Jeremy Clarkson suspended by BBC...

[technodup]

Welshbeef said:

As to those who post on an Internet forum about watching stuff online which is subscription only but find ways of never paying for it -- even if you do posting up such things when your IP address and PH if challenged would have to give up your full details isn't the smartest of ideas. Suggest you edit that post before someone.... Quotes it and it's here forever more. .

Quote all you like, watching at a friends house isn't a crime. And if it is it's his crime.

[otolith]

Vincefox said:

fking paparazzi s!

Yeah, knowing that you've been eating that, they're just waiting to snap you in your beachwear and fat-shame you.

[SPS]

Snozzwangler said:

98elise said:

SPS said:

Oh working for Amazon - you know the ones that pay all that tax
Who the hell watches that?
I would rather watch 5th Gear - at least the cars get a look in instead of three middle aged (well one of em is oldish) pissing around and laughing at each others jokes.

What tax are they not paying? Do you mean corporation tax, ie a tax on company profits. Amazon is not a very profitable company, especially given its turnover.

SPS, getting all angry without the facts.

Chillax babes

£4.2 billion in UK sales has been routed via Luxembourg to avoid paying UK taxes - it's even been in the Guardian not the DM!
Now I think I have my facts more or less sorted.
Oh and avoid watching or purchasing anything from Amazon too - so feel rather righteous ;-)

[chris watton]

SPS said:

£4.2 billion in UK sales has been routed via Luxembourg to avoid paying UK taxes - it's even been in the Guardian not the DM!
Now I think I have my facts more or less sorted.
Oh and avoid watching or purchasing anything from Amazon too - so feel rather righteous ;-)

For balance, I buy a st-load from Amazon, and have prime to boot!

[technodup]

SPS said:

£4.2 billion in UK sales has been routed via Luxembourg to avoid paying UK taxes - it's even been in the Guardian not the DM!
Now I think I have my facts more or less sorted

I don't. Sales aren't subject to tax.

[Halb]

https://www.gov.uk/gosuperfast


My lil hamlet should be getting FTTC very shortly.

[Welshbeef]

SPS said:

£4.2 billion in UK sales has been routed via Luxembourg to avoid paying UK taxes - it's even been in the Guardian not the DM!
Now I think I have my facts more or less sorted.
Oh and avoid watching or purchasing anything from Amazon too - so feel rather righteous ;-)

Look at their global profit - they have barely made any profit since it started.

[Snozzwangler]

technodup said:

SPS said:

£4.2 billion in UK sales has been routed via Luxembourg to avoid paying UK taxes - it's even been in the Guardian not the DM!
Now I think I have my facts more or less sorted

I don't. Sales aren't subject to tax.

ETA Welsh make the point really - we're taking about profit as an enterprise, not tax take.

[Cheese Mechanic]

SPS said:

£4.2 billion in UK sales has been routed via Luxembourg to avoid paying UK taxes - it's even been in the Guardian not the DM!
Now I think I have my facts more or less sorted.
Oh and avoid watching or purchasing anything from Amazon too - so feel rather righteous ;-)

Look at their global profits. They heavily re-invest what they earn . Its called investment, creates loads of those things we all want, jobs.

I'm currently waiting on an Amazon order. Use them a lot, may even take up on Prime, we shall see.

[turbobloke]

Cheese Mechanic said:

SPS said:

£4.2 billion in UK sales has been routed via Luxembourg to avoid paying UK taxes - it's even been in the Guardian not the DM!
Now I think I have my facts more or less sorted.
Oh and avoid watching or purchasing anything from Amazon too - so feel rather righteous ;-)

Look at their global profits. They heavily re-invest what they earn . Its called investment, creates loads of those things we all want, jobs.

Indeed. But hang on a mo...

Reinvestment and jobs creation? Pah! If the Guardian thinks they're less important than a non-story about paying the correct amount of tax due - in any jurisdiction - then the BBC is bound to agree.

For the truth about the new Clarkson Hammond May show in terms of remuneration and subscription level we need to wait for the BBC's take on it, which will derive from a producer handing a copy of The Guardian to a presenter while telling them "it's all in there". During the actual item a BBC media correspondent will be wheeled in as corroboration with their opinion presented as fact. This will uphold the BBC's traditional approach to validation and independent verification of a story.

[MarshPhantom]

Cheese Mechanic said:

SPS said:

£4.2 billion in UK sales has been routed via Luxembourg to avoid paying UK taxes - it's even been in the Guardian not the DM!
Now I think I have my facts more or less sorted.
Oh and avoid watching or purchasing anything from Amazon too - so feel rather righteous ;-)

Look at their global profits. They heavily re-invest what they earn . Its called investment, creates loads of those things we all want, jobs.

I

What kind of jobs though? Book shops, record stores etc are closing to be replaced warehouse picker jobs on minimum wage. They opened a new depot in Staffs, the area isn't overflowing with work. the two people I know that got jobs there both left within weeks.

[chris watton]

MarshPhantom said:

What kind of jobs though? Book shops, record stores etc are closing to be replaced warehouse picker jobs on minimum wage. They opened a new depot in Staffs, the area isn't overflowing with work. the two people I know that got jobs there both left within weeks.

Not really all their fault, is it?

Councils seem to do a stunning job in making it extremely difficult for shoppers to part in their town/city centres over the past decade or so - perhaps many simply do not want the hassle and opt for convenience. Do you?

[98elise]

SPS said:

Snozzwangler said:

98elise said:

SPS said:

Oh working for Amazon - you know the ones that pay all that tax
Who the hell watches that?
I would rather watch 5th Gear - at least the cars get a look in instead of three middle aged (well one of em is oldish) pissing around and laughing at each others jokes.

What tax are they not paying? Do you mean corporation tax, ie a tax on company profits. Amazon is not a very profitable company, especially given its turnover.

SPS, getting all angry without the facts.

Chillax babes

£4.2 billion in UK sales has been routed via Luxembourg to avoid paying UK taxes - it's even been in the Guardian not the DM!
Now I think I have my facts more or less sorted.
Oh and avoid watching or purchasing anything from Amazon too - so feel rather righteous ;-)

You still can't grasp the difference between sales and profit. Corporation tax is on profits. There is no sales tax in the UK.

A company can be huge and make no profit, even large losses. This isn't clever accounting or a dodge, its simply means that there is nothing else left in the pot after they have paid everyone (and all the UK tax due on that).

[eccles]

98elise said:

SPS said:

Snozzwangler said:

98elise said:

SPS said:

Oh working for Amazon - you know the ones that pay all that tax
Who the hell watches that?
I would rather watch 5th Gear - at least the cars get a look in instead of three middle aged (well one of em is oldish) pissing around and laughing at each others jokes.

What tax are they not paying? Do you mean corporation tax, ie a tax on company profits. Amazon is not a very profitable company, especially given its turnover.

SPS, getting all angry without the facts.

Chillax babes

£4.2 billion in UK sales has been routed via Luxembourg to avoid paying UK taxes - it's even been in the Guardian not the DM!
Now I think I have my facts more or less sorted.
Oh and avoid watching or purchasing anything from Amazon too - so feel rather righteous ;-)

You still can't grasp the difference between sales and profit. Corporation tax is on profits. There is no sales tax in the UK.

A company can be huge and make no profit, even large losses. This isn't clever accounting or a dodge, its simply means that there is nothing else left in the pot after they have paid everyone (and all the UK tax due on that).

So why route their money via Luxembourg?

[turbobloke]

eccles said:

98elise said:

SPS said:

Snozzwangler said:

98elise said:

SPS said:

Oh working for Amazon - you know the ones that pay all that tax
Who the hell watches that?
I would rather watch 5th Gear - at least the cars get a look in instead of three middle aged (well one of em is oldish) pissing around and laughing at each others jokes.

What tax are they not paying? Do you mean corporation tax, ie a tax on company profits. Amazon is not a very profitable company, especially given its turnover.

SPS, getting all angry without the facts.

Chillax babes

£4.2 billion in UK sales has been routed via Luxembourg to avoid paying UK taxes - it's even been in the Guardian not the DM!
Now I think I have my facts more or less sorted.
Oh and avoid watching or purchasing anything from Amazon too - so feel rather righteous ;-)

You still can't grasp the difference between sales and profit. Corporation tax is on profits. There is no sales tax in the UK.

A company can be huge and make no profit, even large losses. This isn't clever accounting or a dodge, its simply means that there is nothing else left in the pot after they have paid everyone (and all the UK tax due on that).

So why route their money via Luxembourg?

Presumably so that the total tax bill was minimised taking into account the tax laws of both jurisdictions, a reasonable and sensible step.

In any case, Amazon is no longer booking revenues through Luxembourg, they're using each European country individually, pretty much what the handwringers wanted, which will result in lower profits, present a threat to reinvestment levels and job creation, not forgetting potentially higher prices for customers.

However, in the UK our politicians will be pleased with the contribution to their 10% pay rise.

[Sway]

That's where their European HQ is. Of course, there are hefty charges from the European HQ for the services it provides all European offices.

Exactly the same as the firm I'm working with at the moment. European HQ in London. The Spanish office sends all profit to there. If the London office declares a profit after costs and capex, then it'll pay corporation tax. If it doesn't (guess what, it hasn't for several years as it's spending a metric fkton of cash on new facilites and equipment) then it won't.

None of this is new, nor illegal. We've been (and continue to be) the beneficiary of similar approaches where the European or World HQ is in London. I'm certain the net balance for these approaches to global business's operations has been positive for the UK, although there will always of course be examples where it could be argued we've 'lost out'. Ignoring the vast sums of VAT, income tax, NI and other taxes that have been paid as a normal part of doing business.

[Cheese Mechanic]

turbobloke said:

Indeed. But hang on a mo...

Reinvestment and jobs creation? Pah! If the Guardian thinks they're less important than a non-story about paying the correct amount of tax due - in any jurisdiction - then the BBC is bound to agree.

For the truth about the new Clarkson Hammond May show in terms of remuneration and subscription level we need to wait for the BBC's take on it, which will derive from a producer handing a copy of The Guardian to a presenter while telling them "it's all in there". During the actual item a BBC media correspondent will be wheeled in as corroboration with their opinion presented as fact. This will uphold the BBC's traditional approach to validation and independent verification of a story.

The Guardian, who's owning group is in a trust for the purpose of paying less tax.

Typical Socialists, green eyed envy driven hypocrites.

[turbobloke]

Cheese Mechanic said:

turbobloke said:

Indeed. But hang on a mo...

Reinvestment and jobs creation? Pah! If the Guardian thinks they're less important than a non-story about paying the correct amount of tax due - in any jurisdiction - then the BBC is bound to agree.

For the truth about the new Clarkson Hammond May show in terms of remuneration and subscription level we need to wait for the BBC's take on it, which will derive from a producer handing a copy of The Guardian to a presenter while telling them "it's all in there". During the actual item a BBC media correspondent will be wheeled in as corroboration with their opinion presented as fact. This will uphold the BBC's traditional approach to validation and independent verification of a story.

The Guardian, who's owning group is in a trust for the purpose of paying less tax.

Typical Socialists, green eyed envy driven hypocrites.

I remember reading a Guardian esitorial 'corporate tax avoidance: impoverishing the public’ with hanky at the ready...but not needed.

Then reading about their Caymans subsidiaries holding investments in an offshore tax haven and thinking 'no surprise there'.

Nor was there any surprise when it came to light that in one tax year the Guardian made £300m profit but paid zero corptax, instead they received a rebate of £800k. Their strategy included avoidance totalling £60m by switching assets (presumably inspired by MPs flipping residences).

There's nothing wrong in the lefty rag using avoidance to minimuse their tax bill, but plenty wrong with them slamming other corporations for doing the same, and vilifying individuals who do likewise.

They're likely to be sharpening their red pencils over Clarkson's future tax affairs following the Amazon deal, arch-hypocrites that they are.

[IroningMan]

turbobloke said:

Presumably so that the total tax bill was minimised taking into account the tax laws of both jurisdictions, a reasonable and sensible step.

In any case, Amazon is no longer booking revenues through Luxembourg, they're using each European country individually, pretty much what the handwringers wanted, which will result in lower profits, present a threat to reinvestment levels and job creation, not forgetting potentially higher prices for customers.

However, in the UK our politicians will be pleased with the contribution to their 10% pay rise.

Not least because the advantage of being able to sell ebooks at a reduced VAT rate from Luxembourg has evaporated.

[eccles]

turbobloke said:

eccles said:

98elise said:

SPS said:

Snozzwangler said:

98elise said:

SPS said:

Oh working for Amazon - you know the ones that pay all that tax
Who the hell watches that?
I would rather watch 5th Gear - at least the cars get a look in instead of three middle aged (well one of em is oldish) pissing around and laughing at each others jokes.

What tax are they not paying? Do you mean corporation tax, ie a tax on company profits. Amazon is not a very profitable company, especially given its turnover.

SPS, getting all angry without the facts.

Chillax babes

£4.2 billion in UK sales has been routed via Luxembourg to avoid paying UK taxes - it's even been in the Guardian not the DM!
Now I think I have my facts more or less sorted.
Oh and avoid watching or purchasing anything from Amazon too - so feel rather righteous ;-)

You still can't grasp the difference between sales and profit. Corporation tax is on profits. There is no sales tax in the UK.

A company can be huge and make no profit, even large losses. This isn't clever accounting or a dodge, its simply means that there is nothing else left in the pot after they have paid everyone (and all the UK tax due on that).

So why route their money via Luxembourg?

Presumably so that the total tax bill was minimised taking into account the tax laws of both jurisdictions, a reasonable and sensible step.

In any case, Amazon is no longer booking revenues through Luxembourg, they're using each European country individually, pretty much what the handwringers wanted, which will result in lower profits, present a threat to reinvestment levels and job creation, not forgetting potentially higher prices for customers.

However, in the UK our politicians will be pleased with the contribution to their 10% pay rise.

So if I get this right, Amazon are true gentlemen and have always been paying all their tax thats due, even whilst being based in Luxembourg. Then, because they've not broken any laws or dodged any tax, just out of the goodness of their heart, they decide to base themselves in the country where they earn their money, thus making themselves vastly less competetive because they're now paying a lot more tax?