Circle of escalation: Difference between revisions

Circle of escalation (view source)

Revision as of 10:02, 24 April 2017

258 bytes added , 24 April 2017

no edit summary

Amwelladmin

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

82,853

edits

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 :“''I [[would be]] [[inclined]] to be [[okay with this]], [[subject to]] you confirming the withholding position with {{tag|Tax}},''” you say, happy that you have passed the tangled skein off your desk.
-Of course, the tangled skein has not magically winked out of existence: it has simply ascended from your desk, hovered momentarily and landed with a thud on some one else’s. This poor blighter, a tax lawyer, will have just the same aspiration as you: to pass the sausage on as efficiently as possible. To fulfill it, he will take exactly the same approach you did:
+Of course, the tangled skein has not magically winked out of existence: it has simply ascended from your desk, hovered momentarily and landed with a thud on some one else’s. This poor blighter in tax, will have the same aspiration as you: efficiently to pass on ''le petard'' and, to fulfill it, {{sex|he}} will take the same approach you did:
 :“''There may be an increased risk of retrospective [[withholding]] which is hard to quantify,''” she will say (when one gives tax advice for a living one gets adept at saying this sort of thing by rote) “''but as long as the desk is prepared to absorb that additional risk then I [[have no objections]] to this.''”
-And lo, off the escalation goes to the business. [[Salespeople]], naturally, have but one goal — impregnating their [[client]]s — but not in a way that involves assuming any personal responsibility for a transaction which goes wrong. Up the chain it goes, to trading management. Trading management won’t have any idea what absorbing additional tax risk even is, and so will pass it onto the [[chief operating officer]].
+And lo, off the escalation goes to the business. [[Salespeople]], naturally, have but one goal — impregnating their [[client]]s — while assuming no personal responsibility for the congress, lest it should go wrong. So along the chain it goes, to the trader, a young whippersnapper who will neither know nor care what “absorbing additional tax risk” even is, and who certainly won’t want to be responsible for it. {{sex|He}} will pass it up his line management, a better coiffed version of his charge but with no more insight into tax risk, who will instinctively direct the query to {{sex|his}} [[chief operating officer]].
+[[COO]]s are nothing if not expert in retrospective withholding risk.
 And so on.