5 ms·

The BBC office in Delhi at the Hindustan Times building employs 200+ people, including many UK staff on temporary attachment. It massively expanded in 2016 but

The BBC office in Delhi at the Hindustan Times building employs 200+ people, including many UK staff on temporary attachment. It massively expanded in 2016 but it dates back far longer. I wouldn't be confident that every piece of equipment in that office was obtained legally in the country, let alone being able to prove it. For example someone whose mobile phone got lost/smashed/blownup last time they were in Kabul, so they bought a new one, then returned to their Delhi office. Or a piece of equipment that was legally imported back in 2012 but the paperwork has gone. Or a UK purchased harddrive that a passing cameraman left in the edit suite, or something bought locally but the receipt didn't list the serial number on it. I'm confident there will be an "irregularity" somewhere. I'm confident any office in any building in any city in the world will have similar problems irrefutably proving where any equipment came from.

KingOfCoders 4y ago
"For example someone whose mobile phone got lost/smashed/blownup last time they were in Kabul, so they bought a new one" How is that related to the BBC?
- blincoln 4y ago
  > How is that related to the BBC? I think iso1631 is saying that there may be enough red tape for imports into India that the BBC could technically be breaking the law for failing to declare/pay duties on some equipment they or their employees brought into the country. If you're in the US, my experience is that it's kind of an anomaly in terms of relatively light enforcement of import taxes for individual citizens. For example, most countries will look at the declared value on foreign parcels and force the recipient to pay import tax before releasing it to them.[1] If someone walked the same thing over the border, and the government wanted to make things hard on that person, they might accuse them of tax evasion, etc. [1] For those NOT in the US wondering how this is unusual, individuals generally don't have to pay before receiving the parcel here.
  - KingOfCoders 4y ago
    Yes, but how is the BBC responsible for their employees buying phones and bringing them in the country? Was the BBC telling their employees to do this? It wasn't the employees home raided but the BBC office.
    - iso1631 4y ago
      The BBC provides journalists with phones to do their job, be that a live broadcast using something like LU-Smart, or just getting their emails on the road.
    - MichaelZuo 4y ago
      Any object within their physical premises would be ultimately their liability if no one else steps forward to claim ownership. Or at least that's how the law works in a lot of countries.
      - KingOfCoders 4y ago
        I don't know about a lot of countries, it doesn't work this way in Germany for sure.
        MichaelZuo 4y ago
        So then who is liable if some dangerous substance is discovered within a company's office in Germany? Or if someone gets hurt by a normal object placed in a peculiar position? Assuming the perpetrator is unknown.
        KingOfCoders 4y ago
        There is an investigation (for that we have the police) on how it got there and who is responsible and if something illegal (determined first by the prosecution office and then determined by a court) was going on.
- iso1631 4y ago
  "As the raids are underway, documents were seized and phones and laptops of journalists were taken away. Employees were asked not to call anyone." If those phones were bought out of country there may be tax implications
wkat4242 4y ago
I understand, but looking for one tiny irregularity for political goals is not the same as jailing a mafioso for it who is a money launderer and murderer on a huge scale. I was arguing with the OP that Capone's sentence was not political but this thing is.

KingOfCoders 4y ago

"For example someone whose mobile phone got lost/smashed/blownup last time they were in Kabul, so they bought a new one" How is that related to the BBC?

blincoln 4y ago
> How is that related to the BBC? I think iso1631 is saying that there may be enough red tape for imports into India that the BBC could technically be breaking the law for failing to declare/pay duties on some equipment they or their employees brought into the country. If you're in the US, my experience is that it's kind of an anomaly in terms of relatively light enforcement of import taxes for individual citizens. For example, most countries will look at the declared value on foreign parcels and force the recipient to pay import tax before releasing it to them.[1] If someone walked the same thing over the border, and the government wanted to make things hard on that person, they might accuse them of tax evasion, etc. [1] For those NOT in the US wondering how this is unusual, individuals generally don't have to pay before receiving the parcel here.
- KingOfCoders 4y ago
  Yes, but how is the BBC responsible for their employees buying phones and bringing them in the country? Was the BBC telling their employees to do this? It wasn't the employees home raided but the BBC office.
  - iso1631 4y ago
    The BBC provides journalists with phones to do their job, be that a live broadcast using something like LU-Smart, or just getting their emails on the road.
  - MichaelZuo 4y ago
    Any object within their physical premises would be ultimately their liability if no one else steps forward to claim ownership. Or at least that's how the law works in a lot of countries.
    - KingOfCoders 4y ago
      I don't know about a lot of countries, it doesn't work this way in Germany for sure.
      - MichaelZuo 4y ago
        So then who is liable if some dangerous substance is discovered within a company's office in Germany? Or if someone gets hurt by a normal object placed in a peculiar position? Assuming the perpetrator is unknown.
        KingOfCoders 4y ago
        There is an investigation (for that we have the police) on how it got there and who is responsible and if something illegal (determined first by the prosecution office and then determined by a court) was going on.
iso1631 4y ago
"As the raids are underway, documents were seized and phones and laptops of journalists were taken away. Employees were asked not to call anyone." If those phones were bought out of country there may be tax implications

wkat4242 4y ago

I understand, but looking for one tiny irregularity for political goals is not the same as jailing a mafioso for it who is a money launderer and murderer on a huge scale. I was arguing with the OP that Capone's sentence was not political but this thing is.