A superb Speech and Vow by Cameron well above expectations
Discussion
CamMoreRon said:
This is a fair point.. Vodafone have built an infrastructure in the form of phone networks. However, I struggle to see how that justifies tax avoidance on their scale.
There's the flip side mentioned above whereby they paid a phenomenal amount for a simple licence, effectively a tax the government created.However, moving on, I fail to see where the avoidance is on an unfair scale. What I see, time and time again are financial statements quoted out of context and spat out by people who simply do not understand.
Right this second, I have a set of financial statements on my desk where the profit and loss account shows a profit of £155k. Tax? £31k right? (20% corp tax) nope. £13k. This is because the company bought a couple of nice shiny new JCBs that don't appear on those particular pages. Is that legitimate? Is that unfair? Of course not.
XYX PLC make £100m but paid no tax the rotters.
XYZ PLC make £100m but paid no tax due to investing in large plant & machinery that didn't appear on a particular page we were looking at.
The rags can and do report utter b
ks every day. They don't care about the details, they want to sell papers and the headlines are what they are. The devil is in the detail.Labour introduced the R&D tax credit, allowing businesses to save substantial sums of money in exchange for pouring resources into furthering technology knowledge in the UK (a good thing right?) it's 'cost' the UK billions in tax receipts. Who decides whether that is avoidance and whether that is unfair? It's a balance between furthering the UK as a knowledge base in areas and encouraging external investment and the cost of doing that.
dirty boy said:
There's the flip side mentioned above whereby they paid a phenomenal amount for a simple licence, effectively a tax the government created.
However, moving on, I fail to see where the avoidance is on an unfair scale. What I see, time and time again are financial statements quoted out of context and spat out by people who simply do not understand.
Right this second, I have a set of financial statements on my desk where the profit and loss account shows a profit of £155k. Tax? £31k right? (20% corp tax) nope. £13k. This is because the company bought a couple of nice shiny new JCBs that don't appear on those particular pages. Is that legitimate? Is that unfair? Of course not.
XYX PLC make £100m but paid no tax the rotters.
XYZ PLC make £100m but paid no tax due to investing in large plant & machinery that didn't appear on a particular page we were looking at.
The rags can and do report utter bks every day. They don't care about the details, they want to sell papers and the headlines are what they are. The devil is in the detail.
Labour introduced the R&D tax credit, allowing businesses to save substantial sums of money in exchange for pouring resources into furthering technology knowledge in the UK (a good thing right?) it's 'cost' the UK billions in tax receipts. Who decides whether that is avoidance and whether that is unfair? It's a balance between furthering the UK as a knowledge base in areas and encouraging external investment and the cost of doing that.
No, of course that is fair! But that differs to..However, moving on, I fail to see where the avoidance is on an unfair scale. What I see, time and time again are financial statements quoted out of context and spat out by people who simply do not understand.
Right this second, I have a set of financial statements on my desk where the profit and loss account shows a profit of £155k. Tax? £31k right? (20% corp tax) nope. £13k. This is because the company bought a couple of nice shiny new JCBs that don't appear on those particular pages. Is that legitimate? Is that unfair? Of course not.
XYX PLC make £100m but paid no tax the rotters.
XYZ PLC make £100m but paid no tax due to investing in large plant & machinery that didn't appear on a particular page we were looking at.
The rags can and do report utter b
ks every day. They don't care about the details, they want to sell papers and the headlines are what they are. The devil is in the detail.Labour introduced the R&D tax credit, allowing businesses to save substantial sums of money in exchange for pouring resources into furthering technology knowledge in the UK (a good thing right?) it's 'cost' the UK billions in tax receipts. Who decides whether that is avoidance and whether that is unfair? It's a balance between furthering the UK as a knowledge base in areas and encouraging external investment and the cost of doing that.
"The firm was desperate to keep secret its profit figures in the UK, but was forced to disclose the details to MPs. It emerged it made £74million in pre-tax profit in 2011, a figure never before released, but paid just £1.8million to the taxman – a rate of just 2.4 per cent.
It made sales of £3.35billion from its UK operations but the money is passed over to Luxembourg. It admitted to using the tiny state as a base for its European operations due to the favourable tax rate.
It tried to claim Luxembourg, where it employs 500 people, is the real ‘engine’ of the business, rather than the UK, where it employs 15,000.
The UK is registered as a service arm even though many of its distribution facilities – and customers – are located here."
CamMoreRon said:
I think for the purpose of explaining exactly why I so strongly object to the government's policies, I'll draw a simple analogy that everyone can understand:
Imagine you own a business, called United Kingdom, and you are struggling to turn a profit year after year. Your first reaction was to try and force your major suppliers - the NHS - to be more efficient and reduce the amount of money they cost you, but in doing so it is quickly becoming apparent that your pressurisation has compromised the service they give you, and they are unable to operate under such conditions.
Then, somebody walks in the door and takes a look at your books. They notice that you have a huge amount of smaller suppliers whose numbers don't quite add up.. you can see how much they are charged, how much value they add, and how much they are charging you, and that there is a large discrepancy between the values. This person points out that if you were to start paying attention to them instead you would not only be able to ease up on the struggling main supplier, but also start making a positive balance, and therefore be able to invest / develop and pay your staff a little more?
What do you do? Do you continue to tell your now failing main supplier that they have to shape up or you will divvy up their services to several smaller suppliers (who will actually cost you more) or do you start ringing round the cheaters and tell them they're taking the piss and you won't stand for it?
I know which I would do if I was running the business!
I hope that isn't too abstract to understand the references.
I remember this time! Imagine you own a business, called United Kingdom, and you are struggling to turn a profit year after year. Your first reaction was to try and force your major suppliers - the NHS - to be more efficient and reduce the amount of money they cost you, but in doing so it is quickly becoming apparent that your pressurisation has compromised the service they give you, and they are unable to operate under such conditions.
Then, somebody walks in the door and takes a look at your books. They notice that you have a huge amount of smaller suppliers whose numbers don't quite add up.. you can see how much they are charged, how much value they add, and how much they are charging you, and that there is a large discrepancy between the values. This person points out that if you were to start paying attention to them instead you would not only be able to ease up on the struggling main supplier, but also start making a positive balance, and therefore be able to invest / develop and pay your staff a little more?
What do you do? Do you continue to tell your now failing main supplier that they have to shape up or you will divvy up their services to several smaller suppliers (who will actually cost you more) or do you start ringing round the cheaters and tell them they're taking the piss and you won't stand for it?
I know which I would do if I was running the business!
I hope that isn't too abstract to understand the references.
Yes, my first effort was to try to get my major cost centres under control and to examine their budgets carefully for waste. . Sadly when I approached the NHS to do this they were not interested, preferring instead to rely on their monopoly position in the market to resist any changes or suggestions that would have allowed for more efficient use of funds allocated.
The NHS underpinned their intransigence by waging an absolutely fantastic "hearts and minds" PR campaign with both my employees and customers. I say fantastic because it was quite incredible how they managed to convince so many people that so much chronic waste and poor standards and poor value for money was actually something of which they should be proud and which I should be pouring all the company's precious resources into - including those resources that I had allocated to improve staff conditions and the competitiveness of the company!
Apparently, efficiency and value for money , not to mention cleanliness, basic provision of care and even ensuring that the NHS was geared towards caring for its patients rather than the people who worked in it, is an evil and unreasonable thing to expect. It is also the case apparently that NO OTHER ORGANISATION can be trusted to deliver those standards of service......
Anyways, this resistance to change at a major cost centre caused me problems elsewhere,because like it or not I had to save money somewhere... So instead I had to cut down on security, staff training and R+D. The problems with this approach was that no sooner had I got rid of my security the burglars came in and stole all my desk top computers, further hindering the business.
The lack of staff training meant that I had to reign in my plans for more complex products with higher margins - I simply did not have the skills available to manufacture them. That said, the more ignorant workforce did seem to be remarkably content with the piss poor service and standards coming from my NHS provider - so perhaps ignorance is bliss?
I also struggled in my vital overseas markets because the lack of R+D meant that my products quickly fell behind in the cut throat markets in which I compete. As a result I eventually had to make quite a lot of people redundant.
Naturally I did also look at the smaller suppliers. In some cases they were actually cheaper, so this seemed to be a good source to cultivate. Sadly again, I was forced to limit my options here because of the NHS PR campaign. "We don't want none of your high quality, value for money services here you muppet - we want everyone to be in the same s
tty state...... it's only fair!!!! " In any event the difference I could make to the overall budget by tinkering with the small suppliers was tiny compared to the impact of the main supplier (NHS) and that had managed to acquire some extraordinary defenders!!Bizarrely, my predecessor in my role had engaged rather more small suppliers than I did, but somehow he forgot this as soon as he left office!! Indeed, he and his supporters continuously barracked me from the sidelines for having so many of these small suppliers, even though they represented such a tiny percentage of the budget! Moreover he kept pointing to the major supplier (the one he had helped to turn into a bloated, wasteful bureaucracy) and claiming that I was responsible for having made it what it was!!! Even more unbelievably a significant number of people actually swallowed that drivel, thereby making my job even more difficult, and further entrenching the resistance to change within the NHS!
Fairness became the new religion... I needed to be fair to everyone it seemed, well everyone except those people that actually paid my wages and bought my goods. Apparently it was fair to expect them to pay ever more for what they received rather than to look at the largest single item in my cost base so that I could reduce costs. My desire to leave the hard working souls who paid for everything with more of their own money in their pockets was misguided! . Perhaps not surprisingly quite a lot of customers did not share the view that they should simply be expected to pay more and decided to go elsewhere, and in doing so I lost not only the extra I had asked them for, but also all the money they had been paying up to that point.
If only I could have persuaded the unenlightened in our midst of the merits of value for money, eliminating waste in major cost centres and delivering the highest levels of customer services then perhaps things would have ended differently, but as it was the whole shoddy edifice came down as people focussed on preserving the NHS as an institution rather than seeking to preserve and improve the services provided for the benefit of patients.
In the end I just got cheese off, I was working 100 hours per week for a wage that did not even match that of the head of a county council and taking shed loads of personal abuse for having had a decent education and for having a few bob in my pocket and for actually expecting people to earn a fair days pay for a fair days labour, rather than just being given anything they wanted, on demand, at somebody (anybody) else's expense.
Apparently, according to popular opinion, the best CEO for this business is an ignorant uneducated no mark without two beans to rub together - at least he would understand the fairness behind taxing anybody and everything as much as possible so that the proceeds can be pissed away in hand outs to the masses, or the defence of gross inefficiencies in key services.
CamMoreRon said:
Yes I'm an Engineer, I work at a major OEM, and have been looking in to running my own business for some time. Congratulations Sherlock on your super-sleuthing adventures!
I'm not claiming to know more than you.. not once have I made that claim. I have simply put across a viewpoint that I have developed based on the understanding I have based on the information I have recieved.
What 'information have you received' that leads you to make the outrageous claims accusing Starbucks, Amazon, Vodafone of tax evasion and fraud?I'm not claiming to know more than you.. not once have I made that claim. I have simply put across a viewpoint that I have developed based on the understanding I have based on the information I have recieved.
My expectation is that you've read a few articles on the internet....
CamMoreRon said:
I am of course open to counter-evidence that makes sense, because I have no loyalty to a "side" and am of a scientific background where you accept the evidence laid before you if it provides an acceptable explanation.
A rationale person (not even a scientist) would suggest that these claims might have been verified by someone who knows what they are doing....CamMoreRon said:
What I am objecting to is this Oxbridge Debating Society mentality you have whereby the first step in providing a counter-point is to undermine the credibility of your "opponent".
I don't need to do this, you do it for me - see most of your earlier posts!CamMoreRon said:
I do not subscribe to this mentality and (as before) I will simply stop engaging with you if this is your only method of discussion. This isn't a debate, it's a discussion.. so I would very much like you to stop the denial and actually provide something of substance. If you want to change my mind rather than just claim I'm wrong, please feel free to say something of relevance.
You've provided zero evidence to support your claims!CamMoreRon said:
Again, I seriously doubt that their margins are that tight. If they are so selfishly obsessed with profits over service that they HAVE to put their prices up above that of the competition, then they will lose business. Their only option would be to 1 - pay tax, and 2 - maintain competitive pricing.
Ah, you're an expert on their business margins and their return on capital requirements too??If you think that you can vastly increase costs to a business and customers won't be affected, then you're dreaming. And you reckon you're going to start your own business?
andymadmak said:
TL;DQ
Yes, all those pesky burglars! I remember them from when they used to have jobs and prospects, but I laid them all off and shut down their industry in favour of lining the pockets of a few of my public school chums! Of course, the majority of which had businesses run in the fantasy world of toxic credit bubbles (incindentally having almost nothing to do with the financial crisis that put me in this tight spot) and the rest shipped their industry over to developing countries where they had a say in tax laws and could exploit cheap labour. God only knows why those miserable sods couldn't just lay down in the gutters and die like a decent sub-human being would! Oh no.. they have to go around committing all sorts of crimes in ther run-down neighbourhoods.. all fuelled on cracked cocaines and marrajewana, no doubt! Bloody no good have-nots spoiling this country for me and my chums, is what they are!
Then, as if stealing all our belongings wasn't enough, the little tykes stop bloody buying all our products once we cut their benefits! I mean.. talk about insult to injury! Makes me sick. This whole country is run by bloody softies. I tell you, this wouldn't have happened in 1940! Ship 'em off on the trains.. shower time, boys! Not our problem any more, thank you very much!
sidicks said:
A bunch of quotes..
Here you go, sausage.. some light reading for you:http://www.taxjustice.net/topics/corporate-tax/
This is one of my sources of information. If you look on the Senior Advisors section (link below) you will see that they are very highly qualified economists, lawyers, barristers.. generally people who can be regarded as knowing what they're on about!
http://www.taxjustice.net/about/who-we-are/senior-...
Still no word on what your qualifications are..
CamMoreRon said:
burwoodman said:
Is that is 'haters gunna hate'? Amazon do not make a profit-fact. No clever accounting in the UK. Their model is selling pound coins for 99p. It's a bad business in my opinion and has put 1000's of profitable businesses out of business. I hate amazon.
Rant on about Apple paying a tiny rate in NI, but you're completely wrong on amazon
Sorry, I thought you were trolling for a moment there.Rant on about Apple paying a tiny rate in NI, but you're completely wrong on amazon
http://www.independent.co.uk/money/tax/amazon-clai...
Probably sums it up quite well.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/may/...
There is no giant sack of gold to tax - in the UK, Luxembourg, the US or anywhere else.
HM
You've read their blog and you think that's evidence of widespread fraud and evasion?? Why don't you point HMRC in the direction of their blog and get them to investigate..?
Simply priceless.
CamMoreRon said:
Here you go, sausage.. some light reading for you:
http://www.taxjustice.net/topics/corporate-tax/
This is one of my sources of information. If you look on the Senior Advisors section (link below) you will see that they are very highly qualified economists, lawyers, barristers.. generally people who can be regarded as knowing what they're on about!
http://www.taxjustice.net/about/who-we-are/senior-...
Still no word on what your qualifications are..
Tax justice....http://www.taxjustice.net/topics/corporate-tax/
This is one of my sources of information. If you look on the Senior Advisors section (link below) you will see that they are very highly qualified economists, lawyers, barristers.. generally people who can be regarded as knowing what they're on about!
http://www.taxjustice.net/about/who-we-are/senior-...
Still no word on what your qualifications are..
You've read their blog and you think that's evidence of widespread fraud and evasion?? Why don't you point HMRC in the direction of their blog and get them to investigate..?
Simply priceless.
Edited by sidicks on Thursday 2nd October 18:45
maffski said:
CamMoreRon said:
burwoodman said:
Is that is 'haters gunna hate'? Amazon do not make a profit-fact. No clever accounting in the UK. Their model is selling pound coins for 99p. It's a bad business in my opinion and has put 1000's of profitable businesses out of business. I hate amazon.
Rant on about Apple paying a tiny rate in NI, but you're completely wrong on amazon
Sorry, I thought you were trolling for a moment there.Rant on about Apple paying a tiny rate in NI, but you're completely wrong on amazon
http://www.independent.co.uk/money/tax/amazon-clai...
Probably sums it up quite well.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/may/...
There is no giant sack of gold to tax - in the UK, Luxembourg, the US or anywhere else.
sidicks said:
Tax justice....
You've read their blog and you think that's'so evidence of widespread fraud and evasion??
Simply priceless.
Pathetic.You've read their blog and you think that's'so evidence of widespread fraud and evasion??
Simply priceless.
I have tried very hard not to resort to insulting you, but you are a prime example of complete and utter ignorance and stupidity.
You haven't even bothered to read one article on that website, you have simply rejected it as a source of information because you are too stubborn and ignorant to listen.
If you had even bothered to skim the list of advisors you might have noticed they probably know what they're talking about, and that maybe you could challenge your view by having a read. But no.
Still no hint at what your qualifications are.. if you have any.
I think you are best off ignored.
The biggest reason I won't vote for Cameron is the mess he has intentionally made of the property market, Help to Buy has just fuelled a house price bubble just as I was in a position to start to look for properties. I have spent almost 5 years saving for nothing as houses have gone up by 35k, well out of my price range, and that was in one of the cheaper areas of Essex.
The 185k properties in my area are now 220k, that in under 2 years. I know of places in Reading that we're bought in 2012 for 290k, now being valued at 375k. All Cameron is doing is putting more props and schemes in place to sustain high house prices.
He has sold out the young families, and those wishing to get on the housing ladder to buy votes from investors, Buy to Let'ers and middle/aged elderly who have houses. Both him and the BofE deny it has caused a bubble, but all the experts were warning of exactly what has happened. That is the most unforgivable thing he has done.
The 185k properties in my area are now 220k, that in under 2 years. I know of places in Reading that we're bought in 2012 for 290k, now being valued at 375k. All Cameron is doing is putting more props and schemes in place to sustain high house prices.
He has sold out the young families, and those wishing to get on the housing ladder to buy votes from investors, Buy to Let'ers and middle/aged elderly who have houses. Both him and the BofE deny it has caused a bubble, but all the experts were warning of exactly what has happened. That is the most unforgivable thing he has done.
CamMoreRon said:
Pathetic.
I have tried very hard not to resort to insulting you, but you are a prime example of complete and utter ignorance and stupidity.
You haven't even bothered to read one article on that website, you have simply rejected it as a source of information because you are too stubborn and ignorant to listen.
That pre-suppose that I'm not already familiar with who TJN are....I have tried very hard not to resort to insulting you, but you are a prime example of complete and utter ignorance and stupidity.
You haven't even bothered to read one article on that website, you have simply rejected it as a source of information because you are too stubborn and ignorant to listen.
CamMoreRon said:
If you had even bothered to skim the list of advisors you might have noticed they probably know what they're talking about, and that maybe you could challenge your view by having a read. But no.
I'm glad you've been suitably impressed by the list of advisors.I couldn't find the blog where they demonstrated proof of tax evasion and fraud by companies fabricating debts (or was that entirely your own work?).
Have you forwarded a link to the blog to HMRC yet? There's probably a reward in it for finding tax evaders....
CamMoreRon said:
Still no hint at what your qualifications are.. if you have any.
I think you are best off ignored.
Please feel free! I can't promise not to comment on the idiocy inherent in many of your posts though!I think you are best off ignored.
Edited by sidicks on Thursday 2nd October 19:30
edh said:
As you're so keen on precise definitions, who are the "non tax payers" ?
I'm not sure why you think I am so keen on precise definitions but I would have thought a reasonable definition of 'non tax payer' would be 'someone who doesn't pay tax'. You're doing a sterling job of looking like an idiot on your own but please don't hesitate to ask more stupid questions and I'll see if I can help. Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 2nd October 19:45
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Agreed. The recent housing bubble is undoubtedly the biggest reason for the economic "recovery". It is only a matter of time until the bubble bursts, but I fear that because this time around it is based on investment rather than toxic credit it will keep swelling until the vast majority are forced out of the market and in to permanent rentals.CamMoreRon said:
andymadmak said:
TL;DQ
Yes, all those pesky burglars! I remember them from when they used to have jobs and prospects, but I laid them all off and shut down their industry in favour of lining the pockets of a few of my public school chums! Of course, the majority of which had businesses run in the fantasy world of toxic credit bubbles (incindentally having almost nothing to do with the financial crisis that put me in this tight spot) and the rest shipped their industry over to developing countries where they had a say in tax laws and could exploit cheap labour. God only knows why those miserable sods couldn't just lay down in the gutters and die like a decent sub-human being would! Oh no.. they have to go around committing all sorts of crimes in ther run-down neighbourhoods.. all fuelled on cracked cocaines and marrajewana, no doubt! Bloody no good have-nots spoiling this country for me and my chums, is what they are!
Then, as if stealing all our belongings wasn't enough, the little tykes stop bloody buying all our products once we cut their benefits! I mean.. talk about insult to injury! Makes me sick. This whole country is run by bloody softies. I tell you, this wouldn't have happened in 1940! Ship 'em off on the trains.. shower time, boys! Not our problem any more, thank you very much!
0000 said:
Which bubble? 2007?
Unfortunately I don't think house prices are going to get much better particularly soon regardless of who gets in. Except the Greens maybe, it'd all be worthless as far as the eye can see then.
That sharp upward trend towards the end of the graph? :PUnfortunately I don't think house prices are going to get much better particularly soon regardless of who gets in. Except the Greens maybe, it'd all be worthless as far as the eye can see then.
Bear in mind that is a graph of national house prices.. does not reflect the current property bubble in the south of England. Got to love statistics!
CamMoreRon said:
If you had even bothered to skim the list of advisors you might have noticed they probably know what they're talking about
Can you provide a link to the bit where any of those eminent advisors accuse said companies of tax evasion and fraud? Appealing to authority only works if they agree with you.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff