We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Why is it apparently so difficult to get the big corporations to pay more tax?
Comments
-
But what about those countries that manage their taxation to attract corporations ..Like Ireland ..they would just lower their rates again ...
Good.
It's better for taxpayers to have as low a tax regime as possible.
International competition can only help in that regard.This really would just play into the hands of multi nationals who would play the present game with even more vigour
No.
It would play into the hands of consumers and shareholders. Who would achieve better pension and shareholding returns, and pay less for goods and services.
Corporations are not the enemy. Excessive taxation is the enemy.
And corporations should be applauded for maximising returns to shareholders and minimising the amount of tax they must pay, and thus charge consumers for.“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
Of course, they have these big profits, which never end up in UK coffers, because the UK taxpayer is subsidising so many people's wages through tax credits......
So, indirectly (or nearly directly), we're all just taxed heavily for them to shovel the money offshore.0 -
PasturesNew wrote: »Of course, they have these big profits, which never end up in UK coffers, because the UK taxpayer is subsidising so many people's wages through tax credits......
So, indirectly (or nearly directly), we're all just taxed heavily for them to shovel the money offshore.
Great.
Eliminate corporation tax, and eliminate tax credits.“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
South Africa has a turnover tax. You pay a percentage of your sales in tax - no deductions, no tax havens, no clever licensing schemes.
Some places in the USA have a Gross Receipts Tax, which is similar.
This is the way to stop companies taking the p1ss. It is a fair tax because the rates can be staggered based on the size/age of the business. So in SA, there is a zero rate for very small businesses.0 -
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »Good.
It's better for taxpayers to have as low a tax regime as possible.
International competition can only help in that regard.
No.
It would play into the hands of consumers and shareholders. Who would achieve better pension and shareholding returns, and pay less for goods and services.
Corporations are not the enemy. Excessive taxation is the enemy.
And corporations should be applauded for maximising returns to shareholders and minimising the amount of tax they must pay, and thus charge consumers for.
There are many many people both here and elsewhere in the world that are not in a position to share in all that wealth and never will they are not shareholders, they don't have pensions what do we do about them? Line them up against a wall?"If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
The majority of companies are not international so cannot shift liabilities.
Most of the big companies, of note have, havens to move liabilities around.
Boots, Barclays, Energy companies for example.
Even the likes of Vodafone simply don't pay a"fair" share, they pay what they can get away within the law, not the spirit of the law."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »Good.
Corporations are not the enemy. Excessive taxation is the enemy.
Many large corporations are simply out of control."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
ruggedtoast wrote: »Before Starbucks opened up, England was probably the worst country in the entire world in which to buy a cup of coffee.
Unless you were anywhere other than a reasonably high end restaurant if you ordered coffee you would invariably given a cup of cheap instant, or a weak bodiless cup of filtered that had probably gone round three times.
The closest most people got to actual coffee was in one of those pseudo Italian cafes you get at seaside resorts where they serve coffee in a glass with a wire holder.
This opinion has nothing to do with tax.
I bet the Afghanis love it."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
PasturesNew wrote: »Of course, they have these big profits, which never end up in UK coffers, because the UK taxpayer is subsidising so many people's wages through tax credits......
So, indirectly (or nearly directly), we're all just taxed heavily for them to shovel the money offshore.
It is difficult to disagree with most of this. In simple terms, you are saying:
High public spending = high tax rates
High tax rates = high tax avoidance by foreign companies able to do so.
But your very last observation doesn't hold water. In fact Starbucks existence in UK means jobs with taxable wages, and VAT, so some UK tax is paid, lowering the total tax bill on everyone else - albeit by just a smidgeon.
To be more accurate, though, one could argue that were Starbucks not in UK, the Costa (British Owned) might be selling twice as much and paying oodles more tax.
Starbucks are making profits somewhere. They are simply using legitimate and easy tecniques to ensure that those profits drop in more favourable tax regimes. Why does Switzerland continue to be an hugely economically successful country, despite its small size, I wonder?
The ultimate solution is firstly to spend far, far, less from taxation, and then lower corporation tax to the point where multinational corporations will happily pay it. 10% of £1bn is much more than 24% of sod all.0 -
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »Then all the obfuscation in the world won't change the fact that some of that will come from increasing prices to consumers, and the rest will come from decreased profits to the shareholders. In other words, ordinary people, their pension funds, their share ISA's, etc.
You simply cannot argue otherwise.
There is nowhere else for it to come from. Consumers, or shareholders.
Businesses are owned by people. Taking money from businesses is taking money from people. Increasing taxes on business is increasing tax on ordinary people.
Well, hang on. As you say, companies are owned by, ultimately, people. But like many types of wealth, stock ownership is very unequal, more so than income even. Taking money from businesses is, clearly, taking it from people ultimately. But more so from wealthy people than poor. And as a rule tax receipts aren't, well, put on a big bonfire. They're used to buy stuff. If, say, £60m is taken from business and used to give everyone in the UK a gift of £1 each then this makes the overwhelming majority better off*.
* - in a static sense. My earlier post was in fact a warm-up for a minor rant about the distortionary effect of tax & the relative benefits of taxing assets rather than income, but on second thoughts...FACT.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards