121–130 of 238 posts
Why would that bother anyone but the customer? Tech giants will just add it to the tab. People have no idea how much digital service is worth so if they want it, they pay whatever is the price. I don't think 2% (or even 10%) price hike will cause them to not advertise online their one simple trick to improve health of your joints. What are they gonna do? Print newspaper ad?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The global arguments about multinational tax usually conflate at least two issues: - total tax the corporate pays globally; and - share of the cake paid 'locally' vs in the home jurisdiction This measure seems to me to be more about the second of those than the first, but politically thats a hard sell so you see all the statistics about how much tax they paid 'in the UK' etc etc. Most people misread that. Politically…
The fairest way is to pay tax where you do business, you know, like you’re supposed to. It’s not really different for tech companies or global companies.
This is a pretty good idea. Tech giants make money in Europe paying little to no tax incorporating in Ireland, while all small to medium businesses incorporated in the UK pay the usual tax. Its simply unfair.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is this true? Edit: holy moly it is! https://metro.co.uk/2018/10/12/ed-sheeran-may-be-the-worlds-...
That article seems to be confusing revenue with profit. The $2 billion Amazon made in the UK is revenue; I suspect its profit is actually smaller.
You aren't buying from a UK company when you visit Amazon.co.uk, rather Amazon EU S.a.r.L (based in Luxembourg). This would take back 2% that is coming out of the pockets of UK consumers and being taxed (at a much lower rate) in Luxembourg.
The Amazon UK tax liability is barely anything. They put a handful of professional services through their books here, and most of that is wiped out by warehousing costs. As somebody else pointed out, Ed Sheeran pays more tax in the UK. It's madness.
Most multinationals do stuff like this... Because why wouldn't you? Some have argued it's their fiduciary duty to their shareholders to optimise their tax liabilities like this... But that doesn't mean we have to put up with it.
Why would that bother anyone but the customer? Tech giants will just add it to the tab. People have no idea how much digital service is worth so if they want it, they pay whatever is the price. I don't think 2% (or even 10%) price hike will cause them to not advertise online their one simple trick to improve health of your joints. What are they gonna do? Print newspaper ad?
Sure still achieves the UK.Gov goal, raise additional revenue, don't directly impact citizens.
Ed Sheeran pays more tax in the UK than Amazon.
Ed Sheeran is a person and is taxed differently than a company. That article is manipulative clickbait. UK Amazon executives pay more taxes than Ed Sheeran.
Celebs are not people. They are businesses.
The people who really get shafted on taxes are the like of professional athletes. The services they render their employers occur at very fixed times. They don't get to spread their income over decades as entertainers do.
This will start out as 2% in 2020 but probably be 10% by 2030. That's usually how these things work in the UK.
I know this gets said a lot, but I live for the day the world sees innovation and quality tech companies from Europe instead of taxation and regulation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, that confusion is made clear by the earlier statement that he made `1/5` the profit.... he did not make $400 million, which is 1/5th of 2 billion. It says he made $37 million.
It’s easy to keep profits small when you pay a large “license fee” to your offshore parent company.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A level playing field makes sense, and domestic companies are at a disadvantage if their local profits are taxed while foreign companies' "local profits" are taxed offshore at a lower rate. That said, this doesn't level the playing field, it tips it towards local companies. The tax on business revenues should apply to domestic companies as well, and it should apply to businesses of all sizes. If it has to be netted a…
There's absolutely nothing wrong with a government tipping the playing field towards local companies.
If that doesn't make sense, an example could help when you want to buy a hypothetical WidgetBox.
Amazon WidgetBox: $100.00
Local WidgetBox: $102.00
After the added tax on Amazon, now you have no choice but to pay $102.00 for something you could previously pay $100.00 for. In business speak, it's call "screwing you" - in the article it's dressed up as "helping local businesses (screw you)".