This (as is usual with the Daily Mail) is even more of a non story that it at first seems.
Note first that the headline specifies that they are accused of AVOIDING tax, not EVADING tax. So what is the difference?
Quote:
Tax noncompliance describes a range of activities that are unfavorable to a state's tax system. These include tax avoidance, which refers to reducing taxes by legal means, and tax evasion which refers to the criminal non-payment of tax liabilities.
This (as is usual with the Daily Mail) is even more of a non story that it at first seems.
Note first that the headline specifies that they are accused of AVOIDING tax, not EVADING tax. So what is the difference?
And the difference is that the UK government has just introduced new anti-avoidance rules. UK banks are not allowed to avoid paying tax and the law for other companies are getting stricter.
This is why Apple, Goole et al are being targeted now.
So let's see what that headline should really read...
"Apple, Amazon, Google believed to be saving money on taxes by using totally legal methods in the UK"
or even
"Apple, Amazon, Google not complete idiots when it comes to paying tax in the UK"
or perhaps
"Apple, Amazon, Google paying the taxes they are legally required to in the UK"
Setanta
Yes, there is a big problem of loopholes in tax laws.
The thing is, it's quite complicated to create laws intended for a specific purpose from which an advantage is not taken off that wasn't considered in the first place.
For instance, here in Belgium, we have the concept of notional interest. This concept levels the proper capital (not bearing interest) of a company to debt (interests are deductible). Well, notional interest would mean that a fictuous 3% of the proper capital is considered as deductible interest, the purpose of which was to reinforce the balance sheet of SME's.
Now the thing is, that big corporations created fiscal constructions involving 2 or more companies, lending money from each other and "creating" proper capital. That way they'd win both sides: through the deductible interest and with the notional interest.
What I'd suggest is that next to a law, the gist of it, the purpose of it would also have to be published the purpose of it being that a judge would be able to uphold specific cases against the purpose of a law.
Lawyers will claim that this can create arbitrary ruling. However, these arbitrary rulings already exist. On the contrary, the rulings would be more in line with democratically voted laws because everybody now would know how a law needs to be interpreted iso of interpreting a law along a person's needs and profiting of all the loopholes. BTW: if someone thinks you can close all the loopholes in a law, think again and read Gödel.
For a minute, I thought "how can they be including the gross sales numbers when talking about taxes - taxes are on profits!", but then remembered it's Europe. And then people wonder (and complain) that the same products cost more over there... \
Corporation tax in the UK is on net sales (i.e. profits). The article is extremely badly written by someone with no idea about tax law - that should be expected given it's a blog.
The cost of the product is not higher to make up for the tax Apple don't pay, it's partly down to VAT (paid by the retailer), infrastructure costs, distribution costs and supply/demand. Incidentally, the iPhone 4Gs can be had for free with a contract that will cost you less than AT&Ts over the same time period, so not every product is more expensive. Don't let your prejudices or what you watch on Fox get in the way of reality.
Apple is a BIG business, I'm sure they consult very good tax people in the UK on how to manage the tax bit. Nothing wrong with that. All big companies do that.
That's what I was saying, it seems to be ok as long as everyone else does it. Perhaps we should find more loopholes in the law so that every citizen can benefit from such privileges. Imagine a world where we all pay next to no taxes. Everybody wins right?
That's what I was saying, it seems to be ok as long as everyone else does it. Perhaps we should find more loopholes in the law so that every citizen can benefit from such privileges. Imagine a world where we all pay next to no taxes. Everybody wins right?
Companies are expected to follow the law. There's no evidence that Apple has failed to do so.
If the law allows me to take a tax deduction for wearing a blue shirt on Tuesdays, then I am well within my rights to do so. It would also be well within your rights to object to that law and try to get it repealed.
The tax code needs to be simplified. What you're seeing here is almost certainly simply a matter of complexity and disagreement over what some of the laws mean. Tax law should be simple, clear, and easy to enforce. The fact that it isn't is clearly the government's fault, not the companies who are struggling to comply.
I'm not surprised. Apple is just another greedy, tax dodging big corporation. It's about time Cameron & Osborne stopped pissing about and started closing down the loopholes that let corporations get away with this. The average person or small business are taxed left, right and centre here but big corporations keep getting away without paying their fair share year after year. It makes my blood boil.
Like making a decent salary iso taking cheap labour?
Absolutely. If the "cheap labo(u)r" is a willing participant, and the wages are paying for their food, shelter, and family, and working conditions and standards exceed (not by much, necessarily) those of the country in which the labor is located.
This is not the issue. The UK is suffering because companies are alledgedly funneling the money back into the UK without declaring it. Like in the US, foriegn profits are subject to a tax when entering the Country.
Some people suggest this is unfair. However, 1) the tax gets ridden off in the Country where the profit was made (thereby lessening the tax libility), and 2) those taxes fund the taxing Country's foreign operations.
Since it is largely companies who benefit from a Country's foriegn operations, it seems fair the companies pay to support said operations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by realwarder
The UK is suffering here because companies like Apple are choosing to base their business outside of the UK due to lower corporate tax rates elsewhere. Not much they can do unless the loopholes are not there and the accountants have got too creative.
Regular people and small businesses don't have lobbyists.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK
I'm not surprised. Apple is just another greedy, tax dodging big corporation. It's about time Cameron & Osborne stopped pissing about and started closing down the loopholes that let corporations get away with this. The average person or small business are taxed left, right and centre here but big corporations keep getting away without paying their fair share year after year. It makes my blood boil.
If the law allows me to take a tax deduction for wearing a blue shirt on Tuesdays, then I am well within my rights to do so. It would also be well within your rights to object to that law and try to get it repealed.
Laws are rules that are set in black and white to define, as close as we can, a common sense of ethics. If a law about wearing a blue shirt on Tuesday was tax deductible for special reasons and a corporation enforced that all employees wore blue shirts every Tuesday for the purposes of tax relief then it's a clear abuse of the law.
Yes the law is partly to blame just as it is partly to blame for allowing a large number of criminals to receive reduced sentences but is our reaction when we read about a child molester receiving a 1-year sentence through a plea-bargain that they just complied with the law and got away with it?
There's nothing we can do about it but we don't applaud them and look forward to whatever abuses tomorrow brings. Laws will always be insufficient to govern people but there is an expectation that people have the decency to comply with them without force.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
the companies who are struggling to comply.
Yeah, I'm sure all the companies are desperate to pay their taxes but the complexity is holding them back and only allowing them to pay a fraction of it. Presumably this complexity is what drives them to simpler tax codes in places like Luxembourg, Monaco, The Channel Islands etc.
I would put it to you that it is more complex to register a company outside of the country you trade in to receive a reduced tax rate than it is to comply with any given country's tax code.
The UK is smaller than Michigan and its economy sucks. They should be glad that any company does business there. If the UK starts hitting on all these international companies to prop up their failing economy everyone will just relocate. The VAT (sales tax) in the UK is 20% and everything cost 2-3x the price in the states. How can the UK government even hope to survive if they make life impossible for companies to do business there.
The UK is smaller than Michigan and its economy sucks. They should be glad that any company does business there. If the UK starts hitting on all these international companies to prop up their failing economy everyone will just relocate. The VAT (sales tax) in the UK is 20% and everything cost 2-3x the price in the states. How can the UK government even hope to survive if they make life impossible for companies to do business there.
You don't have a bloody clue what you are talking about. Michigan is a shithole. You can't compare the UK to a US state. The UK economy is doing better than the US economy thank you. We don't have a trillion dollar debt. We don't have 50 million people without healthcare. It's very easy to do business here, you don't have as much red tape as other parts of Europe. We have no need to be grateful. Companies do business here because they make a lot of money.
What we lack is a government willing to crack down on tax avoidance by big corporations and wealthy individuals. Frankly I don't care if they all piss off where they came from, they don't contribute much to our country anyway if they're avoiding tax.
Why should the UK care about the survival of a company that does NOTHING for it? The only tax money Apple generates in the UK comes from VAT, which is collected from consumers. Apple pays practically NOTHING on its massive profits. When I make profits, they're taxed. I don't see why big companies should be treated any different. And believe me, even if they have to pay 25% tax to inland revenue they will still be thrilled to be doing business in the UK. It's about time big business pays its fair share instead of getting a free ride on the back of the little guy, just because they can afford lobbyists.
Absolutely. If the "cheap labo(u)r" is a willing participant, and the wages are paying for their food, shelter, and family, and working conditions and standards exceed (not by much, necessarily) those of the country in which the labor is located.
Again, read the analogy between what you've written down and the situation of the kapo and the slave labour in a concentration camp.
Then think about what you've written. Your kind of reasoning actually makes people comfortable with the thought of child labour.
It's more complicated to start a business in the rest of Europe than in the UK but then again, in the UK you're not quite certain of the solvency of a business.
There is absolutely no flexibility in the way the English do business. They have their rules and there is not the slightest room for any adaptation to the customer: the customer adapts to the supplier, always. If you're trying to do business with a UK company as a foreign business, the situation is even worse as the English are xenophobic and still feel like 'Britannia rules', whatever that may be.
In the meantime, London is getting slumpier by the minute (except for the Stratford area where the London administration injected a massive 15 Bio GBP). The only thing working in London is the Tube as long as they're not on strike (again) or that Circle or Bakerloo or Jubilee is not broken somewhere.
It's more complicated to start a business in the rest of Europe than in the UK but then again, in the UK you're not quite certain of the solvency of a business.
There is absolutely no flexibility in the way the English do business. They have their rules and there is not the slightest room for any adaptation to the customer: the customer adapts to the supplier, always. If you're trying to do business with a UK company as a foreign business, the situation is even worse as the English are xenophobic and still feel like 'Britannia rules', whatever that may be.
In the meantime, London is getting slumpier by the minute (except for the Stratford area where the London administration injected a massive 15 Bio GBP). The only thing working in London is the Tube as long as they're not on strike (again) or that Circle or Bakerloo or Jubilee is not broken somewhere.
What a load of anti-British clap trap. What country do you live in?
Why don't you provide some evidence to back up your claims if you can find any.
I've recently started my own business in England so I know how it is.
What a load of anti-British clap trap. What country do you live in?
Why don't you provide some evidence to back up your claims if you can find any.
I've recently started my own business in England so I know how it is.
Congrats to you and good luck. You'll sure need it.
What does the country I live in matter to you? The thing is I did business for over 3 years with the UK. And it's like I said, period. But you're not the worst people, there are still the Chinese to try and f... a non-native.
BTW:
1) are the water fountains already closed or are they still running?
2) The only thing I miss about the UK would probably be LBC with Nick Ferrari and James O'Brian. So yes, I know some of everyday life in the UK and how the Brits are with the foreigners.
Congrats to you and good luck. You'll sure need it.
What does the country I live in matter to you? The thing is I did business for over 3 years with the UK. And it's like I said, period. But you're not the worst people, there are still the Chinese to try and f... a non-native.
BTW:
1) are the water fountains already closed or are they still running?
2) The only thing I miss about the UK would probably be LBC with Nick Ferrari and James O'Brian. So yes, I know some of everyday life in the UK and how the Brits are with the foreigners.
It?s interesting that you chose to hide behind your anonymity so we all have no idea what country you either come from or live in now. If you think your home country is better then don?t hide.
The fact is the UK is no different to any other country. If you make an effort and assimilate with the local culture you will get on just fine. There are good and bad people here just like everywhere else.
Laws are rules that are set in black and white to define, as close as we can, a common sense of ethics. If a law about wearing a blue shirt on Tuesday was tax deductible for special reasons and a corporation enforced that all employees wore blue shirts every Tuesday for the purposes of tax relief then it's a clear abuse of the law.
Yes the law is partly to blame just as it is partly to blame for allowing a large number of criminals to receive reduced sentences but is our reaction when we read about a child molester receiving a 1-year sentence through a plea-bargain that they just complied with the law and got away with it?
There's nothing we can do about it but we don't applaud them and look forward to whatever abuses tomorrow brings. Laws will always be insufficient to govern people but there is an expectation that people have the decency to comply with them without force.
Yeah, I'm sure all the companies are desperate to pay their taxes but the complexity is holding them back and only allowing them to pay a fraction of it. Presumably this complexity is what drives them to simpler tax codes in places like Luxembourg, Monaco, The Channel Islands etc.
I would put it to you that it is more complex to register a company outside of the country you trade in to receive a reduced tax rate than it is to comply with any given country's tax code.
Sorry, but you're clueless.
If the law says that you get a deduction for wearing a blue shirt on Tuesday, then you get the deduction. It is not fraudulent and is not an abuse of the law.
Since you seem to think that "I want them to pay more taxes" somehow overrides "they are paying the amount required by law", there's no point in arguing you. Continue to stew in your ignorance.
Comments
Note first that the headline specifies that they are accused of AVOIDING tax, not EVADING tax. So what is the difference?
Tax noncompliance describes a range of activities that are unfavorable to a state's tax system. These include tax avoidance, which refers to reducing taxes by legal means, and tax evasion which refers to the criminal non-payment of tax liabilities.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_avo...nd_tax_evasion.
So let's see what that headline should really read...
"Apple, Amazon, Google believed to be saving money on taxes by using totally legal methods in the UK"
or even
"Apple, Amazon, Google not complete idiots when it comes to paying tax in the UK"
or perhaps
"Apple, Amazon, Google paying the taxes they are legally required to in the UK"
Setanta
This (as is usual with the Daily Mail) is even more of a non story that it at first seems.
Note first that the headline specifies that they are accused of AVOIDING tax, not EVADING tax. So what is the difference?
And the difference is that the UK government has just introduced new anti-avoidance rules. UK banks are not allowed to avoid paying tax and the law for other companies are getting stricter.
This is why Apple, Goole et al are being targeted now.
This (as is usual with the Daily Mail) is even more of a non story that it at first seems.
Note first that the headline specifies that they are accused of AVOIDING tax, not EVADING tax. So what is the difference?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_avo...nd_tax_evasion.
So let's see what that headline should really read...
"Apple, Amazon, Google believed to be saving money on taxes by using totally legal methods in the UK"
or even
"Apple, Amazon, Google not complete idiots when it comes to paying tax in the UK"
or perhaps
"Apple, Amazon, Google paying the taxes they are legally required to in the UK"
Setanta
Yes, there is a big problem of loopholes in tax laws.
The thing is, it's quite complicated to create laws intended for a specific purpose from which an advantage is not taken off that wasn't considered in the first place.
For instance, here in Belgium, we have the concept of notional interest. This concept levels the proper capital (not bearing interest) of a company to debt (interests are deductible). Well, notional interest would mean that a fictuous 3% of the proper capital is considered as deductible interest, the purpose of which was to reinforce the balance sheet of SME's.
Now the thing is, that big corporations created fiscal constructions involving 2 or more companies, lending money from each other and "creating" proper capital. That way they'd win both sides: through the deductible interest and with the notional interest.
What I'd suggest is that next to a law, the gist of it, the purpose of it would also have to be published the purpose of it being that a judge would be able to uphold specific cases against the purpose of a law.
Lawyers will claim that this can create arbitrary ruling. However, these arbitrary rulings already exist. On the contrary, the rulings would be more in line with democratically voted laws because everybody now would know how a law needs to be interpreted iso of interpreting a law along a person's needs and profiting of all the loopholes. BTW: if someone thinks you can close all the loopholes in a law, think again and read Gödel.
For a minute, I thought "how can they be including the gross sales numbers when talking about taxes - taxes are on profits!", but then remembered it's Europe. And then people wonder (and complain) that the same products cost more over there...
Corporation tax in the UK is on net sales (i.e. profits). The article is extremely badly written by someone with no idea about tax law - that should be expected given it's a blog.
The cost of the product is not higher to make up for the tax Apple don't pay, it's partly down to VAT (paid by the retailer), infrastructure costs, distribution costs and supply/demand. Incidentally, the iPhone 4Gs can be had for free with a contract that will cost you less than AT&Ts over the same time period, so not every product is more expensive. Don't let your prejudices or what you watch on Fox get in the way of reality.
Apple is a BIG business, I'm sure they consult very good tax people in the UK on how to manage the tax bit. Nothing wrong with that. All big companies do that.
That's what I was saying, it seems to be ok as long as everyone else does it. Perhaps we should find more loopholes in the law so that every citizen can benefit from such privileges. Imagine a world where we all pay next to no taxes. Everybody wins right?
That's what I was saying, it seems to be ok as long as everyone else does it. Perhaps we should find more loopholes in the law so that every citizen can benefit from such privileges. Imagine a world where we all pay next to no taxes. Everybody wins right?
Companies are expected to follow the law. There's no evidence that Apple has failed to do so.
If the law allows me to take a tax deduction for wearing a blue shirt on Tuesdays, then I am well within my rights to do so. It would also be well within your rights to object to that law and try to get it repealed.
The tax code needs to be simplified. What you're seeing here is almost certainly simply a matter of complexity and disagreement over what some of the laws mean. Tax law should be simple, clear, and easy to enforce. The fact that it isn't is clearly the government's fault, not the companies who are struggling to comply.
Like making a decent salary iso taking cheap labour?
Absolutely. If the "cheap labo(u)r" is a willing participant, and the wages are paying for their food, shelter, and family, and working conditions and standards exceed (not by much, necessarily) those of the country in which the labor is located.
Some people suggest this is unfair. However, 1) the tax gets ridden off in the Country where the profit was made (thereby lessening the tax libility), and 2) those taxes fund the taxing Country's foreign operations.
Since it is largely companies who benefit from a Country's foriegn operations, it seems fair the companies pay to support said operations.
The UK is suffering here because companies like Apple are choosing to base their business outside of the UK due to lower corporate tax rates elsewhere. Not much they can do unless the loopholes are not there and the accountants have got too creative.
I'm not surprised. Apple is just another greedy, tax dodging big corporation. It's about time Cameron & Osborne stopped pissing about and started closing down the loopholes that let corporations get away with this. The average person or small business are taxed left, right and centre here but big corporations keep getting away without paying their fair share year after year. It makes my blood boil.
If the law allows me to take a tax deduction for wearing a blue shirt on Tuesdays, then I am well within my rights to do so. It would also be well within your rights to object to that law and try to get it repealed.
Laws are rules that are set in black and white to define, as close as we can, a common sense of ethics. If a law about wearing a blue shirt on Tuesday was tax deductible for special reasons and a corporation enforced that all employees wore blue shirts every Tuesday for the purposes of tax relief then it's a clear abuse of the law.
Yes the law is partly to blame just as it is partly to blame for allowing a large number of criminals to receive reduced sentences but is our reaction when we read about a child molester receiving a 1-year sentence through a plea-bargain that they just complied with the law and got away with it?
There's nothing we can do about it but we don't applaud them and look forward to whatever abuses tomorrow brings. Laws will always be insufficient to govern people but there is an expectation that people have the decency to comply with them without force.
the companies who are struggling to comply.
Yeah, I'm sure all the companies are desperate to pay their taxes but the complexity is holding them back and only allowing them to pay a fraction of it. Presumably this complexity is what drives them to simpler tax codes in places like Luxembourg, Monaco, The Channel Islands etc.
I would put it to you that it is more complex to register a company outside of the country you trade in to receive a reduced tax rate than it is to comply with any given country's tax code.
The UK is smaller than Michigan and its economy sucks. They should be glad that any company does business there. If the UK starts hitting on all these international companies to prop up their failing economy everyone will just relocate. The VAT (sales tax) in the UK is 20% and everything cost 2-3x the price in the states. How can the UK government even hope to survive if they make life impossible for companies to do business there.
You don't have a bloody clue what you are talking about. Michigan is a shithole. You can't compare the UK to a US state. The UK economy is doing better than the US economy thank you. We don't have a trillion dollar debt. We don't have 50 million people without healthcare. It's very easy to do business here, you don't have as much red tape as other parts of Europe. We have no need to be grateful. Companies do business here because they make a lot of money.
What we lack is a government willing to crack down on tax avoidance by big corporations and wealthy individuals. Frankly I don't care if they all piss off where they came from, they don't contribute much to our country anyway if they're avoiding tax.
Absolutely. If the "cheap labo(u)r" is a willing participant, and the wages are paying for their food, shelter, and family, and working conditions and standards exceed (not by much, necessarily) those of the country in which the labor is located.
Again, read the analogy between what you've written down and the situation of the kapo and the slave labour in a concentration camp.
Then think about what you've written. Your kind of reasoning actually makes people comfortable with the thought of child labour.
There is a lot of red tape in the UK.
It's more complicated to start a business in the rest of Europe than in the UK but then again, in the UK you're not quite certain of the solvency of a business.
There is absolutely no flexibility in the way the English do business. They have their rules and there is not the slightest room for any adaptation to the customer: the customer adapts to the supplier, always. If you're trying to do business with a UK company as a foreign business, the situation is even worse as the English are xenophobic and still feel like 'Britannia rules', whatever that may be.
In the meantime, London is getting slumpier by the minute (except for the Stratford area where the London administration injected a massive 15 Bio GBP). The only thing working in London is the Tube as long as they're not on strike (again) or that Circle or Bakerloo or Jubilee is not broken somewhere.
That's quite untrue.
There is a lot of red tape in the UK.
It's more complicated to start a business in the rest of Europe than in the UK but then again, in the UK you're not quite certain of the solvency of a business.
There is absolutely no flexibility in the way the English do business. They have their rules and there is not the slightest room for any adaptation to the customer: the customer adapts to the supplier, always. If you're trying to do business with a UK company as a foreign business, the situation is even worse as the English are xenophobic and still feel like 'Britannia rules', whatever that may be.
In the meantime, London is getting slumpier by the minute (except for the Stratford area where the London administration injected a massive 15 Bio GBP). The only thing working in London is the Tube as long as they're not on strike (again) or that Circle or Bakerloo or Jubilee is not broken somewhere.
What a load of anti-British clap trap. What country do you live in?
Why don't you provide some evidence to back up your claims if you can find any.
I've recently started my own business in England so I know how it is.
What a load of anti-British clap trap. What country do you live in?
Why don't you provide some evidence to back up your claims if you can find any.
I've recently started my own business in England so I know how it is.
Congrats to you and good luck. You'll sure need it.
What does the country I live in matter to you? The thing is I did business for over 3 years with the UK. And it's like I said, period. But you're not the worst people, there are still the Chinese to try and f... a non-native.
BTW:
1) are the water fountains already closed or are they still running?
2) The only thing I miss about the UK would probably be LBC with Nick Ferrari and James O'Brian. So yes, I know some of everyday life in the UK and how the Brits are with the foreigners.
Congrats to you and good luck. You'll sure need it.
What does the country I live in matter to you? The thing is I did business for over 3 years with the UK. And it's like I said, period. But you're not the worst people, there are still the Chinese to try and f... a non-native.
BTW:
1) are the water fountains already closed or are they still running?
2) The only thing I miss about the UK would probably be LBC with Nick Ferrari and James O'Brian. So yes, I know some of everyday life in the UK and how the Brits are with the foreigners.
It?s interesting that you chose to hide behind your anonymity so we all have no idea what country you either come from or live in now. If you think your home country is better then don?t hide.
The fact is the UK is no different to any other country. If you make an effort and assimilate with the local culture you will get on just fine. There are good and bad people here just like everywhere else.
Laws are rules that are set in black and white to define, as close as we can, a common sense of ethics. If a law about wearing a blue shirt on Tuesday was tax deductible for special reasons and a corporation enforced that all employees wore blue shirts every Tuesday for the purposes of tax relief then it's a clear abuse of the law.
Yes the law is partly to blame just as it is partly to blame for allowing a large number of criminals to receive reduced sentences but is our reaction when we read about a child molester receiving a 1-year sentence through a plea-bargain that they just complied with the law and got away with it?
There's nothing we can do about it but we don't applaud them and look forward to whatever abuses tomorrow brings. Laws will always be insufficient to govern people but there is an expectation that people have the decency to comply with them without force.
Yeah, I'm sure all the companies are desperate to pay their taxes but the complexity is holding them back and only allowing them to pay a fraction of it. Presumably this complexity is what drives them to simpler tax codes in places like Luxembourg, Monaco, The Channel Islands etc.
I would put it to you that it is more complex to register a company outside of the country you trade in to receive a reduced tax rate than it is to comply with any given country's tax code.
Sorry, but you're clueless.
If the law says that you get a deduction for wearing a blue shirt on Tuesday, then you get the deduction. It is not fraudulent and is not an abuse of the law.
Since you seem to think that "I want them to pay more taxes" somehow overrides "they are paying the amount required by law", there's no point in arguing you. Continue to stew in your ignorance.