Spain Get Your Money Out Whilst You Still Can?

TickersPlaysPop

Archi_Bald wrote: »

Xenophobic logic fails again, as usual.

None of the companies listed, nor the sum of them, are "sucking our country dry".

This is not an irrational fear of all things foreign or unusual, my point is about not supporting companies that don't pay their fair amount of tax..... UK owned or other wise.... If we use smaller UK based companies they will not be able to afford to avoid paying tax like the large multi nationals.

Also, these tax avoiding companies are holding us back from getting out of the debt hole.... are you sure that all of the tax avoidance is insignificant compared to public sector spending? At least that is giving something for our money, rather than losing the cash to share holders etc... no doubt thet major drain was bailing out the banks, but every little counts, so if you have the choice when on the high street, or performing Internet searches vote with your feet and your wallet.

Cheers

bigadaj

I'd agree with these comments though it seems to have become an anti big company point. Ironically these companies are paranoid about the bad pr and people need to vote with their feet, there are hundreds of billions as in their bank account whilst western countries debts continue to increase there has to be a better mechanism, though with politicians directorships this doesn't look like happening soon.

ColdIron

TickersPlaysPop wrote: »

are you sure that all of the tax avoidance is insignificant compared to public sector spending?

Well, Corporation tax accounted for 2.8% of GDP in 2011 of which avoidance is a tiny proportion

sabretoothtigger

pqrdef wrote: »

I would certainly doubt whether the best people to run the country are the people making the most money in the private sector.

If their business paid the most taxes it would almost be in proportion and make sense in a straightforward way.

Regardless of taxes paid, we do want efficient business and gov to help that.
Take the other scenario, union heads forwarded to power. People who never worked in their industry but were the most able to argue for more money. Thats great they can stick up for people but it wont help encourage competitive business to have them cutting deals in gov

Both sides could have self bias, the problem is it has to stay competitive. If Spain has a problem Im betting its because they served their own interests too directly when it should have been done through encouraging free enterprise open to all

bigadaj

sabretoothtigger wrote: »

If their business paid the most taxes it would almost be in proportion and make sense in a straightforward way.

Regardless of taxes paid, we do want efficient business and gov to help that.
Take the other scenario, union heads forwarded to power. People who never worked in their industry but were the most able to argue for more money. Thats great they can stick up for people but it wont help encourage competitive business to have them cutting deals in gov

Both sides could have self bias, the problem is it has to stay competitive. If Spain has a problem Im betting its because they served their own interests too directly when it should have been done through encouraging free enterprise open to all

But that's currently one of the problems we have, companies being run by accountants who have no idea of what the company does or how best to achieve that goal in the longer term rather than focussing on immediate returns.

gadgetmind

TickersPlaysPop wrote: »

my point is about not supporting companies that don't pay their fair amount of tax

What is the objective and quantifiable definition of "fair" that you apply?

richto

jimjames wrote: »

Yes. Unemployment at under 8% rather than over 25% for Spain plus we have our own currency.

And we escaped from a money wasting socialist government a while before they did, so we are some way ahead in terms of economic recovery and managing our national debt...

gadgetmind

bigadaj wrote: »

we have, companies being run by accountants who have no idea of what the company does

I've rarely met an accountant led company.

We make a lot of acquisitions, and I'm often on the due diligence team looking at the technology ownership and technical activities, but it's always a multi-disciplinary activity. We try and understand the hell out of what we're (probably) buying and part of this involves understanding corporate ethos.

I've seen companies led by certain CEOs and their sidekicks who don't understand the technology, so instead bang fists and desks, shout a lot, and generally drive a good company into the ground. I've seen companies in the trawl of the legal department (they get veto and thus veto everything as this way you'll never get sued.) I've also seen companies driven by their sales departments, who never look far enough ahead and so fail to sell the current products while demanding "me too" to match competitor's current range. Too late!

Technology led companies often come along, and are the most exciting. We need to check that the tech really can do what's claimed, that the patent protection is solid, and then look at why it's come onto our radar. Often it's because some other part of the company isn't working, usually financing and/or route to market, which we can fix.

I've never done DD on a company driven by accountants nor can I understand how one could function for any great length of time.

Every moving part of a company needs to work smoothly to be successful but the bean counters don't generally have the understanding of the business now 5-10 year "long sight" vision to drive it.

However, I'm in tech, and maybe some more "steady eddie" businesses can run in totally different ways.

bigadaj

gadgetmind wrote: »

I've rarely met an accountant led company.

We make a lot of acquisitions, and I'm often on the due diligence team looking at the technology ownership and technical activities, but it's always a multi-disciplinary activity. We try and understand the hell out of what we're (probably) buying and part of this involves understanding corporate ethos.

I've seen companies led by certain CEOs and their sidekicks who don't understand the technology, so instead bang fists and desks, shout a lot, and generally drive a good company into the ground. I've seen companies in the trawl of the legal department (they get veto and thus veto everything as this way you'll never get sued.) I've also seen companies driven by their sales departments, who never look far enough ahead and so fail to sell the current products while demanding "me too" to match competitor's current range. Too late!

Technology led companies often come along, and are the most exciting. We need to check that the tech really can do what's claimed, that the patent protection is solid, and then look at why it's come onto our radar. Often it's because some other part of the company isn't working, usually financing and/or route to market, which we can fix.

I've never done DD on a company driven by accountants nor can I understand how one could function for any great length of time.

Every moving part of a company needs to work smoothly to be successful but the bean counters don't generally have the understanding of the business now 5-10 year "long sight" vision to drive it.

However, I'm in tech, and maybe some more "steady eddie" businesses can run in totally different ways.

Understand that and would agree in specialist areas, but larger companies and more general firms are frequently dominated by accountants rather than specialists. This is one of our drawbacks in comparison to Germany in my opinion, it's not just a lack of apprenticeships. Ironically many if these accountants may have degrees as scientists or engineers but been lured into accountancy and finance by the lower level of risk in getting to a higher salary more quickly.

Thrugelmir

bigadaj wrote: »

Understand that and would agree in specialist areas, but larger companies and more general firms are frequently dominated by accountants rather than specialists.

All large Companies require a Finance Director. In my experience though boards are dominated by those with relevant industry experience.

Making profit is the primary aim. How the business is structured for tax efficiency is secondary. As without profit there's no requirement to construct complex company structures.

Nothing new in this story. Private companies (in particular German ones) have been sheltering behind offshore tax havens for decades.