International Dimension of Living Issues
The range of values, knowledge, experience, and skills relevant to developing a multi-cultural society in a social and economic setting contribute to the issues of the international dimension of living. In this context, several elements are considered to evaluate the role of living aspects. They include cross border issues, foreign residence, tax havens and its treatment, management of personal finance, migration, and domicile issues. Considering three significant countries in the world, Britain, Germany, and Saudi Arabia, one can identify the similarities and differences of the international dimension issues. The above issues bring both opportunities and threats to the citizens in the countries. Therefore, there exist comparing and contrasting factors about the issues.
Britain, Germany, and Saudi Arabia hold similar practices regarding the cross-border issue. Cross-border is an element that involves massive movements of people from one country to another. The three countries firmly distance themselves from the transnational issues. Often, the problems slow down the county’s economic and social development. Cross border issues, therefore, become a threat to the countries. UK, Germany, and Saudi Arabia experience challenges in cross-border negotiations (Bu-Pasha, 2017). The significant difficulty encountered is the effort to settle down cultural differences in the involved communities. Intercommunity differences evolve great danger in meaningful business negotiations. Factors such as lack of respect t and ignorance for other cultures contribute to the cultural gap. The differences not only affect business deals but also influences how communities at the border interact with each other.
The countries’ governments have created and implemented a literature body to aid in navigating the cross-border negotiations. The executives are given the responsibility of enforcing unity and peace among cultures. They encourage people to abandon their cultural tendencies to ease transnational issues. The literature outlines similar negotiations process carried out in the countries. It also indicates ways embraced by different communities to get to an agreement. Although the government may employ various methods of decision-making, issues related to cross-border should value and adhere to the core beliefs of the cultures. Cultural assumptions also have made it challenging to recognize and acknowledge the appropriate decisions.
Despite the UK, Germany, and Saudi Arabia facing similar challenges with cross-border issues in their countries, contrasting factors among them emerge. Since transnational issues are often involving violence among the communities at the border, the government thought it was wise to employ the use of arms (Bu-Pasha, 2017). However, Saudi Arabia did not take the precaution by purchasing weapons. It, therefore, meant that the country would not any control cross-border violence that could arise. Other countries argue that it was not Saudi Arabia’s failure but Germany’s inconsiderate actions. Despite the extent pressure from the British diplomats to Germany to continue with sales of arms to Saudi Arabia, the German government declined the request. Germany noted that it would not supply arms to Saudi Arabia unless in the future after holding fair negotiations. Germany was keen to protect its citizens after a journalist was killed hence issuing the arms sales ban to Saudi Arabia.
Tax havens and treatment largely contribute to the international dimension of living. Tax havens are jurisdictions that provide the least tax liability to businesses in the country and also to foreign personnel. Britain, Germany, and Saudi Arabia are among the countries that have embraced offering of tax benefits for the growth of both individual deals and their economy. Tax havens are the most critical issue of the international dimension of living (Kar & Schjelderup, 2016). The three countries have a collective body governing tax issues the same as the literature body controlling the cross-border issues. Tax havens are characterized by less or tax on income earned. The biggest threat of sanctuaries is transparency challenges, and individuals are denied the opportunity to enjoy effective communication with the jurisdictions.
Britain, Germany, and Saudi Arabia benefit from tax havens just like they do on acquiring protective arms on cross-border issues. The governments earn significant money from the tax havens. The sanctuaries are not entirely free of charge but provide low rates of tax. The jurisdictions tend to impose heavy taxes on imports and customs so that they regain losses incurred in tax revenues. New companies and businesses are other sources of government money (Cockfield, 2015). The companies are expected to make renewal charges every year and also pay for the licenses. Additionally, governments benefit more on established corporate business investments than creating jobs for their residents. Consequently, tax havens increase welfare in countries charging his taxes.
Attracting capital to the countries’ financial institutions strengthens the financial sector. Tax havens also benefit businesses and individuals by saving a significant percentage of tax. Therefore, people find it satisfying to live in tax haven countries than in domicile. Tax treatment is essential in the company’s valuation. Cash flow has a significant material impact on the company’s financial status. Therapy and calculation of taxes help the business analyst build a forecast on the expected future expenses and revenue (Kar & Schjelderup, 2016). Tax havens being the most critical issue; it creates an opportunity for the formulation and implementation of financial modeling. It is a process embraced by many corporate businesses for future predictions.
Although tax havens are significant, the essence of no substantial activities and transparence leads to massive loss of finances. In many cases, funds are misappropriated or lobbied. Statistics reveal that a UK lawyer helped a Nigerian citizen steal a considerable amount of money, thus slowing the economy. Legislation laws of tax havens forbid production activities by companies owned by foreigners hence allowing the resident investors to manipulate them. Residents use shell companies as a lead to business transactions. Shell companies are mostly used to facilitated and conduct criminal activities.
Another aspect contributing to tax havens ineffective is the challenge imposed by multinationals. Britain, Germany, and Saudi Arabia are rich countries that may engage in tax evasions, thus making it hard for emerging countries. Multinationals are capable of shifting their income to the tax havens affiliates tolerating secrecy. The tax haven affiliates, therefore, lend the inadequate country capital at higher taxes for the multinationals to cover their debts (Cockfield, 2015). Stacking debt in developing countries with weak capitalization rules leads to the reduction of taxable income. Multinationals also use another strategy of mispricing transactions of intra-firms. They transfer specialized assets reducing the existence of comparable products in global markets. Multinationals extort their power in contract negotiations relating to natural resources extraction to protect them from high taxation. Tax havens are a hiding place for illicit deals that benefit the rich and oppress the poor.
Many people worldwide move to UK, Germany, and Saudi Arabia to settle for a better life. The high countries advocate for the acquisition of permanent residence documents by the foreigners. Though the process is long, permanent residence status is a great deal to both the foreigners and the government (Brooksbank, 2016). Individuals who have acquired the required documents enjoy indefinite benefits of working and living freely in the county. Foreign residents must have lived in the countries for a significant number of years to apply for resident status. Britain states the required factors for one to be guaranteed a permanent residence. One must be married to a UK citizen, have lawfully or unlawfully lived in the country for more than ten years, or the individual is an investor.
Countries have embarked on charging foreigners for permanent residency. The government aim at attracting foreign investment in the country through the initiation of offering residency status. Foreign residents must attain a particular age to receive permanent status. Once an international becomes a permanent resident, he or she can effectively engage in businesses. The initiative enables foreigners to move in the country with no restrictions from the authorities freely. Saudi Arabia is one of the states that have legalized foreign residence. The country approved a program to monitor and restructure foreigners’ roles in societies. The program also protects foreigners from oppressive residency rules. Mohammed bin Salman Saudi Arabia’s crown prince aimed at boosting direct investment from foreigners and reduce massive oil reliance.
Foreigners are encouraged to stay and do business since it is a source of revenue for the government. However, the high fees imposed on foreign employees prompt them to leave the county. Huge charges on foreigners slow their development status leaving their families in poverty. Just like other international dimension issues, the foreign residence is also exploited by the authorities (Brooksbank, 2016). Foreigners levies are created to help recognized private business strengthen their activities. For example, Saudi Arabia promotes private cartels to generate employment to its nationals, leaving the foreigners jobless. Foreigners feel discriminated against and isolated by the controversial residency system. Others pass a threat to foreigners through an indirect message such as Saudi is for Saudis and not foreigners. Opinions of deporting foreign residents were suggested and published in the newspaper.
International dimensions of living issues bring about both opportunities and threats in the standards of living. Issues such as migration and foreign residence create chances of the increased labor force in the market. Conversely, these issues challenge businesses in embracing changing regulations and cultural tensions in societies. Moreover, dimension issues have strengths and weaknesses, depending on their effectiveness.
References
Kar, D., & Schjelderup, G. (2016). Financial flows and tax havens: Combining to limit the lives of billions of people. Washington, DC: Global Financial Integrity. Accessed at http://www. gfintegrity. org/report/financial-flows-and-tax-havens-combining-to-limit-thelives-of-billions-of-people.
Riccardi, L. (2013). Personal Income Tax. Vietnam Tax Guide, 7–12. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-02138-6_2
Cockfield, A. J. (2015). Bid Data and Tax Haven Secrecy. Fla. Tax Rev., 18, 483.
Brooksbank, E. (2016). How to recruit foreign nationals. Strategic HR Review.
Bu-Pasha, S. (2017). Cross-border issues under EU data protection law with regards to personal data protection. Information & Communications Technology Law, 26(3), 213-228.