Google: MEPs add to pressure on Osborne over 'bad' tax deal

Originally Posted by Mr K

Think I'll negotiate with HMRC over my tax bill. What do you think my chances are of a 99% cut ? Will Osbourne do me a cracking deal ? How anybody thinks this guy is clever and a suitable PM beggars belief.

We are talking about corporation tax not personal income tax ,they are 2 completely different animals .I am of the opinion that corporation tax should be a minimal payment if anything at all ,a tool for the government to use ,low corporation tax can be used as a means to encourage companies to set up here and employ people who will then pay income tax ,council tax and any other type of tax you can think of, instead of drawing money from treasury coffers in the form of benefits they will be contributing and increasing our tax take .
Instead of chasing easy targets like Google and Starbucks HMRC should be after wealthy individuals not paying personal taxes which it has to be said they are making progress in doing just very slowly

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

There, fixed it for you.

You have fixed nothing .. just another feeble attempt to get the thread onto the childish obsession of bashing a government that has not been in power for 6 years.

Try living in the present ...

Originally Posted by Osem

I'm sure loads of folks here would volunteer to pay more tax than they've been required to. Where nothing clearly illegal has been done, the main fault here is with the lawmakers and politicians who've allowed this situation to carry on and done precious little to address it until now.

In much the same way as the Benefits system is undergoing the biggest shake up since it's conception i think our tax system need overhauling to more suit the needs of a modern and comparatively wealthy society.

Originally Posted by Osem

I'm sure loads of folks here would volunteer to pay more tax than they've been required to. Where nothing clearly illegal has been done, the main fault here is with the lawmakers and politicians who've allowed this situation to carry on and done precious little to address it until now.

I think the challenge is, and one that a lot of people don't understand/accept, is that it isn't just UK tax laws that are involved (and they are horrendously complex), it's international law, international tax laws, and international treaties, and the tax laws in other countries that multi-national companies trade in.

This is why things take so long, as there is an multi-faceted web of laws (which each country wants to keep as they are written to try and benefit that country), and the legal complexity keeps very expensive lawyers in business, and unfortunately, Governments don't pay the same salary levels that multi-nationals do, so strangely enough most of the best tax lawyers/accountants work for multi-nationals or large accountancy firms, not the government.

My friend, who is a Tax Partner for a large accountancy firm, has been involved in an ongoing (multi-country) tax case for over 8 years, as it involves 3 continents and 24 countries - all negotiations/agreements/settlements have to take all those jurisdictions into account - the value of the benefits involved run to hundreds of millions of pounds, so it is worth the company's time/efforts to fight the case.

My friend has worked with UK HMRC to discuss ways of simplifying the tax regime, but unless other countries do the same, and if they offer a more attractive tax regime, it is a thankless task.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by martyh

We are talking about corporation tax not personal income tax ,they are 2 completely different animals .I am of the opinion that corporation tax should be a minimal payment if anything at all ,a tool for the government to use ,low corporation tax can be used as a means to encourage companies to set up here and employ people who will then pay income tax ,council tax and any other type of tax you can think of, instead of drawing money from treasury coffers in the form of benefits they will be contributing and increasing our tax take .
Instead of chasing easy targets like Google and Starbucks HMRC should be after wealthy individuals not paying personal taxes which it has to be said they are making progress in doing just very slowly

If a company sells a product in a country and make a profit from doing so why shouldn't they contribute part of these profits to said country through taxation?

In the global corporate model, a lot of companies, especially those that operate through an eCommerce channel, will not "set up here and employ people who will then pay income tax ,council tax and any other type of tax you can think of" in any appreciable amount for the very reason that they don't have to. They can offshore skilled jobs that may have been sited in the UK to India, China, etc. with little or no effort and save money in the process.

Originally Posted by ianch99

If a company sells a product in a country and make a profit from doing so why shouldn't they contribute part of these profits to said country through taxation?

In the global corporate model, a lot of companies, especially those that operate through an eCommerce channel, will not "set up here and employ people who will then pay income tax ,council tax and any other type of tax you can think of" in any appreciable amount for the very reason that they don't have to. They can offshore skilled jobs that may have been sited in the UK to India, China, etc. with little or no effort and save money in the process.

I totally agree with this - however, we need to change international tax law, not just UK, otherwise the "double jeopardy" rule comes into play.

Here is an interesting article which shows the sort of thing the OECD is trying to do on this matter.

http://www.taxjustice.net/2016/01/28...-and-the-rest/

Originally Posted by ianch99

If a company sells a product in a country and make a profit from doing so why shouldn't they contribute part of these profits to said country through taxation?

In the global corporate model, a lot of companies, especially those that operate through an eCommerce channel, will not "set up here and employ people who will then pay income tax ,council tax and any other type of tax you can think of" in any appreciable amount for the very reason that they don't have to. They can offshore skilled jobs that may have been sited in the UK to India, China, etc. with little or no effort and save money in the process.

Your example of eCommerce companies is a very good example of why the tax should be abolished imo ,surely any tax should be easy to collect(hence the introduction of PAYE) but in todays global economy corporation tax gets harder and more costly every year to collect.The other thing to consider is that all corporation is effectively paid by the share holders,directors and workers in the form of lower salaries ,lower dividends and higher prices.

[ianch99]

Made me laugh

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a6873151.html

The Sunday Times says it has analysed the accounts of Osborne & Little Group Ltd – the parent company of the family business – and found it paid out dividends worth £335,000 to shareholders, including the Chancellor, on 30 May 2014.

Mr Osborne's parents, Sir Peter and Lady Felicity Osborne, reportedly received dividend pay-outs of over £270,000.

The company, however, has reportedly not paid UK corporation tax since 2008, partly due to the business rolling over losses from previous years and deferring tax payments.

The Chancellor has previously spoken out against “morally repugnant” tax avoidance, making it a major part of his 2012 budget speech.

So, by following UK Tax Law, they make you laugh?

Do you also smile at the tax relief on your pension payments?

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Hugh

So, by following UK Tax Law, they make you laugh?

So it's other 'morally repugnant tax avoidance' Gideon has an issue with then, is that what you're saying?

I don't have an issue with this, which is what Osborne & Little, and tens of thousands of other companies, are doing...

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/ctmanual/ctm04510.htm

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/corporat...laiming-a-loss

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Hugh

I don't have an issue with this, which is what Osborne & Little, and tens of thousands of other companies, are doing...

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/ctmanual/ctm04510.htm

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/corporat...laiming-a-loss

You having an issue isn't the problem, it's whether Gideon has an issue with it after his grandstanding

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Hugh

So, by following UK Tax Law, they make you laugh?

Do you also smile at the tax relief on your pension payments?

Cheer up Can't you see the irony?

---------- Post added at 22:15 ---------- Previous post was at 22:01 ----------

Oh dear, more bad news for George's reputation:

https://twitter.com/Peston/status/699007634939240448

HoC Treasury Comm. agrees with unanimous view of economists: Chancellor's surplus rule neither sensible nor credible

[spanna]

Maybe I am remembering incorrectly, but doesn't the rule only apply in "normal" situations

Doesn't that give you the wiggle room to respond to changing circumstances

All a future chancellor would have to do is explain why he needs to break the rule in a particular circumstance