Help & FAQs    Search BCF    Members    Groups    Events Calendar
Resend my activation email : Register : Log in 
BCF: Bike Chat Forums


"Diverted Profits Tax" information deal?

 Reply to topic
Bike Chat Forums Index -> Politics & Current Affairs Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
View previous topic : View next topic  
Author Message

G
The Voice of Reason



Joined: 02 Feb 2002
Karma :
PostPosted: 21:15 - 27 Jan 2016    Post subject: "Diverted Profits Tax" information deal? Reply with quote
https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/30672208/international-deal-to-aid-tax-dodgers-hunt/

Will the UK end up better or worse off if a fairer share of tax is paid across countries?
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Lord Percy
World Chat Champion



Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Karma :
PostPosted: 21:27 - 27 Jan 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote
Sounds good to me.

It sets something of a level playing field and helps get some way around the usual argument that big companies will just go elsewhere if they have to pay full tax.

The article is fairly spare on information though. Which 30 countries signed this agreement?
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

G
The Voice of Reason



Joined: 02 Feb 2002
Karma :
PostPosted: 21:30 - 27 Jan 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote
Unfortunately a quick search was very light on articles about it.
Heard it on the (Radio) news earlier*.

*Well, just now on iplayer.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Polarbear
Super Spammer



Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Karma :
PostPosted: 22:47 - 27 Jan 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote
I get quite annoyed when they call the companies 'tax dodgers'. I pay no more tax than I have to, why should they?

The fault is with the governments not making rules that are foolproof however I expect a lot of people in government make use of all these 'loopholes' for their own benefit.

If I thought it might lower my taxes I might get a bit more excited about it, but it won't.
____________________
Triumph Trophy Launch Edition
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

smegballs
World Chat Champion



Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Karma :
PostPosted: 23:54 - 27 Jan 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote
Polarbear wrote:
I get quite annoyed when they call the companies 'tax dodgers'. I pay no more tax than I have to, why should they?

The fault is with the governments not making rules that are foolproof however I expect a lot of people in government make use of all these 'loopholes' for their own benefit.

If I thought it might lower my taxes I might get a bit more excited about it, but it won't.


Yeah if you are gonna bitch and moan, moan at HMRC for not enforcing collection.

I'd sure as hell get some flash accountants to ensure I paid the absolute legal minimum in tax, if I owned a company. I can't blame anyone else for doing the same.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

mentalboy
World Chat Champion



Joined: 05 May 2012
Karma :
PostPosted: 00:10 - 28 Jan 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lord Percy wrote:

The article is fairly spare on information though. Which 30 countries signed this agreement?


I can't see the US being one of the 30. Every state here decides how to tax it's residents, for example Florida has no income tax charge but taxes goods sales, South Carolina has lower sales tax rates but charges income tax (there is a Federal income tax rate to be paid in all states as well) and New York state has no corporation tax for SME's.
Sensible folks live near a state line and live in a zero income tax state but shop over the line in a zero rate sales tax state.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Itchy
Super Spammer



Joined: 07 Apr 2005
Karma :
PostPosted: 00:27 - 28 Jan 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote
Why do you think the government knows how to spend your money better than you do?

Companies that don't pay tax mean you don't pay the additional costs which are imposed on products and goods that you buy. Their BEP (break even points) are reduced if they have lower overheads.
____________________
Spain 2008France 2007Big one 2009 We all die. The goal isn't to live forever, the goal is to create something that will. In the end, your life will flash before your eyes. Make sure it is worth watching.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :
PostPosted: 08:24 - 28 Jan 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote
I for one welcome our New World Order overlords.

Talking about a "fairer share" of taxation is like pointing out that Hungary has been dodging its "fair share" of migrant rapes. There's nothing fair about coercion.
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Lord Percy
World Chat Champion



Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Karma :
PostPosted: 11:14 - 28 Jan 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote
smegballs wrote:
Polarbear wrote:
I get quite annoyed when they call the companies 'tax dodgers'. I pay no more tax than I have to, why should they?

The fault is with the governments not making rules that are foolproof however I expect a lot of people in government make use of all these 'loopholes' for their own benefit.

If I thought it might lower my taxes I might get a bit more excited about it, but it won't.


Yeah if you are gonna bitch and moan, moan at HMRC for not enforcing collection.

I'd sure as hell get some flash accountants to ensure I paid the absolute legal minimum in tax, if I owned a company. I can't blame anyone else for doing the same.


I do enjoy the hypocrisy in this sort of statement though (not necessarily from you).

People who say they'd do exactly the same thing - play the rules in their favour in order to get more money - yet they hate on anyone who plays the rules in their favour to get more money if it's in the form of state benefits and welfare.

Even though the amount of people who actually take the piss with welfare is minimal - how many real, proper, dole-scrounging wasters does the average person actually know? And how much do these people cost the state in comparison to large tax avoiding companies? (And yes, these companies do cost us money because we use their services and they take their profits out of the country, which is money being sucked out of Britain.)

Classic 1984 stuff really. Get the proles to hate each other so they don't focus on the big things that really matter e.g. corporate tax avoidance. In fact it's even worse now - people are becoming tax avoidance apologists, saying they'd do the same if they could..!
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :
PostPosted: 11:33 - 28 Jan 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote
Do we have to do this again?

There is no moral equivalence between taking more while providing nothing, versus holding onto more of the results of your productivity.

Businesses provide the exchequer and councils with plenty, simply as a cost of doing business. Business rates, PAYE, NI, import duties on all the tools required to work that we don't make in the UK any more. Let's not forget mandatory employer contributions into pension schemes, and statutory sick and maternity pay which forcibly socialise businesses and oblige the productive to carry the babyfarmers and ooh-me-back brigade.

The worst business contributes more than the best dole scrounger.

And then HMRC comes back again like a goddamn hyena, laughing "Ah! You had the temerity to make a profit even after all those costs! Hand it over!"

What's astonishing is that we have a private sector left. Please be aware that we're far, far better off with one than we were when everything was run by Central Services.

https://www.oilempire.us/oil-jpg/27b.jpg
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Lord Percy
World Chat Champion



Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Karma :
PostPosted: 13:23 - 28 Jan 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote
Rogerborg wrote:

The worst business contributes more than the best dole scrounger.


Right but my main point was that there really aren't that many dole scroungers. The financial hit from tax avoidance is far larger. To hand-wave it away is to say there's no problem in as many organisations as possible coming over here to profit from the British public, to the point that all our money is in their hands and there's nothing left to keep the country going.

When you say privatisation is better than Central Services, do you also mean healthcare and policing would be better for the country if every individual had to pay for their own level of protection?
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

G
The Voice of Reason



Joined: 02 Feb 2002
Karma :
PostPosted: 13:35 - 28 Jan 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lord Percy wrote:

Right but my main point was that there really aren't that many dole scroungers.

Your experience is different to mine.

However - the point of this post was a genuine question.
In the UK we do also in various ways benefit from people practicing tax avoidance in other countries.
Does anyone how much we would lose vs how much we would gain?

Further; in some cases companies practicing tax avoidance may just fully move abroad.
I'm not sure exactly how it works as far as internet services - I presume it's unlikely we'll ever be able to charge tax on a purely internet service hosted abroad if we don't want.

Then there's physical services - if you don't mind the wait, it's already cheaper to order from Chinese companies that don't have any UK presence, in some cases getting an item delivered from there cheaper than it would be just for the postage in the UK.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :
PostPosted: 14:54 - 28 Jan 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lord Percy wrote:
The financial hit from tax avoidance is far larger.

What "financial hit"?

These rules that I wrote say that you owe me £10,000. I know that sounds tough, but you have to understand that I know how to spend your money better than you do.

Wait, you only gave me £9,000? Well, the rules say you're a thief and now you owe me £15,000. Or would you prefer some jail time to think about, since you're a criminal? Turns out I built a prison using the money I took from you last year.

Taxation, the CliffsNotes version.
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Ste
Not Work Safe



Joined: 01 Sep 2002
Karma :
PostPosted: 15:00 - 28 Jan 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lord Percy wrote:
all our money is in their hands and there's nothing left to keep the country going.

Stop putting it in their hands by shopping at Amazon, Tesco, etc etc etc?
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website You must be logged in to rate posts

Lord Percy
World Chat Champion



Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Karma :
PostPosted: 15:05 - 28 Jan 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote
Rogerborg wrote:
Turns out I built a prison using the money I took from you last year.


My turn to request an answer to an overlooked question:

When you say privatisation is better than Central Services, do you also mean healthcare and policing would be better for the country if every individual had to pay for their own level of protection?
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Lord Percy
World Chat Champion



Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Karma :
PostPosted: 15:12 - 28 Jan 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ste wrote:
Lord Percy wrote:
all our money is in their hands and there's nothing left to keep the country going.

Stop putting it in their hands by shopping at Amazon, Tesco, etc etc etc?


This goes back round to that deep and complex argument relating to organisations getting too big to fail, gaining monopolies, forcing small businesses to close, etc.

It's already fast reaching a point where there isn't much choice any more.

I argued that cheap and efficient provision of goods and services is a good thing, but it needs to be controlled otherwise we'll have no choice but to take our custom to these entities, and if that's the only place we spend our money, we sure as hell need to make sure they're taxed properly, unless these organisations have a moment of benevolence and decide to start providing the things we all currently take for granted from the state - things which are currently funded through taxes.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :
PostPosted: 15:43 - 28 Jan 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lord Percy wrote:
When you say privatisation is better than Central Services, do you also mean healthcare and policing would be better for the country if every individual had to pay for their own level of protection?

Partly.

Emergency response can't wait on checking for cover. I'm OK with retaining that as a social service.

But non-emergency, why not? Either pay as you go - called fire and rescue lately? - or prioritise by the amount of tax paid.

What's the moral imperative to provide the exact same service to those who only take out as to those who put in?
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Ste
Not Work Safe



Joined: 01 Sep 2002
Karma :
PostPosted: 16:02 - 28 Jan 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lord Percy wrote:
It's already fast reaching a point where there isn't much choice any more.

Such as?
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website You must be logged in to rate posts

Lord Percy
World Chat Champion



Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Karma :
PostPosted: 16:09 - 28 Jan 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote
Rogerborg wrote:


What's the moral imperative to provide the exact same service to those who only take out as to those who put in?


Safer, healthier nation. Lower crime, no disease epidemics. That kind of thing. If left to private hands, for the highest fee-payers, it would soon descend into a pretty bad state of affairs and even the wealthiest wouldn't be immune to the social impacts all around them.

Oh but I agree about non-emergencies. Rescuing cats, locked in/out of your house... if you can't find someone in the community to help you with that kind of thing, you must have done something pretty bad in a past life.

Ste wrote:
Lord Percy wrote:
It's already fast reaching a point where there isn't much choice any more.

Such as?


Massive supermarkets, shopping centres where you have the same companies dominating the floorspace up and down the country. Fast food chains, etc.

It's true people can vote with their feet and just not shop there but you know as well as I do that it isn't so easily done when these shops do offer the best and cheapest service in most circumstances. So as they take more and more custom from the nation, it's only right that they pay the same taxes as the smaller businesses they've replaced.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :
PostPosted: 17:19 - 28 Jan 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lord Percy wrote:
Rogerborg wrote:
What's the moral imperative to provide the exact same service to those who only take out as to those who put in?

Safer, healthier nation. Lower crime, no disease epidemics.

Saved the best for last. That's the only one that appeals to my self interest. Double as I have fatal manflu.

Try again on the others.

If limited resources were prioritised based on the amount of taxes paid, how would "the nation" as a whole be any better or worse off?

Same amount of doctoring, same amount of sleuthing, just done for the benefit of different people. At the moment, there's a laughable pretence of equal provision when really the the squeakiest wheels get greased first.

Put on an NHS waiting list? Think everyone is dealt with in order of medical necessity, or first-come-first-served? Aw, cute. Now complain using the appropriate 27b/6 form and watch the secret magic happen.

What if instead of a system that secretly rewards whingers, we had one that openly rewards those who pay for it? The same amount of good gets done either way.

Pikeys gotta pike, right? If they knew that turning over a taxpayer's house - or stealing a taxpayer's bike - would get a much more robust response than preying on their own, what might happen?
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

smegballs
World Chat Champion



Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Karma :
PostPosted: 18:22 - 28 Jan 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lord Percy wrote:

When you say privatisation is better than Central Services, do you also mean healthcare and policing would be better for the country if every individual had to pay for their own level of protection?


Why not something in the middle a voluntary association of people who pay into a pooled fund that then pays out when the association members get sick/unemployed/robbed/fired.

Each association can then deliver the services that it's members require and you can shop around to get the best services for your needs. Want a high pay-in but longer support through unemployment? Choose X. Need cover for fire but not flooding? Choose Y.

Given the existence of low-probability, high-damage risks it does make sense to use a collective pool to insure against said risks. As long as said collectives are voluntary I don't see a problem. The problem with the govt is that it is a coercive relationship. They say "monies pls or jail" and in return you get "services" you may or may not require. I want a system where people are free to organise their own lives as they see fit when it comes to covering risk. That might be giving 90% of their salary to an association that houses/feed/healths them and their families. Or that might be someone who decides to self-insure and pay their own way through everything.

The underlying principle is that I don't know what is best for other people, they do.

Last edited by smegballs on 18:25 - 28 Jan 2016; edited 1 time in total
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Rob Fzs
World Chat Champion



Joined: 07 Oct 2015
Karma :
PostPosted: 18:24 - 28 Jan 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lord Percy wrote:
Rogerborg wrote:


What's the moral imperative to provide the exact same service to those who only take out as to those who put in?


Safer, healthier nation. Lower crime, no disease epidemics. That kind of thing. If left to private hands, for the highest fee-payers, it would soon descend into a pretty bad state of affairs and even the wealthiest wouldn't be immune to the social impacts all around them.

Oh but I agree about non-emergencies. Rescuing cats, locked in/out of your house... if you can't find someone in the community to help you with that kind of thing, you must have done something pretty bad in a past life.

Ste wrote:
Lord Percy wrote:
It's already fast reaching a point where there isn't much choice any more.

Such as?


Massive supermarkets, shopping centres where you have the same companies dominating the floorspace up and down the country. Fast food chains, etc.

It's true people can vote with their feet and just not shop there but you know as well as I do that it isn't so easily done when these shops do offer the best and cheapest service in most circumstances. So as they take more and more custom from the nation, it's only right that they pay the same taxes as the smaller businesses they've replaced.


Supermarkets are the biggest rip off merchants going, they'll buy milk off the spot market for 10ppl and then sell it to you for 40ppl+ , pure profiteering, while the tax payer has to subsidies the farmer for this to go on.
____________________
'00 Aprilia RS50 > '92 Honda CG > '99 Yamaha Fazer > '91 Yamaha RXS > '79 Suzuki X5 > 01' Honda Cg > 07' Honda Cg > 82' Kawasaki Z200 > suzuki gsxr 400 gk73a > honda vfr 400 NC30> Yamaha RD350 YPVS F2 > Kawasaki ZZR 600 D1 > Yamaha TZR 250 2MA >Suzuki TL1000R > Yamaha TDR250 > Honda 929 blade > Suzuki SV1000 > Honda H100
Mod 2 Passed 09/06/2011
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Im-a-Ridah
World Chat Champion



Joined: 20 Oct 2006
Karma :
PostPosted: 18:35 - 28 Jan 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote
Polarbear wrote:
I get quite annoyed when they call the companies 'tax dodgers'. I pay no more tax than I have to, why should they?

The fault is with the governments not making rules that are foolproof however I expect a lot of people in government make use of all these 'loopholes' for their own benefit.

If I thought it might lower my taxes I might get a bit more excited about it, but it won't.


Many companies expect the government to top up their employee's wages with tax credits, and so I expect them to not dodge tax.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

mentalboy
World Chat Champion



Joined: 05 May 2012
Karma :
PostPosted: 18:41 - 28 Jan 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote
G wrote:


... in some cases companies practicing tax avoidance may just fully move abroad.


I believe this is the sole argument for allowing firms, at least historically, to avoid paying tax on UK earned profits. Obviously it doesn't work with firms like Starbucks as your extra-fapped-choco-mocha-chino would be cold by the time it was delivered Wink

Quote:

I'm not sure exactly how it works as far as internet services - I presume it's unlikely we'll ever be able to charge tax on a purely internet service hosted abroad if we don't want.


I should imagine it'd be fairly tricky without international cooperation ...

Quote:
Then there's physical services - if you don't mind the wait, it's already cheaper to order from Chinese companies that don't have any UK presence, in some cases getting an item delivered from there cheaper than it would be just for the postage in the UK.


Not quite true, the goods themselves may be cheaper to buy and ship but you'll quite often get hit for a bill from Customs before they'll release your goods.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :
PostPosted: 18:51 - 28 Jan 2016    Post subject: Reply with quote
Im-a-Ridah wrote:
Many companies expect the government to top up their employee's wages with tax credits, and so I expect them to not dodge tax.

Harry HMRC extorts £100K from Yoyodyne Propulsion Systems and pockets £25K.
£75K goes to the Chancellor, who spends £25K on vital public works like translation services for benefits claimants.
£50K makes it to Delia DWP who pockets her £25K.
The remaining £25K is distributed among Yoyodyne's employees, who are ever so grateful to the government for looking out for them because that mean old Yoyodyne refuses to pay them a living wage.
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts
Old Thread Alert!

The last post was made 10 years, 59 days ago. Instead of replying here, would creating a new thread be more useful?
  Display posts from previous:   
This page may contain affiliate links, which means we may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. By clicking on an affiliate link, you accept that third-party cookies will be set.

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Bike Chat Forums Index -> Politics & Current Affairs All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
 You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

Read the Terms of Use! - Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
 
Debug Mode: ON - Server: birks (www) - Page Generation Time: 0.21 Sec - Server Load: 0.92 - MySQL Queries: 13 - Page Size: 143.22 Kb