote: |
| wangdaning wrote: |
| igorG wrote: |
The new tax is ridiculously introduced and given the circumstances it also is unjust to foreigners in the country. |
No was or will be, is there some info we don't know about. I don't see how it is particularly unjust. It has been noted over and over on this board that foreign workers in most countries pay into the benefits scheme. I understand not being happy about it but to pretend it is unprecedented is a joke unto itself.
In the future please do not misuse quotes. I clearly pointed to forbes as a non credible source. Cyber then made it clear it came from SCMP. I did not say don't trust what is in print. Either way their numbers are off and make them look ridiculous. |
Not to "misuse quotes", here is the whole post. I apologize for taking the "I would not trust what is in print..." out of the poster's context, which i thought may have been the gist then. In any case, "forbes" only echoed the story, didn't it? And, how sure are we what numbers aren't ridiculous?
In fact, there is nothing new as we both have pointed out on this very thread. However, we ought to pay attention to how businesses, institutions and local governments handle the mandated regulation and we shouldn't forget the fact that the requirement is unequal to the local employees as well as it is unclear to how we will benefit or claim the taxes. Agreeably, it has been discussed but can we afford to be ignorant?
One thing to watch out for is the visa regulations, which may put us in precarious situations. How would you collect your benefits, if you had to leave?
But back on the topic, the tax is unequally high for both employers and foreign employees, which is completely against the competitive working environment and perhaps the commitment to WTO. Yes, it all has been mantioned on previously.
| Quote: |
steve:
The criteria is 11% from the employee, which my rudimentary mathematics tells me on a 5K monthly salary the deduction would be 550y |
Yes, foreign employees with monthly salaries of 5-7 K may not suffer as much as the ones that make more. The criteria is 11% plus the existing 10%, which would significantly reduce earnings of the ones that make more. With the high inflation, hostile terms and conditions and increasing pollution added to all the nuisance, it will be a much more difficult trade-off than it has been so far.
Like i have said before, the article and the situation in individual provinces suggest a split in the party and their leadership. |
Speak for yourself  ! Yes, it is basic math that the more you earn the more you have taken out,but when you barely make enough to get by it does make a big difference.
P.S I did catch"may",but it will cause me to suffer! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hochhasd
Joined: 03 Jul 2008
Posts: 422
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2012 1:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| steve b wrote: |
And don't forget there is an upper limit set according to the local average wage.
As for those earning more will suffer more? Absolute rot. They will PAY more but 11% is STILL 11% therefore everyone "suffers" an 11% deduction. |
I agree, but I guess some people are wealthy  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
therock
Joined: 31 Jul 2005
Posts: 1266
Location: China
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2012 1:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Cyberkada wrote: |
Shanghai has it right. Many, many foreign companies will leave and relocate to VN, PH, TH and even back to the West. . |
There will not be any major shift to South East Asia anytime soon. China's infrastructure is more developed and the political situation is more stable. To suggest that foreign companies will leave in droves is stretching it a bit. Sure, some companies will relocate, but more likely back to the West. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lobster
Joined: 20 Jun 2006
Posts: 2040
Location: Somewhere under the Sea
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2012 1:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Agreed, it's going to hit the people who are barely scraping by a lot harder. It will also make many people less willing to take those 5-6k uni jobs.
RED |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Great Wall of Whiner
Joined: 29 Jan 2003
Posts: 4946
Location: Blabbing
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2012 3:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wangdaning wrote: |
| I clearly pointed to forbes as a non credible source. |
What is a credible source? One that you agree with? The Young Pioneers daily? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cairnsman
Joined: 22 Jun 2009
Posts: 203
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igorG
Joined: 10 Aug 2010
Posts: 1473
Location: asia
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2012 5:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hochhasd wrote: |
| igorG wrote: |
| wangdaning wrote: |
| igorG wrote: |
The new tax is ridiculously introduced and given the circumstances it also is unjust to foreigners in the country. |
No was or will be, is there some info we don't know about. I don't see how it is particularly unjust. It has been noted over and over on this board that foreign workers in most countries pay into the benefits scheme. I understand not being happy about it but to pretend it is unprecedented is a joke unto itself.
In the future please do not misuse quotes. I clearly pointed to forbes as a non credible source. Cyber then made it clear it came from SCMP. I did not say don't trust what is in print. Either way their numbers are off and make them look ridiculous. |
Not to "misuse quotes", here is the whole post. I apologize for taking the "I would not trust what is in print..." out of the poster's context, which i thought may have been the gist then. In any case, "forbes" only echoed the story, didn't it? And, how sure are we what numbers aren't ridiculous?
In fact, there is nothing new as we both have pointed out on this very thread. However, we ought to pay attention to how businesses, institutions and local governments handle the mandated regulation and we shouldn't forget the fact that the requirement is unequal to the local employees as well as it is unclear to how we will benefit or claim the taxes. Agreeably, it has been discussed but can we afford to be ignorant?
One thing to watch out for is the visa regulations, which may put us in precarious situations. How would you collect your benefits, if you had to leave?
But back on the topic, the tax is unequally high for both employers and foreign employees, which is completely against the competitive working environment and perhaps the commitment to WTO. Yes, it all has been mantioned on previously.
| Quote: |
steve:
The criteria is 11% from the employee, which my rudimentary mathematics tells me on a 5K monthly salary the deduction would be 550y |
Yes, foreign employees with monthly salaries of 5-7 K may not suffer as much as the ones that make more. The criteria is 11% plus the existing 10%, which would significantly reduce earnings of the ones that make more. With the high inflation, hostile terms and conditions and increasing pollution added to all the nuisance, it will be a much more difficult trade-off than it has been so far.
Like i have said before, the article and the situation in individual provinces suggest a split in the party and their leadership. |
Speak for yourself ! Yes, it is basic math that the more you earn the more you have taken out,but when you barely make enough to get by it does make a big difference.
P.S I did catch"may",but it will cause me to suffer! |
What's 11% out of 5,000? What's 11% out of 12,000? The 12,000 has got another 10% tax, doesn't it? But i agree that four thounsand something is much more difficult to live with. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cyberkada
Joined: 04 Dec 2011
Posts: 306
Location: Xi'an, China
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2012 12:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| therock wrote: |
| Cyberkada wrote: |
Shanghai has it right. Many, many foreign companies will leave and relocate to VN, PH, TH and even back to the West. . |
There will not be any major shift to South East Asia anytime soon. China's infrastructure is more developed and the political situation is more stable. To suggest that foreign companies will leave in droves is stretching it a bit. Sure, some companies will relocate, but more likely back to the West. |
If it costs 47% (total) more for companies to do business in China you bet they will be leaving in droves. That's what Shanghai is afraid of. Companies have stated that they will leave if this comes to pass. Just as an industrial park can be built in Suzhou, it can be built in Batangas or HCM City. With the added benefit of no forced technology transfer and IP theft. Just as Apple (iPad/ iPhone assembly plant) and Samsung (A6 chip) have built new plants in Austin, Texas as Chinese infrastructure has failed miserably (2 major plant fires in less than 1 year due to lax safety regulations of Chinese subcontractors)
Another part of this new tax law that no one talks about (here anyways) is it gives Chinese workers ONLY in foreign companies the rights to unionize, with the foreign companies paying for this unionization. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wangdaning
Joined: 22 Jan 2008
Posts: 3154
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2012 5:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The Great Wall of Whiner wrote: |
| wangdaning wrote: |
| I clearly pointed to forbes as a non credible source. |
What is a credible source? One that you agree with? The Young Pioneers daily? |
A credible source is one that is consistent and publishes facts. News for profit is not a credible source.
If the evidence is there it is agreeable, if not, well, it's not. Go to Belarus and try to get onto a website. I don't think you can take forbes seriously, like most other news outlets. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cairnsman
Joined: 22 Jun 2009
Posts: 203
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2012 6:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| If it costs 47% (total) more for companies to do business in China you bet they will be leaving in droves. |
In other words, the amount companies pay as salaries to foreign employees represents 100% of their operating costs ergo if that cost increases by 47%, it will cost companies 47% more to do business in China. Other cost components, such as raw materials, local labor force, property rental or purchase, transport, etc must actually be non-cost components here in China!
Of course, if the amount companies pay as salary to foreign employees represents 5% of their operating costs and if that cost component increases by 47%, it will cost companies 2.35% more to do business in China.
Now, if the additional amount required to be paid by companies is actually only 37% of salaries paid to foreign employees as reported, then the overall increase in operating costs would be 1.85%? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cyberkada
Joined: 04 Dec 2011
Posts: 306
Location: Xi'an, China
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2012 6:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Cairnsman wrote: |
| Quote: |
| If it costs 47% (total) more for companies to do business in China you bet they will be leaving in droves. |
In other words, the amount companies pay as salaries to foreign employees represents 100% of their operating costs ergo if that cost increases by 47%, it will cost companies 47% more to do business in China. Other cost components, such as raw materials, local labor force, property rental or purchase, transport, etc must actually be non-cost components here in China!
Of course, if the amount companies pay as salary to foreign employees represents 5% of their operating costs and if that cost component increases by 47%, it will cost companies 2.35% more to do business in China.
Now, if the additional amount required to be paid by companies is actually only 37% of salaries paid to foreign employees as reported, then the overall increase in operating costs would be 1.85%? |
So Mr. Chinese-born English teacher is now an expert in International Business, and has inside information on labor costs of these businesses? I'm super impressed. You keep right on earning them Mao - 5 at a time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wangdaning
Joined: 22 Jan 2008
Posts: 3154
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2012 7:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Cairnsman
Joined: 22 Jun 2009
Posts: 198
Cyberkada
Joined: 04 Dec 2011
Posts: 298
Making 5 mao at a time seems profitable. It is like an extra hundred for those that post so much. Calling a person Chinese is not an insult, but arrogance is noted. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lobster
Joined: 20 Jun 2006
Posts: 2040
Location: Somewhere under the Sea
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2012 8:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Pretty darn good English for someone other posters say is Chinese. Better than any CT I've worked with, and better than some FTs. It's bad form to take this approach with other forum members.
Too bad he's right that the increase in labour costs doesn't represent the entire cost of doing business. Still, for a German company that employs 2-3 foreign staff the impact on the bottom line may well be negligible, but a large school chain with perhaps 20-30 FTs on staff would certainly suffer as labour is probably their greatest outlay.
So, a WSE or EF etc, paying 20 FTs 12k per month would be looking at close to 90k rmb monthly in contributions (37%), Crikey! That's over a million rmb per year! Can't say that won't put a damper on things. In my native Mesopotamia that works out to 13 trillion shatniks, which is more than our entire GDP.
RED |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
