Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook paid £4,327 corporation tax in the UK in 2014

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 449 posts

Re: Facebook paid £4,327 corporation tax in the UK in 2014

#211

Post by sneak »

jkahn wrote: post #12

Global companies offshoring profits and not paying enough tax (in the eyes of many countries) was a hot topic at the last G20 summit in Brisbane. This isn't limited to Facebook, as the article explains. The issue and background here is that when large companies operate globally, each country has its own local subsidiary, owned by the global entity. Money is made in each country by selling goods or services. How are t…

Necessary services?

“There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him.” —Heinlein

Re: Facebook paid £4,327 corporation tax in the UK in 2014

#212

Post by spacecowboy_lon »

pjc50 wrote: post #176
marrs wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither the Isle of Man nor the Channel Islands are a part of the UK.

Urgh. This is part of the problem. They're Crown Dependencies. They're neither fully independent countries nor part of the UK. They're accountable to their own local electorates but host a lot of firms doing business that's really in other countries. They're ideal tax havens. I am fond of the constitutional tweeness of Man, Sark, etc, but their situation really does need to be regularised.

The last time that was on the cards suddenly all the MP"s expenses got stolen then exposed by a news paper whose owners live on sark.

Not that I am saying the two are related of course Inocent Grin

Re: Facebook paid £4,327 corporation tax in the UK in 2014

#213

Post by SuddsMcDuff »

dpatru wrote: post #113

In terms of providing social value, Facebook employees far surpass any government's employees. In just a few years Facebook has revolutionized how people connect with each other, whereas governments have, in general, barely been able to maintain the accomplishments of previous generations. This despite the fact that government generally force people to pay about one fifth of their labor, whereas Facebook offers its s…

You're taking a highly subjective view and presenting it as fact. That Facebook is a "socially beneficial organization" is extremely debatable. I would argue that Facebook has actually had a detrimental effect on social cohesion.

Re: Facebook paid £4,327 corporation tax in the UK in 2014

#214

Post by dragonwriter »

cpursley wrote: post #203

Corporations don't pay tax even when they do. The tax is a cost passed on to the end consumer. I'd rather see a combination of a progressive consumption tax (necessities < luxuries) combined with trade tariffs that's appropriate for the country being traded with. This would circumvent the shell company trick.

Yes, corporations pay tax, even when it looks like they just pass it on in prices, since they lose after tax income (except in the unusual case where price does not affect volume sold so long as competitors face the same price increase.)

Re: Facebook paid £4,327 corporation tax in the UK in 2014

#215

Post by [deleted] »

JupiterMoon wrote: post #195
guard-of-terra wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not finance helping quadriplegics from increased VAT? If it comes to that, why not finance helping quadriplegics from charity?

Why not charity? Because then the people donating to charity will (at least try to) impose conditions. So only quadriplegics or a certain faith or with a certain set of circumstances with receive help. (See e.g. the concepts of the deserving/undeserving poor and moral judgements with charities helping the poor in the UK pre-1945.)

[deleted]

Re: Facebook paid £4,327 corporation tax in the UK in 2014

#216

Post by caskance »

kmkemp wrote: post #202
newjersey wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple pays VAT and all the taxes it is legally obliged to pay. Don't blame Apple. They will pay the least amount they have to pay. Fix the loopholes.

Except that the reason the loopholes exist is because of the lobbying of companies that take advantage of them.

The fact that companies are able to create loopholes via lobbying is the problem. When you accept corrupt government as an unchangeable fact of nature, you've already conceded defeat.

Re: Facebook paid £4,327 corporation tax in the UK in 2014

#217

Post by scanr »

tomelders wrote: post #173
mrkmcknz wrote: post #18

The UK press seems to have a field day when it comes to multi-national corporations not paying corporation tax. We will no doubt shortly have a number of MPs telling us how unacceptable this is and that Facebook need to start paying up. This all irks me a little. 362 Facebook staff on an average salary of say £65,000 will contribute at least £7,230,696.60 in taxes and NI to HMRC. Let's also not pretend that £65,000 i…

I utterly reject this argument > 362 Facebook staff on an average salary of say £65,000 will contribute at least £7,230,696.60 in taxes and NI to HMRC. Let's also not pretend that £65,000 is the average salary at Facebook UK, it's likely much higher. First of all, that's Facebook employees paying tax. Not Facebook. That's their money that they are taxed on and they pay it. Secondly, no one is asking for Facebook to p…

> First of all, that's Facebook employees paying tax. Not Facebook. That's their money that they are taxed on and they pay it.

I'm reasonably confident that HMRC is entirely happy with corporations choosing to pay their staff more (and have those salaries taxed appropriately) rather than paying their employees less and paying corporation tax on the profits.

Re: Facebook paid £4,327 corporation tax in the UK in 2014

#218

Post by caskance »

tobltobs wrote: post #115
raverbashing wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, how much Apple money stays outside of the US because it was paid there? Also, how much VAT and other taxes are charged in an iPhone sold in Europe Same for Facebook, their ads generate VAT. Their employees there pay income tax.

First we were told to be nice to the rich and give them tax reduction, because we will be all happy for the trickling down pennies. And now we are supposed to give the cooperation tax relief because there is money trickling down from the employees?

You're not "supposed" to do anything. If you want to raise tax, raise tax. Just keep in mind that this changes incentives for anyone who has to pay that tax. That's not a threat, it's a fact.

Re: Facebook paid £4,327 corporation tax in the UK in 2014

#219

Post by wlievens »

raverbashing wrote: post #149
plouc wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you develop? I am genuinely curious.

That's easy to explain (although it might be tricky). The marginal value of money decreases as the absolute value increases. Getting a raise from $1k per month to $2k per month is more significant than from $2k to $3k Meaning that if you earn more, you'll usually save more. So now stuff is taxed at 50% (VAT or Sales tax), so everything will cost more, but it will be easier for the rich to afford it, because of no inc…

Give every citizen a yearly vat tax credit?

Re: Facebook paid £4,327 corporation tax in the UK in 2014

#220

Post by yrro »

JupiterMoon wrote: post #107
pja wrote: post #20

So they paid next to no corporation tax. Meanwhile their employees will have paid a stack of income tax & the new rules on VAT should mean that all Facebook Ad sales to UK customers are subject to UK VAT. I don’t think the UK is being shortchanged all that much. When Google/FB et al were able to shift Ad sales to low-VAT regime holding companies, that was definitely taking the piss. This? Meh.

This argument is not valid. Yes they are paying VAT and income tax. So what? They should also be paying corporation tax. A start up competitor would have to pay VAT, income tax and corporation tax.

But they are playing Corporation Tax. To put it another way... what additional tax do you want them to pay that they are currently not paying?
Post reply on HN