Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> taxmaxxes funny way to spell 'steals from the public purse'
[flagged]
The software group Palantir paid just £2M in corporation tax in the UK in 2024
51–60 of 83 posts
Re: The software group Palantir paid just £2M in corporation tax in the UK in 2024
#52I seriously do not understand why companies pay taxes on the income and not the revenue. (EDIT: I mixed them up) I pay on the revenue. I also buy things. I also consume. And somehow I can manage with taxes on the revenue. This would also solve the problem of companies that get 10 M€ in revenue, but somehow only 10€ is taxed because expenditure, capex etc
Taxing companies on revenue would completely wipe out low-margin businesses like supermarkets, and create massive distortions in the economy where one company being vertically integrated and owning everything being practically the only option, as otherwise goods passed between businesses means tax is paid on the revenue twice. It would kill the economy overnight.
Why? If the low revenue busyness is taxed at 1% and the mega one at 30% (just examples).
Taxing on the income also means that you can offload taxes elsewhere easily
Re: The software group Palantir paid just £2M in corporation tax in the UK in 2024
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
>so it makes sense you don't pay taxes until you make back that $100m you lost LOL. You losing money with your business is no excuse to not pay taxes on profits you make after losing money. Just because you lost money doesn't mean you dont make profits until you earned back that money. Taxes should be paid every time you make money in the country your business operates in. Simple as that. Everybody benefits off of ta…
> Just because you lost money doesn't mean you dont make profits until you earned back that money. Taxes should be paid every time you make money in the country your business operates in. Over what timescale? For instance, if the first month I operate my business I have a loss of $50,000 (have to buy initial supplies and equipment, hire employees, etc.), but in the second month sales start taking off and I net $20,00…
Timescale has nothing to do with this though. You're Starbucks, you sell me a cup of coffee, you make profit from that cup of coffee, you pay taxes on that singular profit.
What your companies bank account states is not what I care about as tax collector. The profits you make have nothing to do with the equipment you bought earlier to even start the business. Otherwise you could simply: Buy expensive stuff -> even out with profits, buy expensive stuff again, even out with profits and never pay taxes.
Re: The software group Palantir paid just £2M in corporation tax in the UK in 2024
#54How to opt-out of sharing your NHS health records with Palantir:
https://www.nhs.uk/using-the-nhs/about-the-nhs/opt-out-of-sh...
Re: The software group Palantir paid just £2M in corporation tax in the UK in 2024
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Personally I think the tax authorities ought to take the line that a company posting serial losses like this is clearly not a viable, ongoing concern and ought to be wound up. Tax authorities don't need to do this. Investors will. Where will the money come from? If there's no future prospects, it will cease operations. > If Starbucks UK is a loss-making venture, they should have some explaining to do when they're o…
> I like how discussion of taxes turned everyone into a fierce defender of profit maximization. Nothing about adding back to the community, paying decent wages, etc. You are fundamentally missing the issue. What most of these multinationals do is to extract value from the places they operate but then move all the profit (in the books) to another tax jurisdiction, thereby not contributing to the community where they o…
What value do they extract? They provide a good or service to denizens. Unless of course you believe in a serf model of government in which people are an asset of the state and everything should serve the states goals.
Re: The software group Palantir paid just £2M in corporation tax in the UK in 2024
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Personally I think the tax authorities ought to take the line that a company posting serial losses like this is clearly not a viable, ongoing concern and ought to be wound up. Tax authorities don't need to do this. Investors will. Where will the money come from? If there's no future prospects, it will cease operations. > If Starbucks UK is a loss-making venture, they should have some explaining to do when they're o…
> I like how discussion of taxes turned everyone into a fierce defender of profit maximization. Nothing about adding back to the community, paying decent wages, etc. You are fundamentally missing the issue. What most of these multinationals do is to extract value from the places they operate but then move all the profit (in the books) to another tax jurisdiction, thereby not contributing to the community where they o…
The only sane argument to be made against this practice is that governments should make their tax systems more favourable to companies operating in their jurisdiction so they have no reason to move their profits to a more favourable jurisdiction.
Australia has, if I understand correctly, the highest corporate profit tax rate in the OECD. Higher than New Zealand, the US, Canada, the UK, Ireland, Japan, Turkey, China, Greece, Belgium, Denmark, Sweden, Iran, Zimbabwe, Iceland, Finland, Ukraine, Hungary, Qatar, Iceland, anyway…
Why wouldn’t you expatriate your profits and retain your loses as a multinational operating in Australia?
Australia is increasingly and rapidly driving itself toward a future where higher taxes result in lower tax revenues as individuals, business, and corporations pick up their capital and leave for jurisdictions with more favourable regulations and taxation.
Governments shouldn’t aim to maximise taxation, that always kills innovation and the entrepreneurial spirit. They should aim to optimise taxation to a point where businesses flourish and infrastructure is built and maintained, and otherwise generally not be heard from much at all.
Re: The software group Palantir paid just £2M in corporation tax in the UK in 2024
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
I use claude designed markdown renderer. This site is using the same. Others, for example using the same renderer: 1. NPM Supply Chain Attack Techniques: https://npm-supply-chain-attack-techniques.pagey.site/ 2. NPM Ecosystem Threat Report: https://npm-supply-chain-attacks-25-26.pagey.site/ AI generated "slop" is here, and it's here to stay. In case you do find some error in content, point that out please.
The content generally reads like Claude slop. Lots of self-narration, throat clearing sentences, overuse of verbs like “lands”, overuse of tidy sentence conclusions. It’s all fixable with a modicum of effort but combined with the slop styling I’m not sure what you’re trying to achieve other than just pushing slop online.
There is nothing wrong with using AI tools to do your work, or part of it. If there are genuine inaccuracies in the content, please point those out and I will fix them asap, so everyone can benefit.
These things are here, they are here to stay, and they will only get better. Better to learn to use them in correct manner, than shrug them off without any logical reasoning.
Re: The software group Palantir paid just £2M in corporation tax in the UK in 2024
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I like how discussion of taxes turned everyone into a fierce defender of profit maximization. Nothing about adding back to the community, paying decent wages, etc. You are fundamentally missing the issue. What most of these multinationals do is to extract value from the places they operate but then move all the profit (in the books) to another tax jurisdiction, thereby not contributing to the community where they o…
What value do they extract? They provide a good or service to denizens. Unless of course you believe in a serf model of government in which people are an asset of the state and everything should serve the states goals.
This is increasingly, and worryingly, becoming an ideology people are being swept up by.
It doesn’t help that there are Card Carrying Socialist activists in our public school system in Australia, indoctrinating kids in to a politically and economically bent out of shape ideology.
I don’t believe many Australians are aware of just how dangerously few steps away from the mouldy bread and rotting fish head soup lines version of “equality” we really are.
Since when has government, of any sort, been a reliable arbiter of truth or wisdom?
P.J. O’Rourke would be turning in his grave.
Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.
Socialists in Schools: https://www.victoriansocialists.org.au/campaigns/socialists-...
Re: The software group Palantir paid just £2M in corporation tax in the UK in 2024
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Personally I think the tax authorities ought to take the line that a company posting serial losses like this is clearly not a viable, ongoing concern and ought to be wound up. Tax authorities don't need to do this. Investors will. Where will the money come from? If there's no future prospects, it will cease operations. > If Starbucks UK is a loss-making venture, they should have some explaining to do when they're o…
> If there's no future prospects, it will cease operations. That's the point, there are plenty of future prospects, but the company is playing accounting games to hide the profits. > I like how discussion of taxes turned everyone into a fierce defender of profit maximization. No, we're just calling bullshit on the whole thing because we're tired of wealthy multinationals dodging taxes in our countries. That's how the…
There are counties that have zero percent corporate profits tax.
Be like them and the corporations won’t have a need to offshore their profit.
The alternative is One World Government, which, in its lesser form, empire, has a nasty habit rapidly turning quite sour.
Re: The software group Palantir paid just £2M in corporation tax in the UK in 2024
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Just because you lost money doesn't mean you dont make profits until you earned back that money. Taxes should be paid every time you make money in the country your business operates in. Over what timescale? For instance, if the first month I operate my business I have a loss of $50,000 (have to buy initial supplies and equipment, hire employees, etc.), but in the second month sales start taking off and I net $20,00…
Timescale has nothing to do with this though. You're Starbucks, you sell me a cup of coffee, you make profit from that cup of coffee, you pay taxes on that singular profit. What your companies bank account states is not what I care about as tax collector. The profits you make have nothing to do with the equipment you bought earlier to even start the business. Otherwise you could simply: Buy expensive stuff -> even ou…
What do you mean by "make profit from that cup of coffee"? A cup of coffee is hot bean water in a cup - is profit simply the price Starbucks charges minus the cost of (water + bean + cup)? What about the cost of energy to heat the water? What about the fractional cost of the machine that actually puts the water and beans together to brew the coffee (you could do some sort of analysis based on purchase price / total number of coffees made over useful lifetime)? What about the small fraction of time the barista spends making and handing the coffee to you? What about the wear and tear on the machine (e.g. it breaks down X% of the time and costs $Y on average to fix) - does that factor into this "profit" you keep talking about? What about the rent on the building? If none of that matters, then you should spin up a competitor where you simply stand on a street corner hand your customers a cup, cold water, and some raw beans - I don't think you'll take too many of Starbucks customers.
All of these factors, and many more play into the "profit" of an operation like Starbucks, so how do you determine what the real true profit of that one cup of coffee is? It is much simpler to simply say "Hey, just hand over x% of profits at the end of the year" with some reasonable guidelines as to how accounting should be done (see stuff like GAP for example) than to sit down and determine what the individual "profit" is for every single individual cup of coffee sold at every single Starbucks location.
>Otherwise you could simply: Buy expensive stuff -> even out with profits, buy expensive stuff again, even out with profits and never pay taxes.
Yep, you could do this. Only problem is, uh, you never make any money. If you're running a hobby or something, that's fine, but most people owning business want to realize some profit...
If course there are still shenanigans you can pull between different tax districts, but someone somewhere needs to realize a profit at some point - otherwise they are running a jobs program and not a business.