<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Chris Devonshire-Ellis: Hummer Deal Failed Due to Non-Recognition of Offshore Holdings</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.china-briefing.com/news/2010/02/25/hummer-deal-failed-due-to-non-recognition-of-offshore-holdings.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.china-briefing.com/news/2010/02/25/hummer-deal-failed-due-to-non-recognition-of-offshore-holdings.html</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 06:20:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Devonshire-Ellis</title>
		<link>http://www.china-briefing.com/news/2010/02/25/hummer-deal-failed-due-to-non-recognition-of-offshore-holdings.html/comment-page-1#comment-28053</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Devonshire-Ellis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Mar 2010 11:02:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.china-briefing.com/news/?p=6600#comment-28053</guid>
		<description>Thanks Ray. Its an increasing trend. Hutchinson&#039;s take over of Essar in India message texting has run into similar problems with Hutch now facing a huge Indian tax bill. M&amp;A lawyers need to get far more international tax savvy. - Chris</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks Ray. Its an increasing trend. Hutchinson&#8217;s take over of Essar in India message texting has run into similar problems with Hutch now facing a huge Indian tax bill. M&amp;A lawyers need to get far more international tax savvy. &#8211; Chris</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ray Hazard</title>
		<link>http://www.china-briefing.com/news/2010/02/25/hummer-deal-failed-due-to-non-recognition-of-offshore-holdings.html/comment-page-1#comment-28018</link>
		<dc:creator>Ray Hazard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 04:52:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.china-briefing.com/news/?p=6600#comment-28018</guid>
		<description>Most interesting observation. Several countries are now looking at tax on transactions involving offshore jurisdictions. I hadn&#039;t realised China had acted on this and taken implied juridiction over taxable income from transactions involving offshore companies and Chinese businesses. If the USD150million was correct as a buying price, it would have meant GM forking out USD37.5million to the SAT. I&#039;d be interested to see if any companies intend to test this claim in court. It may spell the end for offshore jurisdictions in M&amp;A.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Most interesting observation. Several countries are now looking at tax on transactions involving offshore jurisdictions. I hadn&#8217;t realised China had acted on this and taken implied juridiction over taxable income from transactions involving offshore companies and Chinese businesses. If the USD150million was correct as a buying price, it would have meant GM forking out USD37.5million to the SAT. I&#8217;d be interested to see if any companies intend to test this claim in court. It may spell the end for offshore jurisdictions in M&amp;A.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

