Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

We DO NOT give £55 million a day to the EU watch

    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CherishFreedom)
    Given that the rebate is applied automatically upon payment, I do not think it is fair to use a gross figure.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm all for leaving the EU, but I also believe our statistics must be fair and credible in order to make a persuasive case.
    We pay all the money and get the rebate 1 year later.

    Just to clear that up


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paul514)
    We pay all the money and get the rebate 1 year later.

    Just to clear that up
    I'm afraid that's not true. It is applied instantly.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...EU-budget.html

    'the rebate is effectively deducted at source, and so not actually sent to the EU at all.'

    The overall net payment is still a large amount nonetheless.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by CherishFreedom)
    I'm afraid that's not true. It is applied instantly.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...EU-budget.html

    'the rebate is effectively deducted at source, and so not actually sent to the EU at all.'

    The overall net payment is still a large amount nonetheless.
    The two statements are not necessarily contradictory. Suppose the rebate is 25% and applied a year later, if one year the budget is £4bn before rebate and the next year it is £5bn before rebate, the contribution in the second year would be £4bn, now we can have a rebate applied one year later and it be applied immediately. But if you go and do the research you will find paul514 is correct, the rebate is currently approximately 66% of the net contribution of the previous year with this percentage reviewed every 7 years and agreed unanimously, so actually when the next review comes along we could in theory lose it, or see it reduced even further just as Blair let it be reduced.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    The two statements are not necessarily contradictory. Suppose the rebate is 25% and applied a year later, if one year the budget is £4bn before rebate and the next year it is £5bn before rebate, the contribution in the second year would be £4bn, now we can have a rebate applied one year later and it be applied immediately. But if you go and do the research you will find paul514 is correct, the rebate is currently approximately 66% of the net contribution of the previous year with this percentage reviewed every 7 years and agreed unanimously, so actually when the next review comes along we could in theory lose it, or see it reduced even further just as Blair let it be reduced.
    I would say the correct way of including that in the statistic would be to calculate the government's average return of investment on the rebate's money in the previous year or factoring in inflation, and subtracted from the net amount.

    I believe we should use the net figure because in fact we do the rebate back. Caveats like the trailing calculation method and the risk of losing the rebate in the future should be noted but not be reflected in the figure except for the loss of ROI.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CherishFreedom)
    Given that the rebate is applied automatically upon payment, I do not think it is fair to use a gross figure
    Not really a matter of what's fair, it's a matter of the contention of the OP, which I have nullified. I agree, however, that it is indeed more practicable to address net costs and benefits, albeit that one must not skim over the fact that we've had to fight tooth and nail for the rebate e.g. that if the EU got its way then the rebate wouldn't be an issue at all as it the blooming thing wouldn't exist! :erm:

    Don't get me wrong, I'm all for leaving the EU, but I also believe our statistics must be fair and credible in order to make a persuasive case
    No worries - there's nothing unfair, or incredible, about it, so long as we are prepared to be transparent about the precise nature of different figures and stats, and to discuss a range of data, including less headline-grabbing (if still troublesome) numbers
 
 
 
Poll
Who is your favourite TV detective?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.