USA - Obama Care: Senate GOP fail again and abandon latest effort to kill Obama Care - by J. Eilperin and S.Sullivan

Senate Republicans decided Tuesday not to hold a vote on unwinding the Affordable Care Act, preserving the landmark 2010 law for the foreseeable future even as they suggested they may withhold crucial funding for it

.

The move leaves the GOP — once again — short of fulfilling a signature promise, which some Republicans worried could inspire a backlash among their base heading into the 2018 midterm elections.

Several senators said they instead plan to move onto other issues now that the party’s latest proposal, authored by Republican Sens. Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.) and Bill Cassidy (La.), had failed to garner sufficient support 

“Where we go from here is tax reform,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) told reporters after holding a closed-door policy lunch with members of his caucus.

Meanwhile, Republican lawmakers voiced little interest in shoring up the existing ACA insurance market, sowing apprehension among insurers and state officials just weeks before consumers must start enrolling in plans for next year. 

Note EU-Digest: The US Republican Party is in deep trouble: division among party members, poor Congressional leadership, and the fact that their "Principal Leader", the President of the USA, is a "loose Canon", also is not helpful for their reputation and morale within the party.

 
Read more: Senate GOP abandons latest effort to unwind the Affordable Care Act - The Washington Post

ISDS: Corporations Overpowering Governments and Democracy? - by Steven Hill

After Wallonia’s recent stand on the Canadian-European Trade Agreement highlighted the issue of investor-state dispute resolution provisions in the context of developed markets – and with TPP and TTIP still on the horizon, bearing similar plans – it is worth taking a closer look at them.

Corporate-friendly ISDS provisions feed into a public fear that the biggest corporations are themselves becoming sovereign governments that are unrestrained by democratic accountability. That is actually a reasonable fear in light of recent history.

Read more: ISDS: Corporations Overpowering Governments and Democracy? - The Globalist

Multi - National Tax Evasion: Is Burger King’s move to Canada a raw deal for U.S. taxpayers?.- by Eileen Appelbaum

With tax inversions, by reincorporating overseas and turning the foreign subsidiary into the “parent” company, at least on paper, the company is free to use its offshore cash however it wants without having to pay U.S. corporate taxes on the money. Private equity companies have a history of domiciling portfolio companies that do most of their business in the U.S. in the Cayman Islands or other tax havens.

So it may not be surprising that it is Burger King BKW 3.16% , which was formerly private equity- owned and whose major shareholder is still the PE firm 3G Group, whose massive tax inversion deal breaks this mold. Most tax inversions involve a large U.S. multinational acquiring a small subsidiary, but Burger King and Tim Horton’s are both multi-billion dollar businesses with similar market capitalizations. Most tax inversions have been motivated by a desire to bring offshore profits back to the U.S., but Burger King doesn’t have much in the way of profits parked offshore.

Burger King executives have defended the deal by saying that plans to expand globally is what’s driving the deal rather than tax considerations, but tax experts are skeptical of this explanation. It seems the company just wants to pay lower taxes. In any case, if the deal is not met with customer resistance as Walgreen’s now-abandoned tax inversion plan was, it could lead other multinationals that directly serve consumers to renounce their U.S. citizenship to reduce their taxes.

This may be legal, but that doesn’t mean that it’s right. The corporate defense that companies need to do what’s best for their shareholders and take advantage of every loophole in the corporate tax code rings hollow when these companies employ an army of lobbyists to make sure that the tax code is riddled with loopholes.

Public outrage at the recent spate of tax inversions by high-profile multinationals that want to shift profits earned in the U.S. overseas to reduce their tax bill may finally overcome the clout of corporate interests and lead to action by Congress to limit the opportunities for engaging in this tax avoidance scheme. Treasury and the IRS are also considering measures to discourage tax inversions by making earnings ‘stripping’ illegal and eliminating some of the benefits of such deals.

Even before the Burger King deal was announced, the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation estimated that the potential tax revenue the Treasury would lose to tax inversions over the next 10 years could amount to $19.5 billion. If not stopped soon, lost tax revenue from tax inversions may mount much higher. The country faces an urgent need to stop corporate inversions. This is one tax loophole that Congress should move quickly to close.

Read more: Is Burger King’s move to Canada a raw deal for U.S. taxpayers?

EU-US Trade negotiations: Germany emerges rightfully as most vocal opponent of potentially "bad" EU-US trade deal

"Say no to US-EU Trade Agreement"

At one point in the past Chancellor Angela Merkel said she wished "for nothing more than a free-trade agreement between the USA and the EU". But she did not wish for it to become a lop-sided agreement favoring mainly US multi-national corporations.

To the dismay of many in Brussels and Washington, Germans are now taking a very different view. That is putting Europe's biggest exporter in the unusual situation of becoming one of the most vocal opponents of what is advertised by the US as potentially the world's biggest trade deal.

Today European concerns about the threat to food and the environment have found their strongest voice in Germany, amplified by the country's influential Green party and anger at reports of US spying.

The difficulty of selling the benefits of a deal, which could generate  - ( the US says, but nobody knows from which hat they pulled that information) -  $100 billion a year in economic growth for both the EU and the United States, is a sign of the challenge for governments seeking to contain a growing hostility to the talks and the corporate influence in this potential deal.

"We do not want this sort of agreement," said Ska Keller, a 32-year-old Parliamentarian who gained prominence at home during European elections in May by putting the trade deal at the centre of her campaign. "I don't expect anything positive to come out of the negotiations," she told Reuters.

The trade deal is bad for Europe. It is advertised as creating more jobs and economic wealth, but nothing is said about where the wealth is going to and the uncontrolled power it is giving to tax evading multi-national corporations ( mainly American) and damage to the health of European citizens by allowing the consumption of genetically modified foods and the use of GM in agriculture and life-stock into this deal.  Only five EU countries presently  grow GM crops at all — Spain, Portugal, the Czech Republic, Romania and Slovakia.

Speaking ahead of a protest in Dublin against GM foods on Saturday,  an Irish official said that food standards are much higher in the EU than the US.

“You want trade between these countries but our standards are much higher than for the US. In the US the whole thing is run by multinational companies who are really only interested in the bottom line and money.

“The standard of food in Europe is much higher than it is there. My biggest concern would be is that you would have GM products all over the place and no body is going to know about it.
 
Political parties, focus groups, special interest groups throughout Europe should use every method at their disposal to stop this agreement from being adopted without major modifications, which includes removing corporate influence as part of the political process and decision making in administration this deal, establishing a permanent ban on the use of GM processes and products in the EU, and being far more specific in showing where and how new jobs will be produced and to whom and where the income generated will be going to.

In the case of the NAFTA agreement between the US, Canada and Mexico, similar optimistic predictions were made about economics and job creation,  as are being made today in relation to this new potential EU-US trade deal, but the actual results of the NAFTA agreement have been dismal, except for multi-national corporations which are making out like bandits as a result of the corporate loopholes in that treaty. 

EU-Digest

EU-US Trade negotiations: Thousands protest against EU-US trade deal across the UK

The Landworkers’ Alliance (LWA) joined more than 50 groups to protest against the controversial Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) on Saturday. Protests took place all around the country as part of the no TTIP campaign and the LWA joined coalition groups protesting in London.

The European Commission will host trade talks in Brussels all this week, with the UK government arguing if the new trade deal goes ahead this will open up trade and boost the economy.

However, critics say the deal puts a lot of power into the hands of large corporations, with fears the deal could mean large US firms will be able to sue governments over laws that are against their interests.

There are also worries from producers with the LWA worried about the safety of US imported meat.
Adam Payne, a spokesperson for LWA, said although the protest was a good start but “we really need to work to stand against the TTIP”.

He believes there is still not enough focus on this important trade deal and said, “We need other farming and agricultural unions to join us as this deal will effect them negatively.
“We still have time but now it’s crucial to build a big united opposition against the TTIP.”

The EU has publicly announced that the deal would not change European consumer safety laws. However, this has not stopped groups that are worried the deal could see a reduction in the importance placed on climate change and environmental issues and millions of job losses.

More than 1,000 people protested in front of the EU’s UK base at Smith Square, including the World Development Movement (WDM).

Speaking at the protest, Nick Dearden, director of the WDM, said, “This deal would hand multinational companies unprecedented powers over life in this country, including the ability to sue a future government for billions of pounds if they didn’t like its decisions. 
“The deal is not really about trade, it’s about entrenching the position of the 1%. It should be abandoned.”  

Read more: Thousands protest against EU-US trade deal across the UK - Blue and Green Tomorrow

Airline industry:: "The Robbers In The Sky": 10 things airlines won’t tell you - by Anna Maria Andriotis

Market watch writes : "It’s not your imagination. Airfare is getting more expensive. The cost for a domestic roundtrip ticket averaged nearly $356 last year, up 3.6% from a year prior, according to the latest data from Airlines for America, a trade group which represents U.S. carriers. And the rate at which airfare is rising is speeding up: The average ticket price spiked 24% from 2009 to 2012. In contrast, during the four years prior to this period, 2005 to 2008, prices increased by 16.4%. 

Holiday travel in particular is becoming costlier. The average price of roundtrip economy tickets sold by the end of September for travel between Dec. 21 and Jan. 1 increased 7.5% from last year to $337 before taxes and fees, according to Airlines Reporting Corp., which processes travel agencies’ ticket sales with airlines. (Data is based on purchases made with travel agencies and third-party travel sites.) These prices reflect tickets bought relatively far in advance; holiday tickets bought on shorter notice cost considerably more. 

Airlines say they have to increase prices to keep up with the price of fuel and other costs of doing business—and that despite rising prices, airfare has not kept up with inflation. When adjusted for inflation, the average price of a domestic ticket is actually lower now than it was in 2000, says John Heimlich, chief economist at Airlines for America. However, even when adjusted for inflation, prices are increased 10.3% from 2005 to 2012, according to the trade group. "

Note EU-Digest: Unfortunately the US Congress has been sitting on their hands again  and failing to help consumers/their electorate in combating this problem. 

In contrast, EU Citizens are protected formany of  these abuses by a EU Parliament approved passenger rights bill  – whether traveling by air or rail, and now also by ship, bus and coach.

Read more: 10 things airlines won’t tell you - 10 things - MarketWatch