The GAAPweb blog

Your ticket to warmer weather?

If you’ve ever thought about moving abroad, now could be a great time to do so, with a freezing winter and economic uncertainty at home, and, temptingly, excellent opportunities for finance professionals on the rise in the far-flung locations of Australia, the Middle East, and the Caribbean, or somewhere closer to home in Europe. (There's an interesting article on Australia's debate regarding importing skills.)

Financial Services and Big 4 experience will certainly serve you well if you are thinking of applying for a role abroad, but local language ability is a skill increasingly in demand in some countries. So, if you want to brush up on your Mandarin or Cantonese, now’s the time to start!

Other key skills recruiters are looking for are US GAAP, IAS and Canadian GAAP, especially in the Caribbean and Bermuda.

Of course, securing a position abroad isn’t the only thing on the relocation “to do” list, and planning visas, accommodation, and schooling is just as important. You should also make sure you know your tax status before moving abroad so as not to be shocked by a colossal bill on your return.

So, how do you go about finding your job abroad?  You should start your research on the web and search GAAPweb Overseas for jobs anywhere in the world. You can also make the decision to start your job search when you’ve already arrived in your new country of residence. You could even be given the chance to work abroad by your present employer, in which case you will be known as a “posted worker”.

Spending time abroad could be one of the most fulfilling experiences of your career and could even turn into the adventure of a lifetime.

Yes He Can...if the Republicans let him

Not long before setting up camp in the White House, President-Elect Barack Obama put forward in his weekly radio/youtube speech his plans of a multi-billion dollar stimulus package, which could be worth more than $800bn including $300bn of tax breaks.  10 percent of the money will be used to expand unemployment insurance and healthcare relief for those without jobs. 

Obama’s chief objective of the proposal, however, is to create jobs. If the government doesn’t act now, he believes ‘we could see a much deeper economic downturn that could lead to double-digit unemployment.’  The ‘American Dream’ will consequently be reduced to a mere fantasy, not to mention reverberate badly throughout the world.

Unfortunately, though Obama is keen to have his plan implemented in time for his monumental inauguration on January 20th, Congress is less enthusiastic, subtly pushing for mid-February to allow room for further scrutiny.  The sheer magnitude and expense of the project has, unsurprisingly, many Republicans already critical of such scheme.

Doubts: we’re all going to have them.  Even fellow Obama-supporters have expressed somewhat reserved suspicions regarding his comprehensive economic plan.  And despite being an Obama-plugging-fanatic myself, I for one must admit my own uncertainties.  But it’s only natural given that the American people have been preconditioned with a fierce distrust for any kind of government expenditure supposedly designed to benefit one’s livelihood.  You’ve got George W. Bush to thank for that.  

Further scepticism has been fuelled by other members of the Republican party, such as Senator Mitch McConnell. Disingenuous as always, McConnell believes Obama’s actions are a deceptive ploy to ‘rush to get (tax dollars) spent.’  It’s highly amusing that a minion of the Republicans believes he is a worthy judge of sensible money management.

The infamous phrase of trying to ‘spend your tax money’ is nothing but unintelligible jargon perpetuated in the media. Nevertheless, this perhaps may be true of the Bush administration but don’t forget the significant difference here: Obama’s in charge now (well, soon).  Sure, it’s a grand plan but the present climate compels him to step up and rip into the futile GOP economic policies deployed by Bush.  Beneath the huge amounts of money consumed is a genuine and elemental desire to not only stimulate the economy, but create jobs for the unemployed and give people more affordable healthcare. 

Does that not seem, if not morally righteous, at least logical?  In a land where the dire populace desperately seek a glimpse of hope for the foreseeable economic future, surely we’re witnessing so far promising delivery from Obama.

Instead of the junk Bush has been pumping money into, it’s clear that the economy could benefit from making investments into areas that have been neglected for far too long like education, health care and energy – all of which Obama is keen to tackle.  His proactive approach to promote US economic growth is not only refreshing but sincerely inspiring and no doubt will serve to invigorate a nation eager to rekindle the once-tenacious American spirit (as well as their, and thus our, economy).

So take away his race, his lack of experience, his fist-bumping ‘terrorist’ gestures. Here is a President who has something many politicians are completely devoid of: heart.   In any case it’s perhaps not the wisest decision to be too emotionally involved in Government schemes but the last time the population expected a man to exercise shrewd rationality to run a country, the population trusted Bush.

Can he do it? Tune in for the next installment of my societal meanderings.

Passengers Taken for a Ride

As a pre-emptive strike to combat the current financial crisis, I recently moved out of my flat in London and now commute into the city.

My usually inscrutable calculations indicated to me that the amount of money I would save on rent living outside of London, would be less than my travel costs to work every day. Significantly less, in fact. So imagine my dismay when I woke up a few days ago to the news that train fares were increasing countrywide by above inflation rates of up to 11%.

It is my firm belief that if you are to increase the price of your product or service, then you are obligated by some sort of moral code to consequentially increase the quality of your product or service. Am I right? Unsurprisingly, my experiences with Chiltern Railways tell me otherwise.

The real sting in the tail is the message it sends out to consumers. We’re being charged through the nose to drive, and encouraged to use more environmentally friendly modes of transport. But where’s my motivation? Why does the only viable alternative to driving cost twice what it did ten years ago, back when the 08:36 from High Wycombe to Marylebone was just as reliable and had just as many seats?

Two years ago I had to give up my car as I saw fuel costs increase disproportionately, along with road taxes. I then started to brave the bus for the majority of my journeys. I didn’t much care for the bus, but at least it took me to my destination (albeit slowly) for what seemed a reasonable amount of money at the time. After a few price increases, I was given yet another hard pill to swallow - just over a year ago, some Darwinian nightmares sat around a table in a council office and decided to take my bus route out of service.

Because of all these changes, all of which were beyond my control, I found that my only way around was to walk, cycle, or take the train. I reside happily in a small village approximately 28 miles from the office in which I ply my trade. Unless I want to run or cycle the rough equivalent of 2 marathons a day, it’s probably best I take the train.

The issue here is that the train companies are profit-making companies. Their ultimate goal is to charge as much as possible, whilst spending as little as possible, in order to increase a profit margin. Now I don’t mind paying over the odds for a taxi, because this is a luxury service. A cab will pick me up from my house, and drop me exactly where I want to be dropped. Who knows, I might even get a cheeky bit of banter with the driver. But I am infuriated that I’m paying over the odds for trains.

Overcharging passengers to use basic travel connections is absolutely criminal. The simple fact is that people pay far too much for inadequate services. But the train companies know they can get away with it, as more often than not there is no alternative company to compete with them on price. My thanks go out to John Major on that one.

I for one would like to see the government fully nationalise the industry, rather than merely regulate some fares and not others. At least that way I could complain about the public sector squandering my money rather than it lining the pockets of the big cheeses at the rail firms.