Happy New year?

[Tangled up in Blue]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25617844

A Happy New Year to everyone ( but not those on benefits of course)!

 

[MK Shrimper]

To think if they closed up those tax loopholes we'd be in clover.


But they won't.

 

[chapperzUK]

To think if they closed up those tax loopholes we'd be in clover.


But they won't.

Which ones are those?

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Which ones are those?

They're what you guys normally refer to as "agressive tax avoidance" schemes I believe.:winking:

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/...e-tricks-British-celebrities-use-pay-tax.html

Tbf,I imagine MKS was probably thinking about corporate tax avoidance by the likes of Starbucks,Amazon etc too.

 

[Pubey]

Which ones are those?

Ones which allow companies like Amazon to employ 4200 people in the UK, turnover £4.3bn and only pay £2.4m in corporation tax (0.1% of turnover).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22549434

 

[MK Shrimper]

Yep. Amazon/Starbucks etc pay a measly amount of Corporation Tax.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Microsoft (and Bill Gates in particular) are another well known example of corporate tax avoidance.


"In Britain, Microsoft reported revenues of £1.7bn in a single year for online sales on which it paid no corporation tax. This is why if you look at the small print when buying software through its British website, you find you are dealing with a Luxembourg offshoot."

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ches-fighting-poverty-hypocrite-microsoft-tax

http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/...dance-represents-3-5-of-the-world-aid-budget/

 

[chapperzUK]

These aren't just UK loopholes but worldwide ones, if a company is registered in another country they don't pay corporation tax in our one. It is what Apple do I believe, they are registered in Ireland where they charge little tax.

I also wonder how much other taxes these companies pay. 4200 employees in the UK giving people employment in a tough time and paying National Insurance. Turnover of over £4bn, with a fair amount of that subject to VAT too.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

These aren't just UK loopholes but worldwide ones, if a company is registered in another country they don't pay corporation tax in our one. .

Last year's G7 meeting didn't really do anything much about that,though,did it?

http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/article/g7-countries-plan-clampdown-tax-evasion-and-avoidance/541772

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

Microsoft (and Bill Gates in particular) are another well known example of corporate tax evasion.


"In Britain, Microsoft reported revenues of £1.7bn in a single year for online sales on which it paid no corporation tax. This is why if you look at the small print when buying software through its British website, you find you are dealing with a Luxembourg offshoot."

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ches-fighting-poverty-hypocrite-microsoft-tax

http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/...dance-represents-3-5-of-the-world-aid-budget/

If you're linking to the Grauniad as evidence of big companies evading tax, shouldn't you be linking to the Grauniad's own accounts?

 

[Neil_F]

Microsoft (and Bill Gates in particular) are another well known example of corporate tax evasion.

You realise you've just accused one of the biggest companies in the world, with more than a few lawyers I suspect, of illegal activity?

 

[Neil_F]

Yep. Amazon/Starbucks etc pay a measly amount of Corporation Tax.

Measly based on what????

Amazon made a loss globally last year (they are price leading to try to build market share and push competitors in to bankruptcy). Amazon sell products to the UK from Luxembourg (their website and some support staff are employed by an entity registered there) and then fulfill the order from a UK warehouse (for which there is a small charge to the Luxembourg company, which is where the UK profit comes from). The OECD Model double tax treaty specifically states that a warehouse does not give a company sufficient presence in a country to create a corporate tax liability (permanent establishment is the technical term). If you have a problem with it then take it up with the OECD.

Is there any other entirely legal activity you want to object to?

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Needs a change in the law as over here everyone buys from Amazon and if that spending doesn't benefit this country in the way that spending with their rivals does then laws need changing. Aggressive pricing to bankrupt their rivals is of no real benefit to us in the medium and long term.
Can't see why anyone would want to defend them other than their accountants and lawyers.

 

[South Bank Hank]

Ones which allow companies like Amazon to employ 4200 people in the UK, turnover £4.3bn and only pay £2.4m in corporation tax (0.1% of turnover).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22549434

This discussion has come up before and it always amazes me how quickly people gloss over the bit in bold in their rush to get to the bit in red. Corporation tax has always been a bit of a red herring for me. While Amazon should rightly have to justify any tax avoidance practices, they should be equally welcomed for the employment they bring to THOUSANDS of families.

Incidentally... keeping your mind as open as possible, why might a Government (even successive Governments) not shut down every possible legitimate and legal avoidance practice under a knee-jerk 'loophole' argument?

To think if they closed up those tax loopholes we'd be in clover.

But they won't.

Why wouldn't they? I mean, if companies are screwing the system and taking advantage, and it's costing the Government lots of money that it could spend making voters feel more warm and fuzzy about them, why wouldn't they?

 

[South Bank Hank]

Tbf,I imagine MKS was probably thinking about corporate tax evasion by the likes of Starbucks,Amazon etc too.

If I were a Business English teacher, I'd probably want to clarify my understanding of the difference between tax evasion and tax avoidance - for both professional and legal reasons.

 

[steveo]

Microsoft (and Bill Gates in particular) are another well known example of corporate tax evasion.

Yeah, lets slag off the bloke who through his foundation has donated something like $30 billion to charity. *******.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

You realise you've just accused one of the biggest companies in the world, with more than a few lawyers I suspect, of illegal activity?

Sorry, I did of course mean tax avoidance, which while highly unethical is completely legal.:blush:

 

[Pubey]

This discussion has come up before and it always amazes me how quickly people gloss over the bit in bold in their rush to get to the bit in red. Corporation tax has always been a bit of a red herring for me. While Amazon should rightly have to justify any tax avoidance practices, they should be equally welcomed for the employment they bring to THOUSANDS of families.

And what about the national competition that they've steamrollered into bankruptcy who also employed people and paid corporation tax?

I agree it's not black and white, and it's a bit of a cyclical argument (the Scottish govt gave a grant of over £2m for amazon to build a warehouse - we paid them more than they paid us in corporation tax!).

 

[South Bank Hank]

And what about the national competition that they've steamrollered into bankruptcy who also employed people and paid corporation tax?

I agree it's not black and white, and it's a bit of a cyclical argument (the Scottish govt gave a grant of over £2m for amazon to build a warehouse - we paid them more than they paid us in corporation tax!).

You're quite right buddy with both arguments, and that was my only point really. People (even you in this rare instance) sit these things up as if they are a zero sum game. Even the £2m spent building a warehouse will have employed people and generated large amounts of tax revenue. The first question for me is this: on balance, do we wish to welcome Amazon (and others like them) as employers? Successive governments seem to be answering this with a resounding YES.

 

[South Bank Hank]

Sorry, I did of course mean tax evasion, which while highly unethical is completely legal.:blush:

Are you sure?