Should billionaires and multinationals pay fair tax?

Doggit said:
Why not just say that profits made in a country, has to be taxed in that country, and nt transferred to anther countrys "head office".
Click to expand...

What a good idea

View attachment 127677 JohnD, 28 Sep 2017

fairtaxation-jpg.127677


JohnD said:
there is a move afoot to be less lenient with tax-dodging millionaires and multinationals gaming the tax systems of various countries.

Some of the tax havens are resistant to it because they make a profit at the expense of other countries. To our shame, Theresa threatened the EU that she would do the same.

This kind of reform will only work if the major countries concerned act together.

The next UK government might be less tolerant of tax-dodging billionaires. Can you guess why?

Furthermore, although the UK currently intends to give up its vote and its voice in the debating chamber, much of Europe is also moving towards reform. Let's hope that we can fit in with whatever they decide.

View attachment 127677
Click to expand...

Judy in the sky said:
Apparently a lot of these "Tax Avoidance" schemes are quite legal. Companies employ accountants to save them money legally. It's tax rules that need changing. (and you can bet your last penny that if the big companies are getting away with it, then a lot of smaller companies are too).
Click to expand...
yep

vinty said:
I don't normally have anything positive to say about the EU but they do have point when it comes to tax dodging by multinationals.
Click to expand...
yep


Notch7 said:
I fully agree, the tax rules need changing as well as the deals that are done with these businesses

Where wealthy business owners are able to influence political decisions to allow them avoid paying the right amount of tax, laws must be changed to prevent it happening.
Click to expand...
yep
 
Doggit said:
Why not just say that profits made in a country, has to be taxed in that country.
Click to expand...
It's not clear to me why profits should be directly taxed at all. Looking at profits as simply the wages of stakeholders, if you tax all wages -wherever those wages happen to come from is irrelevant-, then those profits will ultimately and indirectly be taxed.
 
Paying tax according to economic activity already exists - its is basically VAT.

The problem of course with non-physical things (e.g. IP) is that you cannot easily say where the economic activity is.

If I sit in my bedroom in England, writing software on servers in the US for a business in France, using tools developed in china, who integrates that to their own offering on servers in germany for sale to business consumers who will use my embedded works, which may well include the embedded works of others. How should I pay tax to the applicable country that uses my product when I have no say in the final price of my product and indeed how / who may use it.

In today's world micro services (small bits of work contributing to larger bits) dominates the creation of IP. Its hard enough to establish copyright pedigree on these works let alone track where the economic activity is (and does that mean consumer? coder? profit maker?)

Not to mention that there is no frigging appetite for this among the havens.

I can see companies basically ending up making a statement of where the economic activity is for a given product.
 
JohnD said:
They will when they are required to pay tax as a condition of doing business here.

Like everyone else.
Click to expand...

I was commenting on your implication that Murdoch Corp would have some sort of moral dilemma. I thought that, as they have no morals, that was doubtful.
 
indeed.

I meant their position is clearly unjustifiable.
 
motorbiking said:
... That would of course give big companies an advantage over small companies, but if you moved all corporation tax to something as low as 15%, to better compete with the EU tax havens, then lots and lots of PAYE based employees would incorporate to dodge paying 45%.
Click to expand...
:confused:
If the EU tax havens have such an advantage, why are the likes of Apple, Google, Amazon et al not using Bulgaria, Montenegro, Macedonia, Hungary etc?



motorbiking said:
At 15%, I think we'd have a decent chance of off-setting the short term brexit downsides.
...
Click to expand...
We would have to go below Ireland's 12.5%.
But why is Germany doing so well with a rate of 23 - 33%?
 
wannabeDIY said:
:confused:
If the EU tax havens have such an advantage, why are the likes of Apple, Google, Amazon et al not using Bulgaria, Montenegro, Macedonia, Hungary etc?




We would have to go below Ireland's 12.5%.
But why is Germany doing so well with a rate of 23 - 33%?
Click to expand...

Why to both points?
 
Lack of business Infrastructure - is the main reason, but corruption, economic stability and basically access to a multi-lingual talent pool.
 
wannabeDIY said:
:confused:
If the EU tax havens have such an advantage, why are the likes of Apple, Google, Amazon et al not using Bulgaria, Montenegro, Macedonia, Hungary etc?

We would have to go below Ireland's 12.5%.
But why is Germany doing so well with a rate of 23 - 33%?
Click to expand...

motorbiking said:
Lack of business Infrastructure - is the main reason, but corruption, economic stability and basically access to a multi-lingual talent pool.
Click to expand...
So if UK reduced the corporation tax, you now suggest that the firms would not relocate because of the "Lack of business Infrastructure - ... corruption, economic stability and ... access to a multi-lingual talent pool."
Thus, if UK reduced its corporation tax, all that would happen is that the UK corporation tax returns would be less?
It is highly unlikely that more companies would relocate to UK post Brexit. Probably the reverse would be true. We already know that the services sector is preparing to move some operations abroad, which has nothing to do with corporation tax.

Additionally, why is Germany doing so well, with a rate of 23 - 33%?
Perhaps the solution is far more complex than the simplistic answer of reducing corporation tax?
 
Nope - the UK would pull business from lesser EU tax havens even though they might offer better tax incentives. The UK has other strings to its bow (as stated) which means it wont be a straightforward price to bottom fight. However, the bigger the differential, the harder it is to value the softer benefits. There is absolutely no reason other than tax and freebies for any of the Big US high techs to base their EU sales/shipping out of Dublin.

Regarding Germany - I'm not sure you properly understand their tax system. There are several articles that suggest Germany has plenty of cash backs and discount:
https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/global/Documents/Tax/dttl-tax-corporate-tax-rates.pdf
 
motorbiking said:
Nope - the UK would pull business from lesser EU tax havens even though they might offer better tax incentives.
Click to expand...
What businesses?

motorbiking said:
The UK has other strings to its bow (as stated) which means it wont be a straightforward price to bottom fight. However, the bigger the differential, the harder it is to value the softer benefits.
Click to expand...
"Lack of business Infrastructure - is the main reason, but corruption, economic stability and basically access to a multi-lingual talent pool."
You would think that these 'soft benefits' would be sufficient to offset any differential.
Hang on a minute, you have forgotten the other 'soft benefit': being able to trade within EU. So France, Germany has all these 'soft benefits', but with high taxes.
Of course the businesses could just stay where they are and still have all the 'soft benefits'. These low tax countries are not so far away from France, Germany, et al.

motorbiking said:
There is absolutely no reason other than tax and freebies for any of the Big US high techs to base their EU sales/shipping out of Dublin.
Click to expand...
So they will not be moving to UK post Brexit?
The same applies to those moving from eastern Europe. They could move to Dublin and retain their EU trading advantages.

motorbiking said:
Regarding Germany - I'm not sure you properly understand their tax system. There are several articles that suggest Germany has plenty of cash backs and discount:
https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/global/Documents/Tax/dttl-tax-corporate-tax-rates.pdf
Click to expand...
I am not sure you read your reference.
From your link
Germany:
upload_2017-10-6_9-31-24.png
 
wannabeDIY said:
What businesses?


"Lack of business Infrastructure - is the main reason, but corruption, economic stability and basically access to a multi-lingual talent pool."
You would think that these 'soft benefits' would be sufficient to offset any differential.
Hang on a minute, you have forgotten the other 'soft benefit': being able to trade within EU. So France, Germany has all these 'soft benefits', but with high taxes.
Of course the businesses could just stay where they are and still have all the 'soft benefits'. These low tax countries are not so far away from France, Germany, et al.


So they will not be moving to UK post Brexit?
The same applies to those moving from eastern Europe. They could move to Dublin and retain their EU trading advantages.


I am not sure you read your reference.
From your link
Germany:
View attachment 128123
Click to expand...

30% to 33%? To pay for Jeremy 'I want to nationalise everything' Corbyn it'll need to be nearer 90% :)
 
nice to see notch is still making up nonsense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top