How would you feel about paying 15% more for your online goods?

If these loophole were closed then corporation tax wouldn't be a problem. But members of the Government use these same loopholes for their own profit and its well known that they do.

So why would they close them!?!?!? The average Joe complaining about corporation tax isnt going to make a difference.
 
dLockers said:
Why isn't the headline 'EU to ban shuffling through tax haven' rather than increase tax to 15%? It is just political pandering.
Click to expand...

Because this is just a first step to actually get all the major Western economies sat at the table and agreeing that that tackling multinational tax avoidance is in all their benefits.
 
mid_gen said:
Because this is just a first step to actually get all the major Western economies sat at the table and agreeing that that tackling multinational tax avoidance is in all their benefits.
Click to expand...
Lol. We want to stop big companies avoiding tax so let's have a chat about raising tax? No wonder the EU project is failing. Surely closing tax avoidance would mean they could lower the effective rate, and still be better off in terms of net receipts.
 
There has to be some action when companies like amazon, m$, apple etc complete their yearly tax return and on the billions of pounds they make, end up only paying the same as Mike the fishmonger in billingsgate market.

If they all got thumped with a flat % to fess up just for the short term, it would probably wipe off more debt than you could imagine instantly.
 
Firstly its a tax on profits, not revenue, so even if the companies impacted by the tax tried to pass the cost to the customer it wouldn't add 15% to the sales price of the goods. Secondly the passing on of increased corporation taxes (in contrast to sales/indirect taxes) by increasing the sales price of goods is pretty unconvential so I can't see that happening on a widespread scale. It also wouldn't make much sense for the likes of Amazon to do so given their model of being the cheapest (or close to cheapest) retailer of the products they sell.

Tefal said:
Can't see Luxembourg every agreeing to closing these loop holes and as the EU is a unanimous system can't see it ever happwbing
Click to expand...

Whilst changing the EU's tax rules requires a unanimous vote there are many other laws the EU can change with just a simple majority. As such if the rest of the EU want tax rules changed it would not be wise of Luxembourg to drag their heels since the EU could simply introduce legislation that harms Luxembourg (for example increasing funds regulation - a big industry for Luxembourg). This is why we've already seen significant tax reform in the EU in recent years (in particular see ATAD 1 & 2), which the likes of Luxembourg and Ireland voted for despite it harming their Internationally competitive tax systems.
 
Joe Blow agreeing to more taxes is like turkeys voting for Christmas.

How about the government ensure tax is collected correctly AND not squandered? Crazy idea, I know.
 
Force companies to pay a tax in the location that the sale is made.

Easier said than done sadly but how things should be.

In the mean time, there are government committees looking into forcing online retailers to charge the "true" cost of delivery and return which would significantly impact the attraction of online shopping. The argument is that all these online deliveries are harmful to the environment.
 
mid_gen said:
They channeled 300+ billion dollars of profits through Bermuda and paid no tax on it.

Luxembourg and Ireland will moan but if the USA, UK, Germany, Italy, France actually get serious they will fall in line.
Click to expand...

again they won’t because of the stock market and too many powerful people will lose billions.

and it is a fair playing field for all businesses. You can also set up the same schemes if you so chose.
 
Put a tax on Amazon profits on sales in UK. They do, I believe, tax on where profits get "landed" so that tends to be US where they own it or Eire where the Govt do them a deal (like with Apple).

Govt should tackle taxing big tech but they dont cos they know the influence the big tech will have on NEXT election. Same sort of reason politicians never REALLY tackle the pension crisis that is imminent
 
JudgeDeath said:
Put a tax on Amazon profits on sales in UK. They do, I believe, tax on where profits get "landed" so that tends to be US where they own it or Eire where the Govt do them a deal (like with Apple).

Govt should tackle taxing big tech but they dont cos they know the influence the big tech will have on NEXT election. Same sort of reason politicians never REALLY tackle the pension crisis that is imminent
Click to expand...
I don't think you know what 'profit' actually means.
 
Reuben klang said:
again they won’t because of the stock market and too many powerful people will lose billions.

and it is a fair playing field for all businesses. You can also set up the same schemes if you so chose.
Click to expand...

'because of the stock market' isn't a good argument.

It is not a level playing field....because multinationals have tax advantages that aren't available to domestic businesses.
 
Obviously the biggest issue is brand licensing fees and the transfer of those to countries in which those brands reside purely for tax purposes. Brand equity is frankly being overvalued for the most part.
 
SpeedFreak said:
Obviously the biggest issue is brand licensing fees and the transfer of those to countries in which those brands reside purely for tax purposes. Brand equity is frankly being overvalued for the most part.
Click to expand...
Explain why this is obvious :p
 
mid_gen said:
'because of the stock market' isn't a good argument.

It is not a level playing field....because multinationals have tax advantages that aren't available to domestic businesses.
Click to expand...

It is.

It is a level field. Even if you got Amazon (or others) to incorporate solely in the UK as an LTD they’d just offset all the profits in some form whether it’d be owing to another UK company that they rent the buildings or another that abroad. Every UK company can legally do the same.

There isn’t really an easy way at all to get business to pay tax, especially those who have the means to pay accounts and lawyers big bucks to find legal ways. That’s the only difference, they are just better at playing the game, the same game everyone is playing. To make money.
 
mid_gen said:
It's baffling how many people are against having a level playing field for business.
Click to expand...

Indeed...

Psycho Sonny said:
Because they have a better set up and team of accountants and tax experts than what you do?

They are paying what they are legally obliged to do so. No more no less like everyone else should also be doing.
Click to expand...

No, everyone should be paying the correct amount of tax to contribute to the wealth of the country they are trading in, where they can still make a fortune. I don't have a problem paying the tax, I'm not looking for loopholes - as long as it's a fair playing field.

Why does a company with a net worth of £315 billion need to save a few billion quid here and there?
 
Reuben klang said:
It is.

It is a level field. Even if you got Amazon (or others) to incorporate solely in the UK as an LTD they’d just offset all the profits in some form whether it’d be owing to another UK company that they rent the buildings or another that abroad. Every UK company can legally do the same.

There isn’t really an easy way at all to get business to pay tax, especially those who have the means to pay accounts and lawyers big bucks to find legal ways. That’s the only difference, they are just better at playing the game, the same game everyone is playing. To make money.
Click to expand...

Surely that's the problem and what makes it unfair? These companies are able to do it to an extent that no one else can because they can afford to spend vast amounts of money solely on avoiding tax.
 
explicit4u said:
Surely that's the problem and what makes it unfair? These companies are able to do it to an extent that no one else can because they can afford to spend vast amounts of money solely on avoiding tax.
Click to expand...

I don’t see how it’s unfair. It’s all legal. They started from nothing, built up and got to that level. The same level every single company/business wants to get to.

At the end of the day, spend £10 on accountants/lawyers etc or £100 on taxes. You’re going to pick the former. Same with sole traders, putting everything through the business. Or the local pub being rented to the pubs property devision. It’s all swings and roundabouts as far as I’m concerned just on a bigger scale but all the same in relative terms.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom