只用一本书提高英语听力能力!重温经典名著双语阅读小编推荐:跟着纪录片学英语不背单词和语法,轻松学英语
返回列表 回复 发帖

[英伦广角] 2015-02-28 汇丰银行丑闻事件升级 英下议院将调查

提高英语听力能力 找对方法很重要!

[英伦广角] 2015-02-28 汇丰银行丑闻事件升级 英下议院将调查

user posted image
Tory Peer Says Miliband Tax Claim 'Defamatory'


The Labour leader accuses Lord Fink of seeking to avoid paying taxes by holding a Swiss bank account.

user posted image


【电信1】 RealVideo / mp3

【电信2】 RealVideo / mp3

【网通/教育网】 RealVideo / mp3

点击进入英伦广角整理稿汇总页面

点击进入多主题版块听写规则(新手必读)


版主提示:
一、若是自己的听写稿, 请发帖时标注'Homework'.
二、若是改稿, 请发帖时标注'on 某某人'并在修改处标红.
三、为了达到最快的下载速度,推荐使用迅雷高速下载本站音频/视频材料.

普特在线文本比较普特在线听音查字普特在线拼写检查普特文本转音频

支持普特英语听力就多多发帖吧!您们的参与是对斑竹工作最大的肯定与支持!如果您觉得还不错,推荐给周围的朋友吧~
I think for me, the ?letter has been taken off today is the involvement to the banks. the banks weren’t sort of innocent by-standers in this. They were actually aggressive protagonists, so they were not just helping people to avoid and evade paying that tax. they were inviting people on how to avoid and evade paying the tax. And I think the new issue that emerges for me is that we shouldn’t go off, just go off to the individuals. I think Steven Green got really important questions to answer. But I think we should be looking at HSBC as well. I think it undermines our trust in banks. there were other countries that are taking HSBC to court of this. We too should defend our taxpayers and look at whether or not HSBC should be brought to account in the courts.

Why do you think, you describe there. our authority think our pussy ?*&^%$around issue. You can compare and contrast how they are acting in the US. both with individual tax avoidance and corporations that help them do it. I think this is government facing both ways. On the one hand, they know the public are really furious if they find unfairness in the system if you are very rich or if you are big corporation. You can find your way around paying taxes. if you are like the rest of us, you pay PAYE, you just pay your dues automatically. They are facing ? I think you get that with Steven Green. I am astonished today that Siven Green is not answering questions. He was the boss at that time. Either that he knew what was going on, so he was complicit. Or he didn’t know, then he was not on top of his job. Either way, he should be brought to account. he was the boss. He has the question to answer.
(Do) you think you got any chance of getting him in front of your committee? Well, we have got a session interesting enough this Wednesday, already in our diary when we are going to be talking to HRMC and obviously this issue will come up. And I think following on that, if we think that he is relevant that we call to the committee, either the bank or Cizen Stevens and my commission want to do that. We will do it.
And other questions, this is interesting, you talk about HMRC you know as we referred to earlier, in terms of the amount of money recovered and then the actions they take. They seem prepared to do deals don’t they?&^%$#We are not with wealthy individuals but with big companies. either you hold them over the calls#$%^ before or companies like Vodephone or others. They do. I just don’t think it is right. There is a clear law. I think sweetheart deals aren’t right. they argue that it is quick to get the money in if you do a deal and if you litigate. But I think you can say the same about a benefit sgrunture? It is quick to get the money back and why do we treat one group of citizens this one way and another group of citizens the other way. and I do think it is powerful people don’t want to be dragged before the court. People don’t want to be fined. They don’t want to be sent to prison. If you demonstrate, you know, through your cases. You will pursue people through the court. I think probably that is the best to stop people getting involved with this outrageous practices.

个别地方听不出来期待高人的文本
立即获取| 免费注册领取外教体验课一节
HOMEWORK

I think what for me, the legions been taken off today is the involvement of the banks. We…not the banks weren’t sort of innocent by-standers in this, they were actually aggressive protagonists. So they were not just helping people to avoid and evade paying their tax, they were advising people on how to avoid and evade paying the tax. And I think a new issue that emerges for me, is that we shouldn’t go after, just go after the individuals. I think Steven Green has got really important questions to answer. But I think we should be looking at HSBC as well. I think it undermines our trust in banks, and there are other countries that are taking HSBC to court of this. We too should defend our taxpayers and look at whether or not HSBC shouldn’t be brought to account in the courts.

Why do you think, as you describe there, Ms. Hodge, that our authority seems rather pussy foot around the issue? I mean, you can compare and contrast how they are acting in the United Sates both with individual tax avoidance and corporations that help them do it.

I think this is government facing both ways. On the one hand, they know the public really furious if they find unfairness in the system. If you are very rich or if you are a big corporation, you can find your way around paying tax. If you are like the rest of us, you pay through PAYE, you just pay your dues automatically. They are facing brief which I think you get that with Steven Green. I am astonished today that Steven Green is not answering questions. He was the boss at that time. Either he knew what was going on, so he was complicit, or he didn’t know, and then he wasn’t on top of his job properly. Either way, he should be brought to the account. He was the boss. He has questions to answer.

You think you got any chance of getting him in front of you committee?

Well, we have got a session interesting enough this Wednesdays already in our diary when we are going to be talking to HRMC and obviously, this issue will comp up. And I think following on that, if we think that it is relevant that we call to the committee, either the bank or Steven Green, and my committee wants to do that, we’ll do it.

And other questions. It’s interesting. You talk about HMRC, because you know as we referred to earlier, in terms of the amount of money they have recovered and then the actions they take. They seem prepared to do deals, don’t they? Would not just with wealthy individuals but with big companies, and if you hold them over the calls before for deals with companies like Vodaphone and others.

Yeah, they do. And I just don’t think it is right. There is a clear law. I think sweetheart deals aren’t right. They argue that it’s quicker to get the money in if you do a deal than if you litigate. But I think you could say the same about a benefit scrounger? It’s quicker to get the money back than to take them through the courts. Why do we treat one group of citizens one way and another group of citizens the other way? And I do think it is powerful people don’t want to be dragged before the court. People don’t want to be fined. They don’t want to be sent to prison. If you demonstrate, you know, through your cases that you will pursue people through the court, I think probably that’s the best way of stopping people getting involved in these outrageous practices.
实现无障碍英语沟通

[Homework]2015-02-28 汇丰银行丑闻事件升级 英下议院将调查

I think what for me, the latest been taken off today is the involvement of the banks. We…not the banks weren’t sort of innocent by-standers in this, they were actually aggressive protagonists. So they were not just helping people to avoid and evade paying their tax, they were advising people on how to avoid and evade paying the tax. And I think a new issue that emerges for me, is that we shouldn’t go after, just go after the individuals. I think Steven Green has got really important questions to answer. But I think we should be looking at HSBC as well. I think it undermines our trust in banks, and there are other countries that are taking HSBC to court of this. We too should defend our taxpayers and look at whether or not HSBC shouldn’t be brought to account in the courts.

Why do you think, as you describe there, Ms. Hodge, that our authority seems rather pussy foot around the issue? I mean, you can compare and contrast how they are acting in the United Sates both with individual tax avoidance and corporations that help them do it.

I think this is government facing both ways. On the one hand, they know the public really furious if they find unfairness in the system. If you are very rich or if you are a big corporation, you can find your way around paying tax. If you are like the rest of us, you pay through PAYE, you just pay your dues automatically. They are facing brief which I think you get that with Steven Green. I am astonished today that Steven Green is not answering questions. He was the boss at that time. Either he knew what was going on, so he was complicit, or he didn’t know, and then he wasn’t on top of his job properly. Either way, he should be brought to the account. He was the boss. He has questions to answer.

You think you got any chance of getting him in front of you committee?

Well, we have got a session interesting enough this Wednesdays already in our diary when we are going to be talking to HRMC and obviously, this issue will comp up. And I think following on that, if we think that it is relevant that we call to the committee, either the bank or Steven Green, and my committee wants to do that, we’ll do it.

And other questions. It’s interesting. You talk about HMRC, because you know as we referred to earlier, insane,the mad money they have recovered and then the actions they take. They seem prepared to do deals, don’t they? Would not just with wealthy individuals but with big companies, if any, you pull them over the culls before for deals with companies like Vodaphone and others.

Yeah, they do. And I just don’t think it is right. There is a clear law. I think sweetheart deals aren’t right. They argue that it’s quicker to get the money in if you do a deal than if you litigate. But I think you could say the same about a benefit scrounger? It’s quicker to get the money back than to take them through the courts. Why do we treat one group of citizens one way and another group of citizens the other way? And I do think it is powerful people don’t want to be dragged before the court. People don’t want to be fined. They don’t want to be sent to prison. If you demonstrate, you know, through your cases that you will pursue people through the court, I think probably that’s the best way of stopping people getting involved in these outrageous practices.
This post was generated by put listening repetition system,  Check the original dictation thread!
口译专员推荐—>口译训练软件IPTAM口译通

[Homework]2015-02-28 汇丰银行丑闻事件升级 英下议院将调查

I think, for me, the ladders had been taken off today, is the involvement of the banks, we are, the banks were not innocent bystanders in this, they are actually aggressive protagonists, so they were not just helping people to avoid a waping in their tax, they were advising people on how to avoid a waping in tax, and I think a new issue that emergence for me is that we shouldn't go off just go off the individuals, just as i think Steven Green has got really important questions to answer, but i think we should be looking at HSBC as well, i think it undermines are trusting banks, and there are other countries that are taking HSBC to court over this, we too should defend our taxpayers and look at whether or not HSBC shouldn't be brought to account in the courts.And why do you think as you described that odds to our authority, since other are pushing around the issue, I mean comparatively you can trust, how they act in the United States both with individual tax of avoidance and cooperations that help them do it.  I think this is government facing both ways. On the one hand, they know that the public get really furious if they find unfairness in this system if you're very rich of your big cooperation, you can find your way around paying tax;if the lest to pay through PAYE, your just pay your dues automatically,they are facing ,i think you'll get this with Steven Green.I am astonished today that Steven Green is not answering questions. He was the boss at that time, I that he knew what was going on, so he was complicit,although all they didn't know, and then he wasn't on top of his job properly.Either way, he should been brought to account, he was the boss, he has questions to answer. Well, we have got a session interesting to that already in our diary when we are going to be talking to HMRC, and obviously that this should come up,and following on that, if we think it relevant,that we call to the committee, either the bank or Steven Green, and my committee want to do it, we will do it. And another question is interesting. You talked about HMRC, because you refer to it earlier in terms of the mad money they recovered. They seem prepared to do deals, don't they? not with individuals, but with big companies and you've hold over them over the calls before,for deal with companies like voterphone and others.They do and i just don't think it's right.There is a clear law i think sweetheart deals on right.They argue that it's quick to get their money in if you do a deal and if you letigate, you could say the same about the benefit scrounger, it's quicker to get the money back when to take the citizen to court. Why do we treat one group of citizens one way,but the other groups of citizens another way? And i do think it's powerful.People don't like to be dragged before the court;People don't want to be find, they don't want to be sent to prison if you demonstrate through your cases that you will pursue your people through the court.I think it's probably the best way of stopping people getting involved in this outrageous practices.
This post was generated by put listening repetition system,  Check the original dictation thread!
返回列表