Jobs for 50 years: Rolls-Royce pledges to provide work for 2,300
ROLLS-ROYCE says that investment worth hundreds of millions of pounds in the company's Raynesway site will secure more than 2,000 jobs in Derby for the next half- century.
Yesterday, the Duke of Kent was in town to officially open Atlantic House, the second part of a giant scheme to regenerate the site.
-

About 700 people will be employed at the £19.5 million building, developing the next generation of reactors for Royal Navy submarines as part of a contract with the Ministry of Defence worth over £1 billion.
Raynesway is also key to Rolls-Royce's strategy to take a chunk of the multi-billion-pound market to supply expertise in building nuclear power stations for global energy companies
NHS PATIENT VOUCHERS FOR WIGS ARE ACCEPTED AT BEAUTY SPOT...
View detailsNHS VOUCHERS FOR WIGS ARE ACCEPTED AT BEAUTY SPOT COSMETICS
Terms: BRING YOUR NHS VOUCHER AND USE IT AT BEAUTY SPOT
Contact: 01332 418268
Valid until: Tuesday, December 31 2013
Lawrie Haynes, president of the nuclear division of Rolls-Royce, said: "Designing the next generation of nuclear reactor types for the Ministry of Defence will secure our operation in Derby for at least the next 50 years. Furthermore, the nuclear energy design and manufacturing skills and knowledge here is to form the bedrock on which we intend to grow the civil nuclear business."




24 Comments
View all
by Tax__payer
Thursday, March 07 2013, 11:19PM
“by SarahL123
Or is that morally acceptable if you do it, or recommend others to do it?"
There is a vast difference between saving the little guy from being screwed by a grossly unjust quirk of the taxation system, and what large companies do which is blatantly avoid paying billions of pounds by using methods which are simply not available to the little man.”
by towercrane
Thursday, March 07 2013, 10:25PM
“id just like to say i allways under claim but i allways get a nice sum back”
by towercrane
Thursday, March 07 2013, 10:17PM
“to tax payer
well done but you still come over as troll”
by Hamed32
Thursday, March 07 2013, 8:10PM
“Tax__Payer = Tax Avoider + Hypocrite = Amateur advice giver.”
by SarahL123
Thursday, March 07 2013, 7:25PM
“@Tax_payer
So you are recommending sticking a bed in your home office to ensure it is seen to have a partially residential use - isn't that a (perfectly legitimate ) form of tax avoidance? Or is that morally acceptable if you do it, or recommend others to do it?”
by Tax__payer
Thursday, March 07 2013, 5:44PM
“by SarahL123
A home office is unlikely to fall into that category, as computer to post 'expert' advice on internet forums as a private individual (ie not part of your job remit), the use of that room is still partially residential, ergo, no CGT.
Not a wise argument to use with HMRC as you would at the same time be claiming that the computer was not therefore purely a business asset, and that the capitall allowances you had claimed for the last x years for computer equipment were a fraudulent claim - trigger penalties, additional tax, interest, and potential criminal charges.
I think if I were you I would try a different arguement - such as my suggestion of keeping a bed in the "office" to give tyhe room dual purpose.”
by SarahL123
Thursday, March 07 2013, 4:27PM
“Capital Gains only applies on a part of your home used exclusively for business purposes (workshop, garage etc). A home office is unlikely to fall into that category, as the moment you sit at your computer to post 'expert' advice on internet forums as a private individual (ie not part of your job remit), the use of that room is still partially residential, ergo, no CGT. If you have a separate office on your property (rather than a 'home/office') that is not used for any residential purpose, it is dealt with differently.
Maybe that's what you mean Tax__payer?”
by Tax__payer
Thursday, March 07 2013, 4:02PM
“by anony15
wouldn't call myself an expert but i do know accounting!"
SO, are you trying to say tha Rolls Royces UK operations made zero profit for the last 2 years? At that rate there wont be many jobs then because any sensible company would close those unprofitable operations down.”
by Tax__payer
Thursday, March 07 2013, 4:00PM
“by SarahL123
"@ tax__payer
Your information is a little out of date. This was clarified by HMRC in 2008, there is no implications for capital gains tax.
Your information is out of date, not mine. This was actually clarrified by the treasury in 2010 when certain concessions were made, however the principal remains unaltered.
My advice cto you - get yourself a better accountant.”
by SarahL123
Thursday, March 07 2013, 3:16PM
“@ tax__payer
Your information is a little out of date. This was clarified by HMRC in 2008, there is no implications for capital gains tax.
Just sayin' :-)”