Bono’s advice to Canada
p2p news / p2pnet: We recently ran a post on U2 warbler Bono’s helpful advice to just-fired Canadian prime minister Paul Martin.
St Bono was upset because Martin had failed to pay attention to his [St Bono's] views on matters relating to Canada’s foreign aid commitments, or lack of them.
p2pnet reader Elizabeth was among those who posted comments to the original story and, we’re glad to say, she followed up with an editorial. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Bono, U2 and a 1969 tax loophole
By Elizabeth
What most Canadians and Americans will find conspicuously missing from news coverage about what rock star Bono is doing to help Africans with AIDS is the fact that Bono pays no income tax on the tens of millions of euros he earns from his music.
Maybe the oversight is because entertainment writers feel that their job is strictly to review concerts and CDs and to interview celebrities rather than to write about politics. And perhaps hard news reporters find U2 too soft a subject for serious analysis.
Whatever the cause, the result is that very little coverage is given to U2’s tax exempt status, and more broadly, the press fails to carefully examine the political substance of U2. Tax payers in both countries, who underwrite the multibillion dollar policies advocated for by U2, deserve better journalism.
“Income earned by artists, writers, composers and sculptors from the sale of their works is exempt from tax in Ireland”
Despite their enormous wealth, Bono and U2 continue to exploit a 1969 tax loophole that was initiated to help struggling artists. In fact according to accounts in the Irish press, members of U2 have threatened to leave Ireland if the exchequer abolishes their tax exempt status. Do reporters not have a responsibility to at least question Bono, whose social policies are funded by tax payers, about the inconsistency?
Another point which has never been addressed in the media is U2’s public stance on human rights and their willingness to profit by doing business with Wal-Mart.
On their current tour a “Declaration of Human Rights” is read to the audience at every show. Canadian workers gallantly battled the mega retailer. In the US, Wal-Mart gives applications for three major federal welfare programs (Food Stamps, Section 8 Housing and Medicaid) to its employees. They have also been caught smuggling illegal immigrants into America to build their stores.
The Waltons, who own Wal-Mart, are five of the ten wealthiest people in America. The stories of factory conditions in places like China where many Wal-Mart products are made are downright harrowing.
Why hasn’t one journalist asked Bono how he squares that “Declaration of Human Rights” with human trafficking and how his Christian ethos justifies benefiting from workers who are forced onto the dole for food, shelter and medical care after putting in an honest day’s work or from those who were put out of work for merely trying to unionize?
Are U2 willing to pull their products from Wal-Mart shelves until such time as the chain complies with basic labor, environmental and human rights standards?
Next, in early November Bono and an Apple exec bought a $300 million gaming company. Can the press not ask why it is that Americans and Canadians have been saddled with the enormously expensive chore of feeding Africans when off-stage Bono gets to spend so much money on games?
U2 go to a recording studio to create their music and are issued copy rights while pharmaceutical companies go into a laboratory to discover medicine and are issued patents. Each is compensated when that work is subsequently used.
Bono has asked pharmaceutical companies to give “free” drugs to Africa, but have U2 permanently dedicated a substantial portion of their royalties to the cause? As intellectual property rights owners, shouldn’t U2 live up to the same standards they wish to impose upon fellow rights owners?
These examples, the Peter Buck air rage trial, the politics of an Amnesty International supporter shaking hands with a US President who has threatened to veto a bill banning torture are just a few of the issues that the public deserves more critical analysis of. In all fairness, Bono’s virtues are many, quite commendable and well publicized. But if participants in democracy are to make truly informed decisions, they need the full story.
Next Wednesday, December 7, Bono and U2 may finally be joining the ranks of the full tax rate paying masses. That’s the day the Irish budget will be made public and a decision on artist exemption is expected then. In the meantime, here’s to equality, social justice and the press doing a better job of covering U2.
Source 1 Tax and Duty Types
Source 2 Wealthy fear for their tax breaks in Irish budget
Source 3 Wal-Mart Arrests Are a Warning, Feds Say
Source 4 Bono’s Menlo Park fund invests $300M in gaming companies
Source 5 REM star cleared of air rage attack
(Thanks, Elizabeth)
November 30th, 2005 at 8:29 pm
bullsh$%t!!
why do people feel threatened by a kind man’s efforts?
He’s doing more than all of us together, so why don’t we just support him, or at least let him do his part..
Yes, he’s very rich, so what? he’s worked very hard for his money, and his humanitary efforts have nothing to do with it…
November 30th, 2005 at 9:34 pm
The problem isn’t with Bono’s idealistic stances and thoughts he tries to do. Those are commendable. That he hobnob’s with the rich, famous, and politically powerful are a good anchor point in which to do good.
The theme here is that Bono found out early that making this sort of stance sells his groups albums and that he is using this position for indirect financial gain. That Bono isn’t willing to put his money where his mouth is, rather he wants to put your money where his mouth is. Because he hasn’t led the way with making a showing personally, this humanitary effort becomes hippocritical in that he expects to gain through sales while having someone; anyone else pay the tab.
You don’t agree that Bono and the group U2 should pay taxes to their homeland? Prehaps thinking about where those taxes go might help nudge the idea that this is wrong if others are expected to pay what they themselves are saying as a group, “I won’t do” indirectly. (or at least that is what I call threatening to move out of country if they fall into the tax paying roles)
November 30th, 2005 at 9:52 pm
While majority world countries, through the Development Agenda in WIPO and elsewhere, are trying to reduce the scope, term and complexity of copyright, patents and other exclusive rights, Bono is part of the lobby to extend them.
http://forum.europa.eu.int/Public/irc/markt/markt_consultations/library?l=/copyright_neighbouring/legislation_copyright/u2_enpdf/_EN_1.0_&a=d
Please note that this is the U2 Bono, and not Sonny Bono that the 1998 US extension to copyright was named after.
While I am a supporter of (and actually work for) the Make Poverty History campaign http://makepovertyhistory.ca , I have always considered Bono’s views on international development and economy policy to be hypocritical at best.
November 30th, 2005 at 10:15 pm
As the world economies move more and more into the economics of intangibles, the policy around these before very important. Just take copyright term as an example (an issue where Bono is quite opposed to the interests of majority world countries). Copyright term being extended protects the economic interests of the incumbents, which are primarily Western (US/European) industries. An increase in the term causes an increase in the trade deficits in intangibles between the incumbent countries and the rest of the world (IE: royalties being paid by poor countries to rich countries) A reduction of the term means that these works enter the public domain quicker, and reduce these trade deficits.
All creativity builds on the past, and the less restrictions on the ability to create is better for the majority of creators. The majority of people, being in those poor countries, would be served better by having easier access to the raw materials to create. The incumbent business interests (including U2 as a company) don’t want this, and want to be protected from the less expensive creativity that happens with that majority of the world.
Copyright is to creativity like water is to humans; too little and you dehydrate and die, too much and you drown and die. We are currently drowning in over-protection, and yet people like Bono — against the interests of the majority world/poor countries — lobby to throw more water at us.
There are many interesting policy suggestions that Bono has made. Most are economic policy, such as fair trade (Which he opposes when it relates to intangibles such as copyright) or debt/deficit reduction (which again, he opposes when it relates to intangibles like copyright).
He is either unaware of the conflict between these views, or he is relying on the fact that most people do not spend time thinking about multinational economics and trade policy relating to intangibles. Regardless of which is true, we need to expose these issues to either somehow reach him to get him to update his views on copyright or to expose him so that he doesn’t have undeserved influence on policy.
BTW: I believe a percentage of ones income should be the measure of how much people do. I’m tired of people like Gates, as an example, getting away with people thinking that the Gates foundation is doing “good works”. The Gates Foundation, when adjusted to his income, is like the rest of us giving $2/year to a charity. As someone who is poor because I’m an activist I guess this gets on my nerves more than it would other people.
December 1st, 2005 at 4:09 am
Yeah, thanks, Elizabeth.. for nothing.
December 1st, 2005 at 3:15 pm
Bono should put up or shut up. Just MO of course.
December 1st, 2005 at 4:48 pm
Just a bit of a correction to this story. The tax exemption law in Ireland covers only income earned through royalties. All other income, such as from touring, investments, businesses (Bono owns several) is fully taxed. U2 do indeed pay a lot of taxes, just not as much as they might if the exemption did not exist.
And no, they never threatened to leave Ireland if the law is changed.
December 1st, 2005 at 5:03 pm
Funny – no one as yet has mentioned that regardless of Bono’s own status, the advice he gave to Canada was damned good. And too few people seem to care that our own Prime Minister, who said that the economy was too uncertain to warrant committing 0.7% of our GDP to foreign aid, just committed to spend BILLIONS of dollars on federal programs, something that could easily be construed as vote-buying. Incidentally – when he began his term, Prime Minister Martin promised he would never engage in such a spending spree, so the people we should be angry with are the Prime Minister (for breaking his word again) and ourselves (for allowing this to occur without raising any kind of protest)
I do not say this as a rich or influential person. I am underemployed, and I have even made use of our welfare system on two occasions while searching for work. But even when I faced the worst time of my life, it still was ten thousand times better than the life faced by starving, sick people in Africa.
So let me see – I looked for our Gross National Income online and found that in 2004, each household in Canada made roughly $28,000. The goal is to commit 0.7% of that $28 000 to aid each year. That comes out to $196 less in each household’s bank account per year – or the equivalent of about 54 cents a day. That is the cost of of HALF of a small cup of Tim Hortons coffee per day for one year. So really – and let’s be totally honest, here – how many of us drink way too much coffee? How many of us could find a way to save $196 per YEAR to give to people who could then be free enough from poverty and disease to become trading partners with Canada?
We talk about how celebrities should “put up or shut up”. The amount of time, effort and personal income that Bono has put into raising awareness and finding solutions to this issue amounts to more than 0.7% of his gross income per year. So the person or people who should put up or shut up would be – big surprise – you and me. And it is up to us to send a crystal clear message to our government that we must achieve this goal of committing 0.7% of Gross National Income to aid.
Andrea in Ottawa
December 1st, 2005 at 6:28 pm
First of all, Martin said GDP (Gross Domestic Product) Gross domestic product (GDP), is the unduplicated value of all goods and services produced in a year within Canada ’s borders measured at market prices. It has NOTHING to do with anybodys income at all.
SO what are you taking about .7% of income. Two totally different values.
I also give to many charities throughout the year and our country does already give to (Amount unknown) foreign aid. Lets look after our own country and make NOBODY live in poverty here first then help out other nations more than we already do.
I feel satisfied with myself with what I donate to charities. Obviously you and Mr. Bono don’t. May I suggest after reading this you take your $ 196. share of whatever fomula you figured out and give it to some foriegn country, pat yourself on the back and say GOOD BOY. That should make you feel better. I like my Tim Horton’s coffee by the way and Im NOT giving it up for YOU or Mr. BONO.
Oh! and by the way im sure you don’t really need your computer and would likely benifit more by not having it because then you would have more time to go and do some volunteer work like myself, and just think of the extra money you would have to send to another counrty.
Charlie from Manitoba
December 2nd, 2005 at 4:36 am
No one stated that they don’t pay income taxes on their non-musical business investments. But as you are so well versed in U2’s finances, please tell the audience precisely how much money those royalties that they do not pay any income tax on amount to each year.
No comment on Wal-Mart, Peter Buck or donating those tax free royalties to the poor from Camp U2? Fat cat got your tongue???
December 2nd, 2005 at 8:27 pm
What is it, Elizabeth, with regards to Bono that makes you so enraged? And, are you attacking the band U2 or Bono as an individual? It’s not clear. Why do people like you spend so much time and energy ridiculing people who have been enormously effective in helping the world’s poorest people? Elizabeth, I find you offensive. The fact that you would attack someone who works hard and relentlessly in helping others not as fortunate as yourself is offensive. Aren’t you over reacting a bit to his comments about your country’s administrative decision not to increase aid to the poorest of the poor in this world? You’re taking it way to personal when someone implies that your country and its administration is less than perfect. Elizabeth, if you, and people like you, had taken all of that precious time that you devoted yourself feverishly to in writing that commentary (and you probably spent an entire day…look at all that research!) and actually spent it on helping someone less fortunate as yourself, what a better place this world could be. What have you done lately, Elizabeth that has actually helped someone in dire need? You need to take a look at “that woman in the mirror”. You are a disgrace.
December 2nd, 2005 at 10:35 pm
Bono and the rest of U2 donate large sums of money and many of the proceeds from their concerts go to causes such as the AIDS emergency. They don’t want a lot of attention placed on them personally just because they made contributions, instead they want the attention placed on the emergency itself (as it should be). The fact that they don’t pay taxes on their earnings in Ireland has to do with the fact that they live there! The law was written by the Irish courts, not by U2.
December 2nd, 2005 at 10:46 pm
Russell…what are you talking about? You are way off.
How did you manage to drag copyright into this subject?
(By the way, I “googled” you and your website made me nervous…somebody here needs to get a life.)
It’s quite evident that you take yourself a little too seriously.
Just like Elizabeth, you seem to be consumed in spending countless days and enormous amounts of time and energy on matters that really don’t help anyone in dire need.
You are missing the big picture here. No one is putting a gun to Bono’s (or Gates, for that matter) head and forcing them to do anything at all.
I am attending a private conference at the Kennedy School of Gov. (Harvard U.) next Tuesday. Topic is World Economics and Aids. Guess who else will be there? Bono.
Now why in the world would he bother to waist his time and energy attending a private conference on this subject if he truly didn’t care?
You know what? I don’t think that you or Elizabeth even gives a damn that there are 8,000 people a day dying from aids. If you did, you’d keep your insulting comments about this man to yourself.
December 3rd, 2005 at 5:51 am
Elizabeth makes good points. What U2 or Bono donates charities is not at issue. It’s tax fairness. Why does the poor in society have to paid taxes and the rich can get away with it? Tax loopholes and tax havens is a cause of social and economic inequality. It is a cause of poverty too. Bono should know about this. It’s the law so they should change it! The proposal to cap the artist’s tax exemption is a good compromise.
_____
Tax Bono ‘to help the poor’
Thursday October 20th 2005
Cap relief for artists at €20,000-a-year, urges anti-poverty champion
HIGH-earning artists such as Bono, Enya, the Corrs and Westlife should be forced to pay tax to help bridge the gap between the rich and poor in our society, it was claimed yesterday.
The Conference of Religious in Ireland (CORI) yesterday said a cap on the artists tax exemption scheme should be put in place which would effectively force big names such as Riverdance impressario Bill Whelan and Samantha Mumba among others out of the scheme.
At present, artists, musicians and writers do not pay income tax on the sale of their creative works in the scheme which is currently under review.
Yesterday, the Joint Oireachtas committee on Finance heard the scheme was benefiting a small number to a large extent.
“In reality, the distribution of this relief is such that a number of individuals are gaining large tax-free incomes while others are benefiting at a much smaller level,” said Fr Sean Healy, the head of CORI’s Justice Commission.
“We believe that a cap on this relief should be set at €20,000 per annum with artists paying tax on all income above this figure.”
Fr Healy, an outspoken advocate for the poor, was invited to address Fianna Fail’s ‘think-in’ at Inchydoney in September 2004 to change the public perception that the party is uncaring and indifferent to issues of social justice. A policy in which “those who have more, pay more, while those who have less, pay less” should be put in place, said Fr Healy.
“Overall the distribution of the tax relief is heavily skewed towards the top 40pc of households, who receive almost 89pc of the value of this scheme,” he told the committee.
Fr Healy referred to figures from the Revenue Commissioners which showed that in 2001, 41 people who earned over €500,000, used tax relief schemes to reduce their income tax liability to zero.
“The CORI Justice Commission believes that there is something profoundly unfair about a tax system in which some millionaires pay no tax while employees who are on the minimum wage must pay tax,” Fr Healy said.
Procedures should be adopted where tax reliefs would be reviewed on the basis of the economic and social benefits they provide, he declared.
Shane Hickey
© http://www.unison.ie/
http://www.unison.ie/entertainment/news/stories.php3?ca=228&si=1490555
December 3rd, 2005 at 3:50 pm
I think the biggest issue here is Tax Fairness. Regardless of Mr. Bono’s (U2,s) supposedly hard work and monies donated to charities around the world. He chooses to do this, the same way I choose to give to charities in my community. He makes millions more than I do so maybe he should give more than me, but again only if he chooses to. The point really is, he doesn’t pay Taxes based on what he earns like the rest of us.
Mr. Bono and the U2 band all have the benefit of using city streets highways and bridges like everybody else. They all make trash which has to be picked up and disposed of. They have the benefit of the police and fire , hospitals and military, and all forms of gov. and so on and so on. All these these are paid for and kept up with guess what TAXES. So, would it not be FAIR for them to pay taxes like everyone else. What they do with the rest of their money AFTER TAXES is up to them.
How about everybody and I mean everybody pays 15% or 20% (yes even the rich) on what they earn regardless on how much it is. NO LOOPHOLES , NO DEDUCTIONS, just paying your fair share.
December 3rd, 2005 at 4:52 pm
I agree with you…I also heard that he’s on tour in the U.S, but during their days and week off they live in Mexico or Canada not in the U.S, becasue everyday they spend in the U.S they have pay taxes. It seems to me U2 and Bono don’t like to pay taxes. And he’s going around asking Canadian and American taxpayers to increase their forgein aid!?
I am also sick and tired of the mainstream media sucking up to Bono. They think he’s the new Mother Teresa. First they want him to be a Nobel Peace Prize winner, then Time Man of the Year, then World Bank Prez. Crazy! What qualifications does he have to become World Bank head? Only because he’s cares. Like so do 99% of the people on this planet too. He only has a high school diploma! Thanks Elizabeth for writing this article and exposing the faults with this guy.
December 9th, 2005 at 4:20 am
Good news..!! Bad news for Bono!! Ha Ha.>> The artist’s tax exemption has be cap! At 250, 000!! That means pay up Bono..!!! Great day for the poor in Ireland!!
From: http://www.budget.gov.ie/2006/FinancialStatement06.asp#_Toc121680048
“A Minimum and Fair Tax
It is necessary not only to eliminate some incentive reliefs but also to regulate the use that can be made of those that remain. We cannot stand over a situation in which some high-earning tax residents, through the use of incentive reliefs, can reduce their taxable income to nil. This is simply not a fair situation, although I should point out that high-earning non-payers are in a very small minority. Accordingly, I propose now to place an annual overall cap on the extent to which specific incentive reliefs can be availed of.
The cap will apply to those with income over €250,000 per year. It will operate by reducing by half the amount of income that can be relieved from tax by certain specified tax reliefs. This measure will help eliminate the phenomenon of tax free millionaires and increase the effective rate of tax on those with high income towards a minimum of 20 per cent. Further details of how this will work are set out in the Summary of Budget Measures. This will require some complex new legislative provisions and I propose accordingly that the new system will apply for all tax years from 1 January 2007.
This annual cap system will also apply to Artist’s relief from the same date. There is no change in the tax treatment of income now exempt under the Artist’s relief scheme, where that income is less than €250,000 per year.”
December 9th, 2005 at 11:20 am
yes, finally we know how evil Bono is! and now that we know, we can rest in peace, go back to our miserable little lives and be satisfied that he has not deceived us too! We are great, we are smart, we are not manipulated. Do we care if anyone asked Bono to be front page in Time magazine? No. Do we care if he went to Africa when he wasnt famous (early 80’s) and spent weeks with his wife doing voluntary work? No! Do we care if he’s spending his free time flying around, pushing people to help the 3rd world? No!
Why? Because we know better… And after all we got a degree? How can someone who has only finished high school do more than us? Unimaginable…
August 17th, 2006 at 5:00 am
Aw, poor baby! Did someone spit on your plaster saint?
Long story short, Bono (&saint Bob and others) have spent years haranguing western governments to cancel third world debt, while trying their best to make sure that they personally don’t have to fill the gap in the national balance sheet…
…all the while enjoying, but not paying for, all the benefits of living in a stable liberal democracy, as pointed out by a previous poster