Whether you can skip the first part is another story, you might be able to do so if you can provide proof of continuous qualification of the QP requirements over a period of 5 years which might not be so easy to do.
For example you don't charge VAT for intra-EU invoices and in practically every EU country you're liable to pay taxes there in case you stay there for more than 183 days.
There's just no blanket solution here - at least not at the small-fish level.
I was told by a guy who used to contract in Ireland, that there's a heavy crack-down on contractors working through their own Ltd's happening in Ireland, since they want you to pay taxes as a normal employee. Something worth considering, since it could also apply to foreign-generated income.
This might indeed be a problem for Irish nationals, just as the "IR35" rules affect UK contractors working through limited companies, but I can't imagine that a non-national working outside Ireland through an Irish company would suddenly be considered resident in Ireland for tax purposes.
Can you elaborate? I'm genuinely interested in hearing from someone with experience in both industries to weigh in on this. Especially once the risks on both sides have been calculated in, since otherwise the comparison is largely meaningless.
I've worked in banking (algo pricing for an eFX trading desk), built a startup and worked for a VC.
From the financial perspective of a developer if you want to bank a couple of million dollars over 10-15 years then you should go work for a bank. If you want to bank ten million dollars you should start a startup, but it comes with a higher risk.
If you're a good developer, with reasonable people skills and a willingness to learn the business side, then becoming a millionaire in banking is pretty straightforward with a decent saving strategy. It's just a matter of time.
The risk level is pretty low, if you work for a hedge fund the risk is higher but you can earn more money faster and if the fund fails you can get a job at a bank pretty easily. The banking industry has a problem with hiring good devs just like everyone else does.
The financial reason for starting a startup is that you have the potential to make lots more money more quickly. But that also comes at a higher risk.
From my completely non-finance, non-startup, third-party point of view, I gather some finance workers are able to establish a direct link between their work and their pay ("Your bonus is 1% of the profits your software makes"). Startup workers can only make big money if they are lucky enough to get in on a big exit- their personal performance is only weakly tied to payout.
Finance is actually more meritocratic than software, these days. That may change. Right now, the douche factor is much higher in software startups that that clouds the game. Of course, many of those douches came from (cough failed out of) finance and management consulting.
Traders who top out at $500,000 per year are considered failures. Quants and programmers often get to (and, sometimes, past) that level, but more slowly (maybe 35-45 on average; obviously, there are outliers who get there faster).
For a contrast, the mediocre engineer gets such a small amount of equity that it's less than a finance bonus at liquidity. Then there's dilution and cliffing. Sometimes engineers (usually, ones who joined early and were later judged to have "too much" equity) are pressured into non-exercise of options on reputation threats (i.e. "you're fired, but if you don't exercise your options on that 2%, I won't have to give you a bad reference.")
Finance is harder to get into, but once you're in, you have a certain status that Silicon Valley just doesn't give to engineers except for a couple hundred with international reputations.
There's also much better career planning in finance. Don't make any obvious wrong moves and you will move forward. It might not happen as fast as you'd like, and you probably won't get to the $50M net worth level, but you can make a decent life for yourself and you won't be tossed out like yesterday's garbage at age 40.
Finance does have a lot of job volatility. The business is cyclical and layoffs happen. That said, so do startups. Finance compensates you for this risk by (a) compensating you well, and (b) being professional about it when layoffs happen, so your reputation is intact. The slimy tech companies, on the other hand, don't compensate your risk except with platitudes about "changing the world" and, when times are bad for them, hide layoffs with stack ranking and dishonest PIPs.
I will probably try to go back into finance in a year or so, honestly. (I'm already putting out feelers.) Tech is a nice idea, but the software industry, as it actually is with the "agile" micromanagement and the stupid startups and the general incompetence of its upper management (I won't call them "leadership" because they're not) is basically a waste of time for talent. At banks, I know that many of the MDs are at or above my talent level, and that almost all of them worked really hard to get there. Non-techs (including executives) in tech companies are basically 95% morons because the capable non-techs generally have better options in other industries.
It's hard to go back to finance, from startups, because the typical startup CV has a high jobs-to-years ratio and finance is still pretty bigoted about "job hoppers". (Finance is meritocratic once you're in, if you get a good job, but getting in can be a hassle.) In startups, one job per 2 years is normal; in finance, it fucks you in the ass if you change jobs that often.
What did you do in finance? I'm guessing trading? It seems like it's a rather hard field to break into, as you've mentioned. I remember reading that even for people coming out of Harvard Business School only a few make it into trading.
Regardless, that's a small subset of finance jobs, no? What I've read about the investment banker side is that the job is absolutely dreadful; if you get into private equity, it gets better, but you're still working like a dog generally. Also, sans trading, the jobs tend to require a very different type of person than your typical software engineer. As you move up, your sales/pitch skills become more and more important, as your ability to win clients/deals for the firm is what brings in revenue, not your ability to use excel.
Quant trader. It was fun. That said, I'm more suited for programming and quant work than for "guts and glory" trading, especially now that I'm older. I don't think I could ever work a floor.
I remember reading that even for people coming out of Harvard Business School only a few make it into trading.
Business school is about connections, but you need smarts to be a quant or a trader, and I'm still smarter than 99% of the people at HBS. I don't have the connections to get a Partner job at Sequoia, but I have the raw ability that most of those people don't have.
What I've read about the investment banker side is that the job is absolutely dreadful
Entry-level (analyst) jobs are pretty awful, and the hours are inhuman. It gets better as you move up the ranks. MDs work 9-to-6. VPs and EDs work 8-to-7, and there's enough status to the job (and the work is usually interesting, at that level) that it isn't so bad.
As you move up, your sales/pitch skills become more and more important, as your ability to win clients/deals for the firm is what brings in revenue, not your ability to use excel.
There's some of that everywhere. We failed at keeping politics out, at high levels, in the Valley. It's just hard to make merit matter more than being well-liked no matter what industry you're in. I don't know of any industry that has figured that problem out.
Looking for a C# web development role with ASP.NET MVC. I have more than 3.5 years of experience developing software with .NET stack, from desktop apps (WinForms), to web apps (ASP.NET MVC) that utilized machine learning methods (R, R.NET) and SOA-based services (WCF, Web-services). All of it was done in the context of working for a financial services software provider, so I also have a lot of domain knowledge of how financial industry operates.
PS: I'm also open to learning another stack, if given the oppurtunity to learn it (especially Python/Django).
Officials now believe most likely location for MH370 is on land near Chinese/Kyrgyz border.[1]
If this holds true, then the most likely perpetrators are Uyghur separatists. But this begs the question, how did they manage to evade being detected by the numerous radars?
They probably were detected by radar, but geopolitics means few countries will admit they were able to detect it to avoid revealing military capabilities.
If you'd like to read a more substantiated account about the pace of development of modern society I suggest that you rather read this: http://hanson.gmu.edu/bigthing.pdf
Thanks