Datasets:
Recag
/
C4_6

Dataset card Data Studio Files Community
text
stringlengths
11
64.4k
Canada Olympic House will hold a ceremonial opening on February 7 in PyeongChang and is officially going to open to the public on February 10.
CNRP lawmaker Ou Chanrath speaks to party officials in Stung Trang district, in Kampong Cham province, Nov. 12, 2017.
Cambodia’s opposition Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP) on Friday filed an appeal to reverse a ruling by the nation’s highest court to dissolve it, saying the decision was “politically motivated” and amounted to a national tragedy.
Cambodia’s Supreme Court on Nov. 16 unanimously ruled that the CNRP be dissolved for its part in plotting a “coup” against the government, banning 118 party officials from politics for five years and essentially eliminating any competition to Prime Minister Hun Sen ahead of a general election scheduled for July 2018.
Since the decision, the National Assembly has redistributed the CNRP’s 55 seats to other government-aligned political parties, while Hun Sen has pressured the party’s nearly 5,000 elected commune and 800 provincial/municipal level councilors to defect to his ruling Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) or lose their jobs.
CNRP lawmaker Ou Chanrath on Friday filed an appeal against the Supreme Court ruling to dissolve the opposition party, telling RFA’s Khmer Service his intention is to “stop the ruling party from arbitrarily distributing” the CNRP’s commune and provincial/municipal councilor positions to other parties.
He also called for all 118 CNRP officials who were banned from politics to be allowed to resume their positions and return to politics.
“I have filed the appeal, but I haven’t been informed of how things will proceed,” he said.
Ou Chanrath said he believes that the Supreme Court lacks dependence from the ruling party, but felt the need to ask for a reconsideration of the decision because it would “cause a tragedy for the nation” if not reversed.
“We do not recognize the Supreme Court’s ruling to dissolve the opposition party,” he said.
Local political analyst Lao Mong Hay said it is highly unlikely that the CNRP would win its appeal, particularly because the opposition party didn’t bother to take part in the proceedings during the original ruling.
“When the CNRP was summoned to the hearing, they didn’t show up, and the ruling was then rendered,” he said.
“He has the right to file an appeal, but it’s useless to appeal a final decision,” he said.
Also on Friday, Choung Choungy, a lawyer for jailed CNRP lawmaker Um Sam An, expressed frustration over the “very slow process” of the Supreme Court in addressing an appeal of his client’s sentence.
“The legal documents were submitted a long time ago, but the Supreme Court keeps changing the dates of the hearing time and again,” he said.
Um Sam An was handed a two-and-a half year sentence by the Phnom Penh Municipal Court in October 2016 for “inciting discrimination” and “inciting social instability” for posts on the lawmaker’s Facebook page accusing the CPP of failing to stop land encroachment by Vietnam and using improper maps to demarcate the border between the two former colonies of France.
Am Sam Ath, head of investigations for local rights group LICADHO, told RFA that “justice delayed is justice denied” in Um Sam An’s case.
“The longer the delay in the proceedings, the more infringement on the rights of the accused occurs,” he said.
A man once known worldwide as the Cellist of Sarajevo wants compensation from a Vancouver author who he said has used his reputation in a bestselling novel without asking.
The Cellist of Sarajevo is inspired, in part, by the tale of cellist Vedran Smailovic, a musician made famous during the Bosnian conflict in 1992.
With a stool and his cello, Smailovic once played on top of the rubble from a deadly mortar attack in Sarajevo. In plain view of snipers, he played for 22 days straight — one day for each person killed during the mortar attack.
So does the character in Steven Galloway's book, published this year. It's a war tale woven around three characters in Sarajevo and their reaction to a cellist character inspired by Smailovic, whose story has travelled around the globe.
"The cellist in my book is based on a real character. He doesn't ever speak in the book. I was kind of careful not to put words, I don't want to put words in his mouth," Galloway told CBC News Thursday.
In interviews with other media outlets, Galloway said the cellist in his novel is only a character in the first five pages of the book, which focuses more on the other three characters.
He added that most of the information he found out about Smailovic was readily available on the internet.
Smailovic, however, said he is furious the author never contacted him to seek his permission to be included in the novel, a bestseller in Canada and Britain.
"It's not fair, it's not on. It's unbelievable," said the musician, who still composes and records music from a small village south of Belfast, in Northern Ireland.
"How can somebody steal your work, my, my sadness, my, my tragedy?"
Smailovic said that if people are making money off tales from his past, he is entitled to a share of it.
"They put my picture, my face, on the front, on the cover with no permission. They don't ask me — they use my name advertising their product. I don't care about fiction, I care about reality."
Galloway, who interviewed more than 25 people for the book and offered compensation to none of them, said Smailovic's story is fair game because so much has already been written about him.
"[I don't know] for what I would be compensating. I mean, he performed a public act and I mentioned it?" said Galloway, who sent Smailovic an autographed copy of the novel after it was released.
The use of a photo featuring Smailovic on the cover of the novel, however, may be a grey area, according to entertainment lawyer David Zitzerman.
He questioned whether the use of Smailovic's photo and name in the promotion of the book would allow the musician to make a claim for compensation along the lines of a celebrity whose image or likeness is being used without permission.
Way back when. Before setting off on the reality TV journey for love, Lauren Burnham briefly met her soon-to-be suitor, Bachelor Arie Luyendyk Jr., a source exclusively tells Us Weekly.
Though Lauren B. made it to the finish line as one of the final two women vying for Arie’s heart, he ultimately chose to get down on one knee and propose to Becca Kufrin.
But not so fast. On the Monday, March 5, season 22 finale of the reality show, Arie announced his change of heart, admitting he wanted to give it a second shot with Lauren. The race car driver took the opportunity — in front of millions of viewers — to call off his engagement to Becca, leaving her shocked. The breakup unraveled in a fully-unedited clip, something that was a first in the franchise’s history.
“I go to bed and I think about Lauren, I wake up and think about Lauren,” Arie said during the episode.
Meanwhile, another source tells Us that Lauren did not, and will not, watch the finale episode, adding that she’s been hanging out in Washington. She is set to attend the live After the Final Rose show and sit down with Arie, but it hasn’t been revealed if she’ll address Becca.
After the Final Rose airs on ABC on Tuesday, March 6, at 8 pm. ET.
Starting in January, new EU tax rules will force many businesses offering online services across the Union to take on a load of new administrative responsibilities.
The changes have caused particular consternation among micro-businesses providing such services – for a classic example, think about an individual who’s making a small amount selling knitting patterns — and the outrage seems especially virulent in the U.K. With a couple weeks to go before the changes hit, here’s a run-down on what red tape is being introduced, and why.
From January 1st, 2015, the provision of many digital services in the European Union will be taxable in the country where the service is consumed, rather than the country from which it is provided. The point, in theory, is to stop big firms from setting up headquarters in some tiny low-tax country such as Luxembourg and using that location to get out of paying taxes in the rest of Europe.
The problem here is that there are 28 EU member states, each of which has its own value-added tax (VAT) rates, and its own minimum thresholds for having to charge VAT in the first place. For many digital services businesses, this will add a degree of complexity. For those who operate micro-businesses that currently don’t have to charge VAT at all – in the U.K., for example, that’s any business with a taxable annual turnover of under £81,000 ($127,000) – this could be a whole new ballgame.
The kinds of services that aren’t affected include lawyers and accountants emailing clients, the supply of physical goods through electronic ordering processes, car and hotel booking services, and real-time educational services. Business secretary Vince Cable has also said that people can ignore the changes if they sell through a “marketplace like an app store” – an option that of course means losing a cut of the sales revenue.
But those independently selling images or text or music, or paid-for “online magazines” or software, will have to adapt – and fast.
Good grief! And with only two weeks to go?
Yes … about that. These new rules were agreed upon in 2008, so businesses have technically had around six years to wrap their heads around the implications. Of course, it’s really down to the national tax authorities to make sure everyone’s up to speed and, certainly in the U.K., it’s not clear that this happened in any meaningful way.
For example, it was only this month that Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs (HMRC) finally agreed that people wouldn’t suddenly have to charge VAT on small U.K. revenues if they also sell into other European countries – a key issue that caused panic when people started freaking out about the changes in November.
Crucially, though, the changes do not mean that micro-businesses need to register with the tax authorities in 28 different countries. Instead, each country should be setting up a “Mini One Stop Shop” that provides a single point of contact through which to collect and distribute the VAT on sales to other EU countries.
In the U.K., a business can sign up with the local MOSS if its taxable U.K. turnover is under £81,000. This will simplify matters, but it still means that someone who previously didn’t have to register with the VAT authorities at all, will now need to register for a VAT number and submit quarterly VAT returns (declaring nil VAT on U.K. sales), and register separately with the MOSS, again submitting quarterly returns.
And then there’s all the data collection.
Get ready for some serious record-keeping (storing everything for a decade, no less.) The changes don’t make much sense if no one knows in which country the buyer is located, so the business’s customers will now need to tell the vendor which country they live in, and what their billing address is.
But there’s more: HMRC has recommended that sellers collect two pieces of information from their payment providers, such as [company]PayPal[/company]. This includes the country code of the customer’s bank, and the customer’s billing address. Unfortunately, PayPal is only willing to provide the country code, so the rest is really is down to the business to establish. So much for the convenience of no-hassle payment mechanisms such as [company]Stripe[/company].
Then there’s the small fact of the business qualifying as a “data controller” under EU data protection legislation, because they’re processing people’s personal data. In the U.K., this means they’ll have to register with the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), for a £35 fee.
However, the ICO’s security requirements for small businesses are quite flexible – these knitting-pattern entrepreneurs won’t need to adopt military-grade encryption, but they will need to at least try to keep their customers’ data safe, as any small business should. Whether criminals see a hacking opportunity in all the personal information that will now be stored by individuals with minimal security expertise, is another matter.
Why do you keep mentioning the U.K.?
Partly because the U.K.’s relatively high VAT threshold means this will have more of an effect there – more micro-businesses will be dragged into the VAT-collection game for the first time — and partly because that’s where people have made the most noise about this. So far.
Meanwhile, the T&Cs for U.S. Helpouts providers now state: “You may not provide Helpouts for a fee to customers within the European Union. All Helpouts which are provided to customers within the European Union must be provided free of charge.” It seems Google thinks these changes are a reason to steer clear of paid-for person-to-person services in the EU altogether.
Arguably not, because – in one of the weirder specificities of these rules that were designed over six years ago – live webinars aren’t covered by the changes (but recorded webinars are.) The new rules are also only supposed to affect companies based in the EU, but then again Google and other big U.S. firms tend to run their international operations out of EU subsidiaries. I asked Google to explain why it made the changes, but it has refused to do so.
Some experts have even advised no longer selling services into other European countries – a suggestion that at the very least flies in the face of the EU’s precious Digital Single Market project, and that may even contravene EU anti-discrimination rules.
So what’s a poor micro-business or seed-stage startup to do? Read the extremely lengthy guidelines about what’s affected and what’s not, and go shout at some politicians and tax authorities.
As it happens, the EU VAT Action group began a Twitterstorm on Tuesday using the #EUVAT hashtag, calling on the European Commission to suspend the introduction of the new rules for micro-businesses and sole traders. Given the fact that the rules could kill off swathes of the small entrepreneurial digital sector — which the Commission is supposedly trying to stimulate — that may be a good idea.
@sbisson @JamesWallis how I’m surviving #VATMOSS: closing our PDF shop, continuing to sell vattable goods under the threshold. Insanity.
The Commission believes the administrative burden is bearable also for the smallest online businesses. The changes imply that each business including micro businesses need to know the country of their customer: this could be established eg. by IP address, invoicing address, bank card issuing country, (the possible sources are listed in an EU VAT implementing regulation). Then based on the country of the customer the VAT rate needs to be selected for that country. The list of VAT applicable rates is provided by the Commission on its website. Finally they have to declare sales per country to their [local] tax authority.
UPDATE (3.25am PT): And now Andrus Ansip, the Commission vice president for the digital single market, has published a blog post on the matter. In it, he said that “even if the concerns come late, they should be listened to,” and that he trusts that payments processors will start giving businesses the information they need for compliance.
Our company, Paddle.com, actually handles VAT on behalf of its sellers. We provide you with a checkout for your website, analytics dashboard, file hosting & delivery, and best of all we handle your VAT too.
We’re already fully compliant with the changes and are prepared for 1st January 2015. If you’re looking for a platform to sell digital products, we’d love to help you overcome the VAT changes.
Exactly. And then there’s the fact the this is intended to roll out to physical products and services in the very near future. It’s not just the digital community that this is affecting.
I have chronic, disabling illness that forces me to work flexibly from home. As I am finding it increasingly difficult to carry out my physical work (dressmaking), I have been developing digital products (pdf sewing patterns) to replace some of the physical work that I do. The patterns would sell automatically, whether I was well enough to sit at the computer or not, and reducing the amount of administration time I would spend selling the product. I cannot afford to invest in print runs, so going digital was the obvious choice. That is now on indefinite hold and the time, energy and money I invested in it is lost. What happens later on, when the EU VAT legislation applies to physical products as well? Just as it would have been for the sewing patterns, many in my target market are European. I sell garments to anywhere in the world via my Etsy shop. Will I have to stop doing that, too? That’s incredibly limiting for my business, my target market, and my income. How will I survive? How will I pay my bills?
To those who say ‘well, Etsy are handling VATMOSS so what are you worried about? Just put your prices up’, I say ask Etsy yourselves – see if YOU can get any sense out of them, because I certainly can’t! With only a matter of days to go, Etsy have not told their sellers what they are going to do. And they are one HUGE platform, who have been aware of this for a heck of a lot longer than I have. (By the way – I’ve been tax registered self employed in the UK for around a decade and even though I receive several letters from them each year, tax return reminders etc., I have not received a single piece of information about the changes to EU VAT or the VAT MOSS system. I found out two weeks ago, by chance, on Facebook.) So change platforms; sell through someone else? The other platforms are pretty much floundering. Several have refused to take the VAT MOSS responsibility on behalf of their sellers – and it doesn’t matter if we read the rules and believe they ought to comply, they’re doing whatever they want anyway. Some are still ‘in talks’ with their accountants and HMRC. No hope of them being ready for January 1st.
Besides, certain platforms suit certain products, and attract certain customers. Businesses have to go to where their customers are, and changing from one arena to another can lose you your clientèle. It’s not a click of the fingers.
The data collection aspect is a nightmare. I didn’t go into business for this! To do somebody else’s paperwork for them! If they want me to take precious (BILLABLE) time, energy and attention away from my business to become a data collector then they can blooming well pay me for it! Otherwise it is a loss I cannot pass directly onto my customers because the price increase necessary would create unfair competition with larger companies who will always be in a better position to keep their prices down. i would be pushing away custom. All the potential extra costs – admin time, fees to register as a data collector, paying to store the data, paying third parties to gather the data for me, investing in software, hiring an accountant – all that would become unbillable. EU VAT is putting me out of business.
Once again, a load of dumb arse politicians, who don’t know the first thing about how the internet works. As someone has already said, using an IP to get someones country is stupid – its not possible to get 100% accuracy. Granted, you can get a rough idea – but anyone using proxies will get around that. Also, I know for a fact people will not bother buying if you ask too many questions – especially if you have to tell them its gotta be saved for big brother!
Also, I thought this was meant to be targeting the big boys tax dodging? So why not have a cap of say £50k worth of earnings, before you need to start doing this rubbish? Yet another reason to vote UKIP and get out of this mess that is the EU!
Blood = boiling right now!
Thank you so much for covering this.
Vanessa Mock’s statement is typical of what we’re hearing from the EU Commission – and even the UK’s HMRC (the government body implementing this). They keep telling us that we can collect and process the required THREE pieces of information (you need 3 in case the first two contradict each other) and analyse them DURING the transaction, so you know which rate of VAT to apply. And all of this is supposed to happen before the customer lands on your sales page so you can comply with the requirement to display prices inclusive of VAT for consumers.
The more we show them that all we can get is the country code, after the sale, the more deaf they become.
Our research survey indicates that only 4% of micro businesses and sole traders will be able to comply by January 1st. A shocking 10% are closing their doors completely.
Imagine your Grannie having to register for #EUVAT for selling a £2.99 knitting pattern. Well, from January 1st 2015, she will.
The time has passed for the EU teams to keep pretending that there’s no problem.
We are requesting a meeting with Andrus Ansip and his Cabinet this week to show them the evidence and ask them for an emergency exception to allow businesses, worldwide, to continue trading.
Thank you so much for your support, everyone.
This impacts your biz – wherever you are in the world.
The biggesting issue here is that the thresholds are gone. If you’re earning enough online to register for the standard VAT thresholds then the admin burden can be absorbed as you’ve got the money to pay for it to be done. Without the thresholds in place whether you earn €100, €1,000, €10,000, €100k you still have to register for VAT and a data controller which costs money and time to process.
Determing clients’ location by IP? What a LOL – should push proxy service providers’ business through the roof once this is neatly established. In any case, “bureaucratic nightmare” is right!
The master suite in the Roost cabin.
The Roost-cabin kids room and other bedroom.
Winter wonderland at Christmas time.