Allpar Forums banner

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
258 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
A very intetesting article that I somehow missed. Maybe some of you missed it as well:

http://www.automotiveworld.com/comment/no-obvious-role-for-iveco-in-n-american-fiatram-van-plan/

The author seems the think there is something to the selection of the Fiat Ducato over the Iveco Daily that goes beyong the actual vehicles. While I personally think the Ducato has a few advantages being FWD up to a certain size/GVW, the Daily would have been a better overall competitor the the upcoming 'large' Ford Transit family and the traditional GM and Nissan vans and commercial chassis vehicles. If in fact the Ducato was chosen because it is a Fiat as opposed to the Daily being an Iveco, it may lend a bit of credibility to the rumor that Fiat may ultimately sell Iveco to help finance the Chrysler aquisition. This also brings to mind Mr. Diaz's recent comments that there has been no decision to bring the Daily to the U.S. as of yet. He stated that the Ducato was chosen because it competed in the commercial vehicle class 2 market, which is indeed a larger market than class 3 and 4. However, I see a lot of overlap between the Ducato and the smaller versions of the Daily, and if the Daily had been chosen wouldn't that have given Ram the opportunity to compete in class 2 through 4 (like the Transit)? Kind of makes you wonder.

Rumors were rampant that Fiat was planning to bring Iveco to the U.S. as a competitor in the medium and heavy truck market, but that would certainly require some serious effort. While Fiat could brand the vehicles 'Ram' and capitalize on the Ram reputation and familiarity with U.S. truck buyers, they would essentially have to build a whole new dealership network. Very few existing Dodge dealers have the capacity to sell and service large commercial trucks. And if a sales and service network was set up, would the trucks themselves be competitive with Freightliner, International, and PACCAR?

Iveco's plight may ultimately be dependent on what sort of deal Fiat can negotiate with the UAW's VEBA over the remaining shares of Chrysler Fiat does not own. Maybe Fiat is being prudent in keeping Iveco separate from Chrysler Group in case Iveco does need to be sold off to finance the aquistion of Chrysler. Time will tell........
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,990 Posts
I guess I don't see this as a zero sum game. The Ducato made the transition now--but that doesn't mean the Daily doesn't come over in the future.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,620 Posts
Ram Truck has its plate full of products late to market. Besides the F-series diesel used in the Ducato, what driveline parts could they use in a NAFTA Daily? There is a shortage of Pentastars, 8 speed auto transmissions and engineers to develop them. The Daily range also includes CNG and EV versions. The Euro rules for EV batteries are very different from the US. Any EV Daily sold here needs a lot of re-engineering.

The author of the article should let the ink dry on the CNH-Iveco merger before making such speculation. Why would Fiat create such a merger just to sell Iveco? Iveco is very successful in Latin America, Africa and Asia-Pacific.

Let me add this.
Fiat Industrial seeks UK residence to cut tax bill


(Reuters) - Truck and tractor maker Fiat Industrial (FI.MI) intends to move its tax residence to the UK from Italy after its planned merger with unit CNH (CNH.N), according to a filing with U.S. regulators, a move that would lower its tax bill.
Source: http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/05/21/uk-fiatindustrial-tax-idUKBRE94K0CT20130521
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
31,982 Posts
Iveco might not have much of a presence here, but they've been around for decades in the U.S. Just don't see many of them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
844 Posts
I can't help but wonder if the continual rumor stream back in the carpocalypse days, with headlines like "Fiat to sell [industrial business] to [competitor] to finance Chrysler merger?" was part of the reasoning behind the demerger 2+ years ago that moved CNH and Iveco to Fiat Industrial and separated them from Fiat Auto.

CNH is incorporated in the Netherlands under Dutch law:
http://investors.cnh.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=61651&p=irol-reportsannual
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,474 Posts
DaveAdmin said:
Interesting, wasn't CNH’s official tax HQ in Holland?
Yes, but they have an office in London. I read briefly the filing, and the merger is a bit complicated. Basically fiat industrial will reverse merge into a purposely made dutch company, and then it will merge with CNH into that. The purpose Dutch vehicle is domiciled at the office in London.
The UK in the past few years (as a way to jump start the economy) has become very aggressive in the way they lure foreign companies with favorable taxation and loose enforcement of some rules. At the same time they have made it extremely difficult for not-resident companies (read based in other EU countries) to operate in the UK. I was just talking to an Italian client yesterday that operates a fund in the UK, and he was telling me that now it's virtually impossible to even open a checking account if you are not at least resident in the UK (something you can easily do in other EU countries). The UK also has an ancient rule whereby any earnings a UK company generates outside the UK are not subject to taxation (it was created way back when, to encourage big wigs to go out to the colonies and set up operations there). The net result is that today a UK-resident company that generates most of its earnings (sales) outside the UK, pays almost nothing in taxes; as low as 0,5-2,5% as a matter of fact, limited to what you sold within the UK.

Of course this means that if another EU country catches as much as a wiff that you are actually not really OPERATING the company from there (as in Marchionne having a Swiss fiscal residence when in fact he is almost never there), said other country will go after you with all they got, for tax evasion.

Italy, incidentally, is very aggressive in the way they go after said cases. Germany has recently gone so far as bribing a Liechtenstein bank employee to obtain a CD with the names of German residents that stashed their cash there. The list is becoming long.

Apple was testifying on these days before the congress on how they basically legally eluded taxes for up to 70+ billions on the last few years, by setting up operations in Cork and not another EU country for their EMEA operations (not the same but similar effects). Google is, shamelessly, under attack in the UK for doing basically the same thing that the UK is doing to every other EU country, but backwards; it's operating from Ireland and therefore not paying a penny in taxes for money they generate from the UK with their Adwords clients there.

At some point this will have to stop with a mega agreement, or the proverbial will hit the wall...of course an alternative could be that the other countries enact taxation rules similar to those of the UK and IRL....but what are the chances of that!?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,990 Posts
RVC--the sideshow with Apple is just a bit of political theater. They are simply using Apple because they don't have the lobbying corps that any of the Petrochemical companies which use actual tax gimmicks to convince the government that the company is owed money by the state rather then visa versa. What they are trying to say with Apple is that Apple should be taxed for the intellectual property generated by their operations here in the US, which is a radical re-envisioning of the relationship between business and state--can't call it a sales tax anymore and do we really want to tax entrepreneurship?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,474 Posts
I'm sure McCain and Co. put on their usual show, but the "tax optimization" scheme used by Apple is more than real ;)
And perfectly legal, by the way.
Don't know about their intellectual property issues, but the issue involving Cork is that 2 separate Int'l divisions dealing with EMEA, Middle East and India are headquartered there, and according to Irish law they aren't taxable to the extent that they are in fact controlled and managed directly by Apple in the US (so they should be taxed in the US). Too bad that according to US laws, no taxes are owed for revenues generated abroad, at least until the time those moneys are brought back to the US (which needless to say, isn't happening).

At least that's what I gathered from the reports on Cook's deposition.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,990 Posts
The "off-shored" money is in fact all from european sales. It was never "in-shored". Seems to be Irelands problem if they decide not to tax the sales. This is a phantom problem.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
31,982 Posts
I guess we lost the original topic about Iveco - and the poster.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
258 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Still here, I have been following the discussion. The article mentioned Caterpillar's recent entry into the heavy truck market, and that deserves some comment as it could be applicable to Iveco/CaseNH. Caterpillar was once a major OEM supplier of diesel engines for heavy trucks, but due to the failure of their strategy to meet 2010 diesel emissions regulations, they left the market. Caterpillar entered into an agreement with Navistar (International) to supply diesel engines which International would equip with their emission controls and sell as a proprietary International branded engine in International trucks. As part of the agreement, International would provide Caterpillar dealers with a line of Caterpillar powered vocational (construction) trucks to market under the Caterpillar brand. If the newly merged Iveco/CaseNH is sold off, I think it would be quite possible for CaseNH dealers to sell Iveco trucks, particularly to construction and agricultural users. It may be a better strategy than trying to sell Iveco trucks at existing Ram dealers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
844 Posts
What motivation would there be for Fiat Industrial to sell CNH & Iveco? ...especially considering that FI & CNH are known to be working toward a merger...

http://www.fiatindustrial.com/it-IT/investor_relations/shareholders/combination/FiatDocuments/FI_-_DutchCo_Merger_Plan.pdf


Per page 5/6 of the above link:
...Following completion of the Transaction, all existing business activities, shareholdings and other assets belonging to as well as liabilities pertaining to FI and CNH will be consolidated into (or controlled by, as the case may be) one single legal entity [...] FI is currently listed on the Mercato Telematico Azionario organized and managed by Borsa Italiana S.p.A. (Mercato Telematico Azionario) and CNH is listed on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE). The Transaction is, therefore, also intended to simplify the capital structure of the FI group by creating a single class of liquid stock with a listing on the NYSE and on the Mercato Telematico Azionario.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top