Listen to our latest Investing Matters Podcast episode 'Uncovering opportunities with investment trusts' with The AIC's Richard Stone here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
BT - Obviously you know some quite dated historical background to the Ukraine, but I think you need to brush up a bit on Putin!
Polish PM calls for 'concrete steps' from NATO amid Belarus border crisis!
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/polish-police-say-group-50-migrants-broke-through-belarus-border-2021-11-14/
"Russia could not annex Ukraine! They can maybe only seize some border areas where they can assert authority." By this you must mean the Crimea - are you trying to be credible!
What about 100,000 Russian troops invading Chechnya! What about Russia seizing Georgia! Russia is subversive, manipulative and controlling with its gas supplies. Putin thinks nothing of cutting off supplies to Moldova or even the Ukraine, to further his political ambitions. What do you think Nord-stream 2 with a big on.off tap in the Kremlin is about!
MMM - Great news! I was always taught that companies should identify and mitigate risks wherever possible! Regardless you will know when they become issues that have to be dealt with when they bite you hard on the rear end!
The lesson to learn from this is don't play poker with Ben van Beurden. This guy is a genius! He might even go for the Dutch Government paying his refining costs for a year, from any green fund that is handy to them! Certainly he should hold out for the Dutch Government sponsoring a 12 cylinder gas-guzzler for each member of the Shell Board, if he wants to have some fun with this!
Smithy its down to the tax situation of individuals. You need to contact the IRS and explain your situation to them.
Dutch government seeks to scrap dividend tax in bid to keep Shell in the Netherlands
Mehreen Khan in Brussels
The Dutch government has made an 11th hour attempt to keep Shell in the country by seeking to abolish a controversial dividend tax that the energy giant has complained about.
Officials from the Dutch government told the Financial Times the caretaker government of Mark Rutte is seeking to find a last-minute parliamentary majority to scrap a 15 per cent withholding tax that has been a source of complaint for Anglo-Dutch companies Unilever and Shell for many years.
The political machinations come hours after Shell announced it would end its dual share structure between the UK and the Netherlands, moving its entire tax base to Britain. The Dutch government said the announcement was an “unwelcome surprise” and is now engaged in last-ditch talks to scrap its dividend tax.
Earlier this year, Shell boss Ben van Beurden cited the Netherlands’ failure to abolish a dividend tax as a potential reason for leaving the country.
In 2017, Rutte’s coalition government promised to scrap a 15 per cent withholding tax to make the country a more business friendly environment to encourage both Unilever and Shell to relocate entirely to the Netherlands. But the proposal was shelved after sparking political uproar. Unilever subsequently announced last year it was moving its headquarters to London from Rotterdam.
So I can claim back holding tax on A series Dividend? My understanding was, I couldnt?
Smithy - The Netherlands and the United Kingdom have a double taxation convention and protocol for the avoidance of double taxation. The agreement was signed on September 26 2008 and was entered into force on 25 December 2010.
You need to pursue this with the IRS.
NQM - You are absolutely right, this is really massively positive for Shell. Re-branding, re-positioning in the market, embracing and recognising dramatic change, re-directing the company, shaking off the shackles of the past! Soon Shell will be outside the jurisdiction of the Dutch courts, apart from its continuing presence in Holland. Soon they will have as much influence on Shell policy as Jules Holland!
Perhaps the Dutch courts will realise that they cannot easily dictate policy to global multi-nationals like Shell, or they might just opt for changing the playing field. Behind the scenes lengthy discussions will have taken place with the British Government to check their stance on dictating policy to the big oil companies. The Dutch Government having lost Unilever only a year ago, might start to realise that losing big multi-nationals is becoming a pattern of events for them!
This will send shock-waves through any multi-nationals thinking of re-locating or head-quartering in Holland. It is also a massively positive step for the UK. And it is a Dutchman directing this seismic change. This is the biggest news on Shell yet, although doubtless some will not be able to see it!
If I can avoid paying Holland tax on my A series shares it gets my vote.
I will be voting Yes, I can't think of a reason not too.
A much more simplified structure, at arms reach from the Dutch green lobby (I hope( but with the global reach of Londons main market.
Shell just keep on delivering as far as I am concerned.
Agree casapi, the demand to buy the more expensive share will fall if they are to become equal. I expect convergence quite soon.
For arbitration read arbitrage, I guess, predictive hah!
You pay Dutch holding tax on A series Dividend. I guess that the cloggie government want a bigger slice of the revenue Pie.
The Dutch government said on Monday it was "unpleasantly surprised" by news that Royal Dutch Shell PLC is planning to move its headquarters to London from The Hague.
Oh dear , never mind. I reckon it will simplify the structure and boost my RDSB shares. That's all that matters.
1 - top notch results look at that operating cash flow
2 - minimal damage from COP
3 - corporate streamlining
It has to be said that it's also a huge boost for the UK what with all the brexit scaremongering and so on
Cheap... oddly the A shares have traditionally been more expensive than the B shares because they rank higher in the hierarchy but lately they have drifted down , the gap is likely to close to zero before the simplification takes place . Whatever happens there will be no opportunity for the sort of arbitration you are describing , the markets are not that stupid! If you read up you will find that the other issue is the B shares liability to Dutch withholding tax , so don't think there is a way to make an easy profit!
Schools in Deli are closed due to thick choking smog.
"Perhaps my arguments were not clearly expressed or you are a ‘Bird watching climate change activist’ and not a Shell or BP investor...."
==================================================
ArgentaG, what a peculiar thing to write. So if I am a 'genuine' Shell or BP shareholder I would somehow understand your points on the climate debate. Just because some of the points seemed rather trivial and had nothing sensible to add to the 'climate' debate must mean I now have to sell my Shell shares.
Sorry not in BP....another sign I shouldn't be here I suppose!!
BTW the future for SHell (& BP) is a mixture of reducing fossil fuels and increasing low carbon alternatives....the rate of that transition is the big unknown. I would like to see Shell investing a larger % of the current oil & gas profits in the green side of the business, it would future proof the company IMO. The current COP26 agreement is fairly benign for the oil industry, but in future COP's the pressure for change will only increase until we reach the point where really drastic action may be taken...so better to prepare early (like now). The alternative is just to give up and let global warming go effectively unchecked.....with food shortages, mass migration, rising sea levels, fires & floods all predictions by the scientists. Is travelling by electric or hydrogen vehicle really so terrible?!
Is it going to be 1 for 1 on A or B shares?
A shares are 5p cheaper so if you buy those, presumably you save 5 pence?
Can anyone clarify please?
Thank you
Hi bald-eagle, my COP26 HYPOCRISY post was an attempt to defend BP and Shell against ESG investor negativity and climate change activists targeting. Perhaps my arguments were not clearly expressed or you are a ‘Bird watching climate change activist’ and not a Shell or BP investor, which I am.
Whatever, I am very concerned about the climate change issue but try to see all angles of the problem and the need for rational, fare
and carefully worked out remedies.
All IMHO
Population growth is a long term issue for sure, reducing the population isn't going to solve global warming in the short term....we need to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels. To pretend otherwise is just deflection of people who espouse the doing nothing (or doing very little).
The rest of the accusations were mostly irrelevant trivia....so what if Greta comes from Norway, it doesn't make the truth any less unpalatable?....BTW when she farts she probably emits methane (add that to your list of arguments against climate change).
Ultimately to pretend that climate change isn't going to impact us - because the the messengers aren't perfect eco-angels - is silly and a sign of an investor who is denying reality....and possibly missing an investment opportunity. Akin to sticking your head in a bucket of sand!!
PS Migration is partially caused by climate change and in the future - especially if we exceed 1.5c - will be far far worse than it is now. Some of those people might even want to come to the UK.
Good point, expanding populations is a major factor linked to carbon emissions. I also think the growing problem of mass migration from poorer countries to the richer West is another factor.
There are two unmentioned almost ‘taboo’ factors largely overlooked in the carbon emission and climate change story. Firstly, the ever increasing world population and Secondly the growing over ‘consuming’ and often ‘overweight’ population. This one mainly in developed western world economies at the moment.
Senator Kerry, who is married into the Heinz Food Family, well represents the democratic ‘Woke’ element of the Second Factor, that is the over indulging western world as does Greta T from Sweden. (Ironically the very high individual wealth of the tiny populations of Norway and Sweden are derived from carbon derivatives of oil, gas and timber and will continue to do so I’m sure)
The Hypocrisy is the aforementioned telling India and China to stop using coal and ultimately fossil fuels. India’s Population is expected to exceed that of China by the 2030’s, around 1,500.000.000 (1.5 billion). All these people and many more elsewhere would like the same standard of living as Mr Kerry and Miss Thunberg THAT WILL NEED A HELL OF A LOT MORE ENERGY including coal, oil and gas.
SHELL AND BP are the BEST advocates in promoting a careful transition to cleaner alternative energy sources as soon as prudently possible as well as meeting this undisputed massive increase in energy demand.
Climate change activists and ESG investors,
DON’T Knock SHELL or BP
All IMHO posted on BP chat as well as I am invested in both companies
Russia could not annex Ukraine. They can maybe only seize some border areas where they can assert authority. To try and occupy a Ukraine with a strong self identity and 30 years free from Soviet/Russian control would be a bigger mistake than the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Stalin had Soviet forces quelling armed Ukrainian nationalists from 1945 to 1948. It took the Holodomor (forced starvation) in the 30s and massive military presence in the 40s to break Ukraine.
I agree Eagle but hope that we are wrong in that the Belarus / Russia situation could go wrong.
However, if it does the price of gas & oil would increase dramatically putting more pressure on Mr Biden as the Americans like their cheap 'gas' for cars etc & one half order there i.e. the Republicans don't believe in global warming & won't do anything about it.
There is talk that Russia is going to 'annex' Ukraine....the polite way of saying invade. That would put the cat amongst the pigeons.
Putin is testing the resolve of the EU and America post Afghanistan fiasco....things could go horribly wrong!