Facebook pay no Corporation Tax AGAIN
Discussion
Rovinghawk said:
OK- let's try a reasoned debate.
I claim my expenses against my income to mitigate my tax liabilities. Examples are train fares, mileage expenses, tools, etc.
I also tax-deduct my pension contributions.
All these are tax avoidance; please tell me what is morally wrong in what I have done.
They aren't all tax avoidance.I claim my expenses against my income to mitigate my tax liabilities. Examples are train fares, mileage expenses, tools, etc.
I also tax-deduct my pension contributions.
All these are tax avoidance; please tell me what is morally wrong in what I have done.
Deducting your expenses from your income is simply how you arrive at your taxable profit. If you didn't do it then you would be wrong in tax law (and in theory HMRC have an obligation to correct your tax filing).
Paying into a pension could be termed tax avoidance.
Avoidance is something you choose to do which tax law doesn't require you to do e.g. pension payment, ISA investment.
Rather than b
hing about avoidance, morals etc, isn't it simply the case of HMRC make the rules, and can change the rules. If what FB are doing is wrong, then they simply change the rules to say...
From tax year 2015/16 <insert FB tax avoidance method here> is no longer tax decutable in the UK.
If they don't tackle it, then there is nothing to moan about.
hing about avoidance, morals etc, isn't it simply the case of HMRC make the rules, and can change the rules. If what FB are doing is wrong, then they simply change the rules to say...From tax year 2015/16 <insert FB tax avoidance method here> is no longer tax decutable in the UK.
If they don't tackle it, then there is nothing to moan about.
Rovinghawk said:
CamMoreRon said:
Clearly a typo then, wasn't it?
I have to go by what you actually write as opposed to putting words into your mouth by presuming what you might mean.Anything else would be amoral & unfair.
Although if you can't decipher context to isolate a typo.. perhaps not.
CamMoreRon said:
Majority are R&D or PD, with manufacturing offshore to take advantage of cheap labour.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/10/01/uk-pmi-manufacturing-britain-idUKKCN0HQ3E920141001Just to explain in simple terms, a PMI rating above 50 means manufacturing is expanding. The UK has been above 50 for quite some time now, yet high tax economies, such as France, have been well below 50 for an equal amount of time. Now why do you suppose that is?
CamMoreRon said:
I think tax competition is inherently bad, but that is my personal opinion. I don't think meaningful revenue is created in tax havens; it serves only to benefit the few directly involved.
You do realise that a tax haven is simply a place with lower taxes than somewhere else right? To a wealthy Frenchman the UK is a tax haven. Do you think politicians would like to raise taxes in the UK? What do you think is stopping them? You don't seem to believe that people and businesses would up sticks and leave the UK to escape your punitive tax rates. They do. Your flirtation with 50% income tax permanently lowered your tax base, I know a dozen people who said fvck it, enough is enough. bodhi said:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/10/01/uk-pmi-ma...
Just to explain in simple terms, a PMI rating above 50 means manufacturing is expanding. The UK has been above 50 for quite some time now, yet high tax economies, such as France, have been well below 50 for an equal amount of time. Now why do you suppose that is?
Interesting.. so we have a 1.6% majority that think manufacturing is improving.Just to explain in simple terms, a PMI rating above 50 means manufacturing is expanding. The UK has been above 50 for quite some time now, yet high tax economies, such as France, have been well below 50 for an equal amount of time. Now why do you suppose that is?
But am I right in thinking that this isn't indicative of anything other than how the manufacturing industry thinks they are doing? Like a self-assessment? I mean.. it doesn't demonstrate anything to do with how many manufacturing jobs there are vs how many there were 10.. 20.. 30 years ago. It just seems like a metric to make people think "oh yeah.. things aren't that bad" when they complain about not being able to get a manufacturing job.
Maybe I'm just being dismissive, but that metric seems to be devoid of any context.
ETA: Yes that does seem very dismissive!
I'm happy to admit I don't see any context here because I have absolutely no idea what PMI is, other than a quick skim of Wikipedia. If you can explain to me why it's relevant that would be very nice.
Edited by CamMoreRon on Friday 24th October 14:58
CamMoreRon said:
Interesting.. so we have a 1.6% majority that think manufacturing is improving.
But am I right in thinking that this isn't indicative of anything other than how the manufacturing industry thinks they are doing? Like a self-assessment? I mean.. it doesn't demonstrate anything to do with how many manufacturing jobs there are vs how many there were 10.. 20.. 30 years ago. It just seems like a metric to make people think "oh yeah.. things aren't that bad" when they complain about not being able to get a manufacturing job.
Maybe I'm just being dismissive, but that metric seems to be devoid of any context.
Jesus Christ. You never heard of PMI before did you?But am I right in thinking that this isn't indicative of anything other than how the manufacturing industry thinks they are doing? Like a self-assessment? I mean.. it doesn't demonstrate anything to do with how many manufacturing jobs there are vs how many there were 10.. 20.. 30 years ago. It just seems like a metric to make people think "oh yeah.. things aren't that bad" when they complain about not being able to get a manufacturing job.
Maybe I'm just being dismissive, but that metric seems to be devoid of any context.
CamMoreRon said:
it doesn't demonstrate anything to do with how many manufacturing jobs there are vs how many there were 10.. 20.. 30 years ago.
30 years ago isn't relevant- it's what we do now that matters.What we do now is better than most of Europe & gradually improving. Based on that, I suggest we leave business alone & don't try to impose 'fair' taxation (whatever that is).
turbobloke said:
DonnyMac said:
turbobloke said:
How much taxable-in-the-UK profit did FB generate?
None, because they say they're sales people arn't selling - all the paperwork is done in Eire.Cheeky, cheeky.
If HMRC want to fight it, they can. I imagine if they do, and the ultimate decision is that there is UK profit to be taxed, then FB will pay. At the moment the position would appear to be lawful which is all that matters.
At least the government can't waste what it never had.
CamMoreRon said:
bodhi said:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/10/01/uk-pmi-ma...
Just to explain in simple terms, a PMI rating above 50 means manufacturing is expanding. The UK has been above 50 for quite some time now, yet high tax economies, such as France, have been well below 50 for an equal amount of time. Now why do you suppose that is?
Interesting.. so we have a 1.6% majority that think manufacturing is improving.Just to explain in simple terms, a PMI rating above 50 means manufacturing is expanding. The UK has been above 50 for quite some time now, yet high tax economies, such as France, have been well below 50 for an equal amount of time. Now why do you suppose that is?
But am I right in thinking that this isn't indicative of anything other than how the manufacturing industry thinks they are doing? Like a self-assessment? I mean.. it doesn't demonstrate anything to do with how many manufacturing jobs there are vs how many there were 10.. 20.. 30 years ago. It just seems like a metric to make people think "oh yeah.. things aren't that bad" when they complain about not being able to get a manufacturing job.
Maybe I'm just being dismissive, but that metric seems to be devoid of any context.
oyster said:
turbobloke said:
DonnyMac said:
turbobloke said:
How much taxable-in-the-UK profit did FB generate?
None, because they say they're sales people arn't selling - all the paperwork is done in Eire.Cheeky, cheeky.
If HMRC want to fight it, they can. I imagine if they do, and the ultimate decision is that there is UK profit to be taxed, then FB will pay. At the moment the position would appear to be lawful which is all that matters.
At least the government can't waste what it never had.
turbobloke said:
Here's to a diverse and robust economy.
Hear, hear! So, err.. when's that one coming? Because the last time I checked, the economy was circling the drain after one of the biggest financial disasters in history - itself due to an unstable and unsustainable economic ideal.
CamMoreRon said:
turbobloke said:
Here's to a diverse and robust economy.
Hear, hear! So, err.. when's that one coming? Because the last time I checked, the economy was circling the drain after one of the biggest financial disasters in history - itself due to an unstable and unsustainable economic ideal.
CamMoreRon said:
OH MY GOD. The engineer has no previous interest in abstract economic metrics.
I hang my head in shame.
You're the one angrily demanding a sensible reasoned debate about a subject you evidently know nothing what so ever about. Perhaps you should tell us about engineering instead? Let's put it like this; talking to you about economics and finance is like you trying to explain how a rocket works to someone who doesn't beleive in Newtons laws.I hang my head in shame.
fblm MEng
This is quite simple to nail down.
General position of profits, taxes and spending.
1. My business, my profit, my money.
2. Extortion by law - justified by saving the planet, children, morality blah blah blah
3. Extorted money (mine) used to give free st in exchange for votes - no national vision or end result except getting power back in 5 years.
Ideal position of profits, taxes, spending
1. My business, my profit, my money.
2. Extortion by law rates limited to % of total budget in each extortion category.
3. Total budget determined by 10 year vision of country and lowest level of state beaurucracy.
4. spending in each category of basic state service to be allocated as a % of corresponding extortion category.(eg. majority of road taxes to be spent on transport infrastructure)
IF anyone wants to save the planet, children, moral conscience etc - donate to charity. Dont get extorted for it!
General position of profits, taxes and spending.
1. My business, my profit, my money.
2. Extortion by law - justified by saving the planet, children, morality blah blah blah
3. Extorted money (mine) used to give free s
t in exchange for votes - no national vision or end result except getting power back in 5 years.Ideal position of profits, taxes, spending
1. My business, my profit, my money.
2. Extortion by law rates limited to % of total budget in each extortion category.
3. Total budget determined by 10 year vision of country and lowest level of state beaurucracy.
4. spending in each category of basic state service to be allocated as a % of corresponding extortion category.(eg. majority of road taxes to be spent on transport infrastructure)
IF anyone wants to save the planet, children, moral conscience etc - donate to charity. Dont get extorted for it!
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/dec/19/hm...
There was an interesting exchange between Hodge and Hamer on this matter.
Hamer will not pursue those who Hodge wishes to, since in her opinion (which I tend to agree with) expenditure on legal fees would be a waste of taxpayers money while current international tax legislation is in place.
Responsibility lies with HMG to negotiate revised legislation in the international community - which is no easy matter.
Of course, multinationals may be swayed by public opinion on such matters - since they may be sensitive to revenue reduction!
There was an interesting exchange between Hodge and Hamer on this matter.
Hamer will not pursue those who Hodge wishes to, since in her opinion (which I tend to agree with) expenditure on legal fees would be a waste of taxpayers money while current international tax legislation is in place.
Responsibility lies with HMG to negotiate revised legislation in the international community - which is no easy matter.
Of course, multinationals may be swayed by public opinion on such matters - since they may be sensitive to revenue reduction!
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff