Thursday, December 30, 2010

English Shoes Cream Meltonian

RETIREMENT. The inevitable reform of the public pension system. Part I.

Hello everyone,

Now that the economic situation is critical, it seems that one of the measures to be taken is to reform the public pension system. Talk about this theme is "politically incorrect", but that is why, to talk about what nobody wants to talk, I will give my honest opinion that I will be making several entries on successive days. In fact, for many years known "unsustainability" of current public pension system and no political , the color that best each has made anything to avoid making the difficult situation. Now, it seems inevitable, take measures for many years not been made and, logically, their cost is much higher.

Understanding how the public pension system is the first step to begin to break down the current situation. The English system is called DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM and its basic operation is as follows: current workers pay into Social Security, creating the future rights to pension benefits while their contributions to fund current payments of Current pensions retirees. In turn, those who are now retired, did in his day the same, their contributions to fund the payment of pensions of pensioners at the time.

So with the current system, so that charge current retirees require contributions from current workers, creating an interdependence between current retirees and active workers, more workers trading more security for the payment of pension by the retiree, the more is listed per worker, more security for the payment of pensions by pensioners and increased pensions to be paid in the future, for the active worker.

The problem arises when in Spain there are fewer people working and more people receiving retirement . Currently, for every two active workers, there is a person who receives any type of pension. In 40 years, back in 2050, without reform the current system, the relationship is reversed: for every active worker, there are two people who receive some type of pension.

"What factors are important to understand the seriousness of the problem ?. Several, but my view would be to highlight the following:

First, the English production model . Spain has based its economic growth in recent years mainly in the construction and tourism, two sectors that do not require much qualification and where a significant portion of the salaries, besides not being very high perceived in "B".

In this regard I give much importance, because at lower pay, less Social Security contribution and, therefore, less revenue for the pension system and less expensive to perceive the future. If we add that much salary is paid in "B" and therefore do not contribute to Social Security, it is easy to understand how much more would raise the system if crop that 22% of English GDP is on economy submerged. those with public responsibilities, they could start thinking about how they should be tax and labor laws to make disappear the reasons that lead to the existence of this unacceptable volume outside the legal economy.

If the production model is based on highly skilled jobs with high wages and therefore with high prices, sustainability system would be much greater and the possibility of replacing those jobs would be much smaller and therefore have greater job stability. Clearly it is much easier to replace a waiter an engineer, earning both the same respect. Clearly, if as an employer I have several candidates for a waiter, I can offer lower pay, less Social Security contributions and even a major part in money "B" and almost certainly will cover the job. It is clear that if I am a computer engineer and speak English, I can afford to say no to many job offers deemed insufficiently paid and even opt to work in large multinational companies with good prospects for promotion and highly paid. That and nothing else, well-prepared people went to work in other countries that value the professional and adequately paid.

And in this issue, as in many others, quality education system should be the starting point . When we as a country unable to articulate, develop and maintain over time, a quality education system, we are condemning future generations to work in poorly paid, low education, also, being of low-skilled are easily replaced by others willing to work for much lower wages.

political Gentlemen, do the favor of transforming the educational system in order to transform the productive system. not forget that the welfare of a society is directly linked to level of training and education of its citizens.

Secondly, Spain is one of the countries with higher life expectancy the world, reaching 82 years for men and 84 for women the . This means that those who receive public pensions continue to do so for many more years, fortunately. It is estimated that by the year 2050, Spain will be the oldest in the world, behind Japan. And this means there will need to spend more public money to pay pensions, but will also have to spend more public money to fund health care they will need our elders.

When you created the public pension system, back in the early twentieth century, the average life expectancy was just over 40 years. Today life expectancy exceeds 80 years and yet the legal retirement age remains the same as in the early twentieth century, ie 65. Something does not fit ..........

Thirdly, Spain is one of the countries in the world with fewer births . There will be no change in future generations. Today's children are tomorrow's workers and, therefore, who paid their dues will support the public pension system.

do not know any responsible public official when he has had responsibilities government has committed itself to establish a network of nurseries wide and cheap , such that any working mother, to continue their work without to consider leaving their jobs because the cost of care to eat much of the salary he receives. Clearly

having children today is a serious obstacle in the career of many women , and it is clear that many women face this situation, freely choose not to bear children.

I see no interest in promoting part-time contract, which would enter the labor market to a large number of women, supported by its role as a mother with a part-time job.

Fourthly, the average effective retirement age is well below the legal age of retirement at age 65. When workers took early retirement with little more than 50 years, with almost 100% of their wages, no one can argue that this is an achievement of the welfare state, but rather a misunderstanding unwarranted abuse of the welfare state. When the savings banks to their employees early retirement from the public money FROB (Bank Restructuring Fund), turns to abuse of the welfare state. When for years and years, all self-employed were listed from least until I was 50 years old, after which they were listed by the maximum in order to collect the maximum pension, trading the minimum years required for it, and not all his working life, he turned to abuse of the welfare state. In the end, all we are going to pay abuse very seriously.

About negotiate do not know why, since 1995, so-called Toledo Pact, should begin by establishing mechanisms to do that practice any worker retiring at age 65 and not before, except in cases duly justified for health reasons.

And if you, all our politicians had the dignity of the regulation ring Pensions and other benefits for former parliamentarians, which allows deputies and senators retire with full pension, having contributed only 7 years and not 35, as happens to any other employee perhaps in the next survey of CIS, the political class would not appear as one of the main problems of citizens, to approve the reforms would have a greater popular support.

And fifth, the psychological element of the issue: the neglect of the vast majority of the population . We strongly believe a pension public when we retire and we propose that could be otherwise. If we are not aware of the seriousness of the problem, we can hardly cope. We do nothing to ensure our future. We firmly believe in the pension and that public confidence, in my view, is supported by a very shaky foundation.

What to do in this situation?, What have other countries such as Germany, Chile and Sweden, when faced with this problem?, Is the extension to 67 years of retirement age the right solution?.

try to answer these questions and give my personal opinion of the topic in the next post you do, it will be next year.

Happy Year 2011 For All.

Regards,

José Antonio



Monday, December 13, 2010

Minute Maid Heart Wise South Africa

TAXES. The new income tax for the year 2011.

Hi all once again.

had long wanted to offer the ability to write in this blog to others. Professionals in the world of taxes, international trade, banking, investment, can make "entry" very interesting will surely read much more than I can do.

Today, Don Palomino Ricardo Alvarez will make the first collaboration outside of this blog. Degree in Economics from the Universidad Autonoma de Madrid. In 1993, she joined the Management of Public Finance, now called the Technical Corps of Finance. It Head of Service in the General Assistance Legal and Policy Coordination Department of Tax Management of the Inland Revenue, with the experience that gives the performance of this job since mid-1995, having dealt with issues as diverse as the records exemption in the income tax of Sports Federations, the program reports on Tax Management procedure, the filing of appeal before the Regional Economic and Administrative Courts, numerous income tax campaigns in the answers to the complaints filed with the Council for Defense of Taxpayer etc.

This 2010, also a member of the Court examiner at the Technical Opposition Treasury.

Ultimately, Ricardo is what I call a "professional contrasted enough."

few days ago, taking advantage of our sincere and old friend, I put in the commitment to write for this blog. I asked him to do an entry on "The New Income Tax for 2011, comparing with the current rules. An extremely interesting topic for everyone. His response was immediate ... ... ... ..

Thanks Richard, for your generous collaboration, and make a hole in your busy schedule to tell me yes and I know you've done with the whole illusion.

I leave you with the interesting "entry."

A final nuance : Everything that Richard is going to comment, is made on the basis of Articles 60 to 70 of the Draft Budget Law State (LPGE) for 2011 and, therefore, must still be debated and voted on in Parliament. Even may be modified in any of his appearances in the parliamentary process. Its entry into force is scheduled to the January 1, 2011, that is, would apply to the "Income Statement" is made in 2012, in respect of income received in the year 2011.

Regards,

José Antonio

joseamoraleslopez@hotmail.com

joseamoraleslopez@gmail.com





NEWS FOR THE YEAR 2011 income tax

1. UPDATE COEFFICIENTS OF THE PURCHASE PRICE OF PROPERTY TRANSMITTED IN 2011.

First, and as always, the next LPGE (Article 60) update updates the coefficients of the acquisition value of property, for transfers of property not used for economic activities to be carried out during 2011.
To do this, for each year, the update rate increases in 2010 compared to 1%. For example, the update rate for 2010 for transmissions in 2000, was 1.2070, coefficient renumbered in 2011, of 1.2191.
Similarly, 2011 update to update the coefficients of the acquisition value in the transmissions of real estate to business activities economic (as provided in Article 72 of Draft LPGE-2011).
In updating the values \u200b\u200bof acquisition, capital gains declare that no more than the difference between the transfer value and the purchase price, be a lower amount and therefore will reduce the amount of tax due.

2. REDUCTIONS ON PERFORMANCE OF CERTAIN WORK AND ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES.

LIRPF Article 18.2 - Percent reduction applicable to certain employment income.
Project LPGE-2011 limits the reduction of 40%, for integrated performance of work have had a generation time of over two years and which are not a regular or recurring, and as those obtained from qualifying regulations as well as irregular in time, inserting the following paragraph, with effect from 1.1.2011 and indefinite duration:
"The full performance level referred to this section on which will apply this reduction may not exceed the amount of 300,000 euros per year .. "

legislation in force until December 31, 2010, NO fixed limit to qualify for the reduced 40%.

LIRPF Articles 20 and 32.2 - Reduction for obtaining employment income and certain income from economic activities.
indefinite period is given to the wording of Article 20 of the Income Tax Act by the LPGE-2010, ie the amount of the reduction by obtaining income from work remains exactly as it was, without vary at all from the year 2009 and 2010.
The same applies to the reduction of net income derived from economic activities governed by Article 32.2.1 ° of the Income Tax Act (which applies to "self" that only provide services to a third party .) is granted indefinitely to the amounts set for 2010 and already were identical to those for 2009.

3. Reduction in rental housing.

With effect from 1 January 2011 and in force indefinitely, the Draft LPGE-2011 introduces small improvements in the treatment of leases of property, from the standpoint of the lessor, improving the percentage of initial reduction in net income obtained from 50%, effective in 2010, up to 60%.

As "compensation" to be eligible for 100% reduction on net income derived from the lease, the tenant must not exceed the age of 30 years (35 years with the law in force at 31.12. 2010).

Thus, amending section 2 of Article 23, which reads as follows:

"2.1 º. In cases of leases of real property for housing, the net income calculated in accordance with the provisions of the preceding paragraph, be reduced by 60 percent . In the case of positive net income, the reduction will only be applicable in respect of income declared by the taxpayer.

2 º. This reduction will 100 percent, when the lessee has an age between 18 and 30 and a net income from employment or economic activities in the tax period in excess of public income indicator of multiple effects.
Lessee shall report annually to the lessor, as determined by regulation, compliance with these requirements.

If there are several tenants in the same housing, this reduction will be applied to the net yield proportionally corresponding to tenants who meet the requirements of this number 2 º. "

Regarding the age of the tenant , is also added, from 1.1.2011, a new transitional provision nineteenth, with the following contents:

Transitional provision nineteen. Reduced lease contracts from before January 1, 2011.

"For the implementation of the reduction of 100 by 100 under No. 2. No section 23.2 of this law, the age of the tenant be extended until the time you reach 35 when the lease had been concluded prior to January 1, 2011 with the tenant .. "

4. MINIMUM PERSONAL AND FAMILY.

LIRPF Article 57 - Minimum taxpayer LIRPF Article 58 - Minimum and Descendants; Article 59 LIRPF - Minimum of ancestors, and Article 60 LIRPF-Minimum disability.
The amounts remain unchanged in all cases on the force for the years 2009 and 2010. All it Project LPGE-2011 is to give those amounts remain in force indefinitely.


5. GENERAL AND SUPPLEMENTARY SCALES OF TAX.

LIRPF Article 63.1 - General Tax Scale.
Bill of PGE-2011 also incorporates an indefinite term, two new sections to the general tax scale for "sobregravar" on high incomes, in addition to the four existing sections and valid until December 31, 2010. The two new sections are:


Base Fee Payable rest taxable income Type


120,000.20 ; 22.358,26             55.0000                                          22,5
  175.000,20               34.733,36             En adelante                                     23,5


LIRPF Article 74.1 - Tax Autonomy Scale.
Consistent with the modification in the overall scale of tax proceed to amend the regional scale of the tax, in accordance with the provisions of Law 22/2009, which regulates the financing system the Autonomous Communities of common system and the Autonomous Cities , applying the scale rates each Autonomous Community regional set up, within regulatory limits under the Law 22/2009.

6. TYPES OF TAX SAVINGS.
The LPGE-2011 maintains the overall level of taxation of savings (19% to the first 6,000 euros and 21%, from 6,000.01 euros) established in 2010, but changed from 2011-in force indefinitely the percentages for the state party and the state, which are now distributed by 50% (9.5% to € 6,000 and 11.5% from 6000.01 euros, both for the State to the Autonomous Communities), when under the rules in force until December 31, 2010 up to 6,000 euros corresponding to the Autonomous Communities the 7.28% and 11.72% to the State, and from 6,000.01 euros corresponding to the autonomous regions below the 8.05% and 12.95% to the State .

That is, we will taxed at 19% or 21%, as appropriate, upon receipt of interest bank deposit accounts or when payment of a dividend of shares or when we perceive interest on debt securities.
7. DEDUCTION FOR NORMAL HOUSING INVESTMENT.

This is a modified "star" by the new LPGE introduced in 2011, introducing a limit tax base (24,107.20 euros, non-existent with the rules in force until 31.12.2010) for be eligible to apply this deduction in respect of all those homes whose legal acquisition occurs prior to 31.12.2010.

also adjust the maximum annual basis which will be able to apply the deduction (to 31.12.2010, established in 9,015 euros).

In any case, further introduce a transitional regime to continue to apply the current allowance scheme to 31.12.2010, provided that the property was acquired before 31.12.2010 :

A. FOR ACQUIRING YOUR HOME ABOUT DAILY, FROM 1 JANUARY 2011 , the Article 68 LIRPF , according to the above, reads as follows:

"1 . Deduction for investment in residence.

1 º. taxpayers whose tax base is less than 24,107.20 per year may be deducted 7.5 percent of the amounts paid in the period concerned by the acquisition or rehabilitation of housing which constitutes or will constitute internal taxpayer's normal. For this purpose, the rehabilitation must meet the conditions established by regulation.

(...)

also taxpayers whose tax base is less than 24,107.20 per year may apply the deduction for amounts deposited in banks in accounts that meet the requirements of formalization and provision set out in regulations , and always intended for the initial acquisition or rehabilitation of residence.

In the case of nullity of marriage, divorce or legal separation , the taxpayer whose tax base is less than 24,107.20 per year may continue to practice this deduction, in the terms laid down, the amounts paid in the tax period for the acquisition of which was for the duration of the marriage his residence, provided that this condition will continue to have joint children and the parent in whose company are.

The maximum base this deduction will be:

a) when the tax base is exceeding EUR 17,707.20 year: 9,040 euros per year,
b) where the tax base falls between 17707.20 and 24107.20 per year : 9,040 euros less the result of multiplying by 1.4125 the difference between taxable income and 17707.20 per year.

2 º. (...)

3 º. (...)

4 º also may apply the deduction for investment in residence taxpayers whose tax base is less than EUR 24,107.20 annual works and installations made of adequacy in the same, including the common elements of the building and serve as a gateway between the farm and road , with the following specialties:

a) Works and fitness facilities must be certified by the competent authority as necessary for sensory communication accessibility and to facilitate adequate and dignified development of people with disabilities, on the terms set out in regulations .
b) will be entitled to deduct the works and fitness facilities to be made to the taxpayer's residence, by reason of disability of the taxpayer himself or his spouse or relative online direct or collateral consanguinity or affinity to the third degree, who lives with him.
c) The dwelling must be occupied by any person referred to above as an owner, lessee, sublessee or beneficial.
d) The maximum base this deduction, regardless of the concentration in the number 1, above, is:
- when the tax base is equal to or less than 17,707.20 per year: 12,080 euros per year,
- where the taxable amount is between 17707.20 and 24107.20 per annum : EUR 12,080 less the result of multiplying by 1.8875 the difference between taxable income and 17707.20 per year.
e) The deduction rate will be 10 percent.
f) means a circumstance which necessarily requires the change of residence when the former would be inappropriate due to disability.
g) case of works to modify the common elements of building serve as a gateway between the urban property and public roads, as well as necessary for the implementation of electronic devices that serve to overcome communication barriers sensory or promoting its safety, may apply this deduction in addition to the taxpayer referred to the b) above, taxpayers who are joint owners of the building in which the home is located. "

Two important nuances: One, the percentage of deduction acquisition of residence, remains at 15%, what happens is that the state section you corresponde el 7,5% y al tramo autonómico le corresponde el  otro 7,5%.El artículo modificado a que se hace mención anteriormente es el relativo al tramo estatal.  Dos, cuando se habla de "adquisición" de vivienda habitual, por "adquisición", hay que entender la fecha de compraventa de la vivienda habitual, según consta en la escritura pública . La fecha de adquisición, a efectos de aplicar la deducción por vivienda habitual, no es la fecha en la que se dan las arras o señal por la compraventa, ni es la fecha de firma del contrato privado . La única fecha a tener en cuenta es la fecha de adquisición de la home to put on the public deed.

As noted earlier, the Draft LPGE-2011 also adds a new transitional provision eighteenth, for those who had acquired their main residence BEFORE 1 JANUARY 2011 or also they had already met prior to 1.1.2011, quantities for the construction of the same (amounts paid to promoting the self-construction housing or housing) with the following contents:

"1. Taxpayers whose taxable income exceeds EUR 17,724.90 per year who acquired their main residence prior to January 1, 2011 and amounts paid before that date for the construction of the same , will be based maximum deduction respect of that dwelling is set out in Article 68.1.1 of this law as it stood in force on December 31, 2010, even if your taxable income is less than 24,107.20 per year.

Also, the maximum deduction shall be as provided in the preceding paragraph works for rehabilitation or expansion of residence, provided that the requirements of amounts prior to January 1, 2011 and those works are completed before January 1, 2015.

2. Taxpayers whose taxable income exceeds EUR 17,738.99 per year that would have satisfied amounts to the execution of works and facilities for adequacy of residence of persons with disabilities prior to January 1, 2011, will be based maximum deduction about the same as laid down in Article 68.1.4 of this law in its wording in force on December 31, 2010, provided that the above works or installations are completed before January 1, 2015, even if your taxable income is less than 24,107.20 per year.

3. In any case, pursuant to this provision based on the deduction for all investments made residence in the tax period exceed the maximum base amount of the deduction provided for in Articles 68.1.1 and 4 of this law in its wording in force on December 31 2010. "


B. LIRPF Article 69 regulates the deduction, state-by renting the residence.

also with effect from January 1, 2011 and indefinite duration, was amended by paragraph 7 of Article 68 of the Income Tax Act, to suit the amounts used also for the deduction for purchase construction or rehabilitation of residence:

"7. Deduction rent for the residence .

taxpayers whose tax base is less than EUR 24,107.20 per year may deduct 10.05 per cent of the amounts paid in the tax period for the rental of his residence.

The maximum base of this deduction will From

a) when the tax base or less to 17,707.20 per year : 9,040 per year,
b) when the tax base is between 17,707.20 and 24,107 , 20 per year: 9,040 euros less the result of multiplying by 1.4125 the difference between taxable income and 17707.20 per year. "

2010, the wording of this precept was:

"7. Deduction for rental of the residence.

Taxpayers may deduct 10.05 percent of the sums in the tax period for the rental of his residence, if your taxable income is less than 24,020 per year.

The maximum base of this deduction will be:

a) when the tax base is equal to or less than 12,000 per year: 9,015 euros per year,
b) when the tax base falls between 12,000.01 and 24,020 euros per year: € 9,015 less the result of multiplying by 0.75 the difference between taxable income and 12,000 per year. "


8. DEDUCTION FOR REMOVAL OF BIRTH OR ADOPTION.

Article 81.bis LIRPF - Deduction for birth or adoption:

With effect from 1 January 2011 and indefinite period is deleted called "check baby," laid down in Article 81.bis of LIRPF and consisted of the following:

"1. Taxpayers referred to in Article 2. Of Law 35/2007 of 15 November, the fee may be reduced differential this tax by 2,500 per year for each child born or adopted in the tax period (...)
also be deleted, thus the references to Article 81.bis contemplate Article 103 , paragraphs 1 and 2 of LIRPF on the tax return derived.

There remains, however, also with effect from 1.1.2011 and indefinite duration, the additional provision of Act 26 of income tax on the deduction for the birth or adoption, introduced by Royal Decree Law 8 / 2010 of 20 May for all births in 2010 , as follows:

" births that have occurred in 2010 and adoptions that had been formed in that year will be entitled in that period tax deduction for the birth or adoption governed by Article 81.bis of this Act provided that the Civil Registration must take place before January 31, 2011, may also, in the latter case, apply before that early date perception of the deduction. "


9. TAXATION OF PARTNERS OR PARTICIPANTS IN COLLECTIVE INVESTMENT INSTITUTIONS (SICAVS).

With effect on reductions of capital and distribution of premium of investment companies CAPITAL VARIABLE, conducted from September 23, 2010, and in force indefinitely, LPGE draft-2011 amending paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 94 of the Income Tax Law.

Thus, in paragraph a) of Article 94.1, the exceptions to the deferral regime newly acquired shares or units in UCITS be further identified with respect to fiscal year 2010, being as follows:

"The system of deferral under the second paragraph of this paragraph a) not will be applicable when, by whatever means are available to the taxpayer the amount derived from the refund or transfer of shares or units of collective investment institutions . Nor will apply those rules when the transmission deferral or reimbursement or if the subscription or acquisition intended to equity interests representing the collective investment institutions referred to in this article, are deemed listed mutual funds or shares in the companies of the same type as provided in Article 49 Regulations Law 35/2003 of November 4 of collective investment schemes approved by the Royal Decree 1309/2005 of November 4 . "

then introduced in Article 94.1, the two new cases of tax partners or participants in the Collective Investment Institutions (c) and d)), the case of capital reductions and distribution of premium of investment companies with variable capital, completely novel approaches to the regulation , 2010 . Thus, taxpayers who are members or participants of the IIC regulated by Law 35/2003, also charged the following income:

"c) In cases of reduced capital companies variable capital investment that is intended to return contributions , the amount thereof or the market value of assets or rights received, which qualify as investment income according to the provisions in point a) of Article 25.1 of the Act, to limit over the following amounts:

- The increase the net asset value of shares from its purchase or subscribe to the time of the reduction of social capital.
- When the reduction of capital comes from profits, the amount of such benefits. For this purpose, it is considered that reductions in capital, whatever its purpose, primarily affect the part of social capital that comes from earnings, until its cancellation.

The excess over that limit to lessen the purchase price of the shares affected, according to the rules of the first paragraph of Article 33.3 a) of this Act, until its cancellation. In turn, the excess could be taken as income from capital from the equity participation in any type of entity, in the manner provided for the distribution of the premium.

In no case will be within the exemption provided for in the letter y) of Article 7 of this Act to regulated investment income in this letter.

d) In cases distribution of premium on shares of investment companies with variable capital , the total amount obtained without the Impairment resulting from application acquisition value of shares expected in Article 25.1 e) of this Act "

10. MODULE ORDER 2011.

The BOE November 30, 2010 is published ORDER EHA/3063/2010, 25 November, which was developed for the 2011 method objective assessment of income tax and VAT simplified special scheme . Following the pattern of previous years, for the most part a literal reproduction of its predecessors. The only news to note are:

1. everything disappears on the unique possibilities of calculation of VAT is regulated by Order 2010 to adapt the calculation of fees to two changes in tax rates : the general rate increase and reduced from 1 July application, from 13 April, the reduced rate to construction activities performed in the repair and renovation of private dwellings. Consequently there are some unique amounts of "annual tax due per unit" applies both to quantify the quarterly payments to the annual fee.

2. Maintain 5% reduction in the net yield of modules was also established in 2010 . This reduction is contained in the additional provision 1.

3. Additional Provision 2 ª, down rates of return on net to apply, exceptionally this year, three agricultural activities and had the same exceptional treatment in 2010 : table grapes, flowers and ornamental plants and snuff .

Saturday, December 4, 2010

Favorite Beautiful Agony

DEBT. The Generalitat Valenciana issues bonds to 4.75%.

Hello, again.

At the entrance I did on October 23, 2010 , speaking of the investor triangle and the concept of risk analysis, gave as an example the bond issue which was then being out the Generalitat of Catalonia. Today, a few days later, I want to reflect upon the bond one year of 1,000 million euros, expandable to 1,500 million , which since December 2, 2010, began the Generalitat Valenciana.

The first fact to keep in mind is that the bond issue is addressed fully NO individuals and institutional investors. As was the case with the issuance of bonds Catalan, once again, the "big money", what Americans call the "smart money", do not go to this "fabulous" bond issue. In fact, the Generalitat Valenciana performed this bond issue, as happened to the Generalitat of Catalonia, because they get that money in the wholesale market, much cheaper but much more demanding to receive guarantees to provide the money.

If for positioning and securing the bond issue came mostly Catalan savings banks and Catalan, the latter controlled by the Generalitat Catalonia, the Generalitat Valenciana now is exactly the same, making them savings banks and mostly Valencia to place and ensure the success of the issue. Another nuance that should not go unnoticed.

The analysis of this transaction allows us to highlight another feature that was present also in the Catalan bond. The RETURN this operation offers the investor, is much less than the cost of this operation is for the issuer, in this case, the Generalitat Valenciana. If any particular investor to come to the issue will receive an APR of 4.75%, the actual cost to the Generalitat Valencia is 7.75%. This is because the issue underwriters charge a 1% insurance and an additional 2% for the placement of the operation.

The last auction of treasury bills (state) to 12 months offered a yield of 2.363%. Why must assume the Generalitat Valenciana cost three times higher, as did the Catalan Generalitat?. Why state that cost him a 2.363% to the General Valencia cost you 7.75%?.

The signing of these bonds is the illiquidity of money invested until settlement with payment of interest on 22 December 2011.

RISK Concerning the operation I want to comment that I find very important and I hope I'm wrong and no matter what I will comment.

The year 2011 will be a year of extremely hard on the finances of all government, and especially those of the Autonomous Communities. cash advances that were produced by the State in favor of the Autonomous Communities, pursuant to the financing system currently in force were based on revenue forecasts that have proven to be completely "inaccurate." If it is found that as income tax, for example, would raise $ 100, it really has raised 60, to give a figure. As advances are made to account based on these projections and the reality is that it has raised far less than estimated in its day, is that for the next 2011 all the Autonomous Communities as a whole, except for Community Madrid, have to repay the state about 25,000 million euros over perceived, based on forecasts that actually drastically reduced. The problem is greater if one takes into account that the regions have spent that money and not returnable.

Add to this that the misfortune is already quite complete in that fateful 2011, and Spain has the dubious honor of joining Ireland, Greece and Portugal who knows whether, as a country more involved by European Union, I wonder: what guarantees do we receiving the money we invested plus accrued interest, at the end of the expected poor 2011?. If Spain were involved, something that today is far less ruled out, will there be a rebate on all public debt, which will assume that bondholders?. Will it take investors with English public debt, state or regional, losing some of their money?. This risk seems very real and certainly to be taken into account and assess it very carefully when investing our savings worked in English public debt, either national or regional.

The Valencia currently has a debt in excess of 16,000 million euros. It is the second region with more debt , behind Catalonia has more than 30,000 million euros. In fact, the debt of the Generalitat Valenciana represents 16% of the GDP of the Autonomous Community, with the highest percentage if we compare this data with the equivalent of the rest of the regions.

If we add that the amount of this bond issue will go to pay suppliers, ie to finance current spending rather than productive expenditure , as might be the completion of some infrastructure, not just to see, nor saw the Catalans bonds, what are the arguments that may have a small investor to venture into the purchase of bonds of the Generalitat Valenciana.

Regards,

José Antonio







Hello