What are your unpopular opinions? (Vol. 2)
Discussion
The top 5 tech companies who operate in the uk, made 4 billion in sales, pay minimal tax.
It might be a better may to increase government income by targeting these companies over the poorest in society who struggle to survive in an ever increasing expensive cost of living country, which in turn is actually driving more profits for these big companies.
It might be a better may to increase government income by targeting these companies over the poorest in society who struggle to survive in an ever increasing expensive cost of living country, which in turn is actually driving more profits for these big companies.
Only 6% of estates attract IHT. Most people then go on to say 94% of estates aren't large enough pay it. This isn't true. 93% aren't large enough, and 1% are too large to pay it.
It's that 1% that's the problem. The annoyance with IHT isn't that it exists, it's that the super rich can avoid it, most are below the threshold, and so it's saps like me who have to pay more than we should, because we have estates large enough, but not so large that I can channel everything thru shell companies in The Cayman Islands, or buy a Scottish Forest, or any of the other loopholes the very rich can evoke. The Duke of Westminster had an £8bn estate, and the beneficiaries of his will didn't pay any IHT on it.
If the very rich paid their share, they could probably up the threshold or lower the percentage.
It's that 1% that's the problem. The annoyance with IHT isn't that it exists, it's that the super rich can avoid it, most are below the threshold, and so it's saps like me who have to pay more than we should, because we have estates large enough, but not so large that I can channel everything thru shell companies in The Cayman Islands, or buy a Scottish Forest, or any of the other loopholes the very rich can evoke. The Duke of Westminster had an £8bn estate, and the beneficiaries of his will didn't pay any IHT on it.
If the very rich paid their share, they could probably up the threshold or lower the percentage.
Gt6turbo said:
The top 5 tech companies who operate in the uk, made 4 billion in sales, pay minimal tax.
It might be a better may to increase government income by targeting these companies over the poorest in society who struggle to survive in an ever increasing expensive cost of living country, which in turn is actually driving more profits for these big companies.
How much tax should they go have paid on sales?It might be a better may to increase government income by targeting these companies over the poorest in society who struggle to survive in an ever increasing expensive cost of living country, which in turn is actually driving more profits for these big companies.
If they are driving more profits then that's more tax (profit is taxed)
Personally I don't see thinking rich people and companies should pay more tax as being an especially unpopular opinion. Where my opinion differs is how it is achieved.
We could start by simplifying the tax code to eliminate loopholes, then encourage people to pay more tax rather than demanding it. For eg the tech companies mentioned are more than happy to pay shedloads of tax in Ireland and Luxembourg as the rates are lower.
Lower the rates, and increase the amount of tax collected. We could start by slashing Corporation Tax....
We could start by simplifying the tax code to eliminate loopholes, then encourage people to pay more tax rather than demanding it. For eg the tech companies mentioned are more than happy to pay shedloads of tax in Ireland and Luxembourg as the rates are lower.
Lower the rates, and increase the amount of tax collected. We could start by slashing Corporation Tax....
98elise said:
Gt6turbo said:
The top 5 tech companies who operate in the uk, made 4 billion in sales, pay minimal tax.
It might be a better may to increase government income by targeting these companies over the poorest in society who struggle to survive in an ever increasing expensive cost of living country, which in turn is actually driving more profits for these big companies.
How much tax should they go have paid on sales?It might be a better may to increase government income by targeting these companies over the poorest in society who struggle to survive in an ever increasing expensive cost of living country, which in turn is actually driving more profits for these big companies.
If they are driving more profits then that's more tax (profit is taxed)
Any activity in which winners and loser are decided by a slate of judges is not a sport, and doesn't belong in the Olympics.
Also, curling is not an Olympic sport. Any activity where an overweight, middle aged dude holding a beer could conceivably win the gold is not an Olympic sport.
Also, curling is not an Olympic sport. Any activity where an overweight, middle aged dude holding a beer could conceivably win the gold is not an Olympic sport.
mko9 said:
Any activity in which winners and loser are decided by a slate of judges is not a sport, and doesn't belong in the Olympics.
Also, curling is not an Olympic sport. Any activity where an overweight, middle aged dude holding a beer could conceivably win the gold is not an Olympic sport.
Suspect the brushing part may get challenging whilst holding a beer - unless you're ok with spillage of course. Also, curling is not an Olympic sport. Any activity where an overweight, middle aged dude holding a beer could conceivably win the gold is not an Olympic sport.
Gt6turbo said:
The top 5 tech companies who operate in the uk, made 4 billion in sales, pay minimal tax.
It might be a better may to increase government income by targeting these companies over the poorest in society who struggle to survive in an ever increasing expensive cost of living country, which in turn is actually driving more profits for these big companies.
The CEOs of top tech companies are the same people who "donate" millions of dollars/pounds to politicians campaigning to be next Pres/PM.It might be a better may to increase government income by targeting these companies over the poorest in society who struggle to survive in an ever increasing expensive cost of living country, which in turn is actually driving more profits for these big companies.
Join the dots....
"It's one big club and you ain't in it!"
- Carlin
Here's a line to connect some of those dots: https://archive.is/HfBVr
TwigtheWonderkid said:
If you can take part in your chosen sport in your normal everyday shoes, it ain't a sport. If you have to go barefoot, or wear the correct footwear, it might be sport.
So darts and snooker are not sports, they're games. Like chess.
I have always said if you wear trousers to play it’s a game not a sport. Golfers usually get really angry about this one.So darts and snooker are not sports, they're games. Like chess.
Golf, Snooker, darts etc skilful enjoyable games but not sport.
By trousers I do t mean any long legged garment I mean like chino or suit trouser.
mko9 said:
Any activity in which winners and loser are decided by a slate of judges is not a sport, and doesn't belong in the Olympics.
Also, curling is not an Olympic sport. Any activity where an overweight, middle aged dude holding a beer could conceivably win the gold is not an Olympic sport.
But the Olympics are for games, not sports. That's why they are called the Olympic games. Also, curling is not an Olympic sport. Any activity where an overweight, middle aged dude holding a beer could conceivably win the gold is not an Olympic sport.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff