151–160 of 224 posts
Does anyone know what percent of US revenue Google pays in US taxes? I'm pretty sure it's not 9%
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is that? The same corporation could be paying exactly the same corporate tax rate on exactly the same base, under such a scheme.
In my understanding what you are saying is, a country will tax profit on revenue generating from its own territory by its own tax rate. For the sake of simplicity, assume 100% profit margin. Let R and R' be revenue generating without and with such tax law. Let T be tax rate. So a company was hoping R into its bank account. But with the new taxes it would be (R - RT). Naturally the company would just increase the reve…
One option, which I've not thought through, would be something like the following:
You make £500 profit.
You pay 20% corporation tax, so that's £100. The question is who does that get paid to?
If 15% of your revenue comes from the UK and 50% comes from France, then £15 of the corp. tax goes to the UK and £50 goes to France.
More complicated with different company structures and corp. tax differences between countries, etc, but I think this may be what they're getting at.
The title says EUR 5.4B, the text of the article states "between 51 and 54 billion euros". How is this accurate reporting on Reuters' part?
In English, otoh, billion = 10^9.
see, for instance: https://www.dict.cc/?s=billion&=DEEN&=
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my understanding what you are saying is, a country will tax profit on revenue generating from its own territory by its own tax rate. For the sake of simplicity, assume 100% profit margin. Let R and R' be revenue generating without and with such tax law. Let T be tax rate. So a company was hoping R into its bank account. But with the new taxes it would be (R - RT). Naturally the company would just increase the reve…
I think the key thing here is "based on" does not have to be "equal to". One option, which I've not thought through, would be something like the following: You make £500 profit. You pay 20% corporation tax, so that's £100. The question is who does that get paid to? If 15% of your revenue comes from the UK and 50% comes from France, then £15 of the corp. tax goes to the UK and £50 goes to France. More complicated with…
Also when US says 20%. It means US gets £100. US aint the sharing type :p.
How would this even work with territorial taxation countries such as Singapore/Hong Kong ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is that? The same corporation could be paying exactly the same corporate tax rate on exactly the same base, under such a scheme.
In my understanding what you are saying is, a country will tax profit on revenue generating from its own territory by its own tax rate. For the sake of simplicity, assume 100% profit margin. Let R and R' be revenue generating without and with such tax law. Let T be tax rate. So a company was hoping R into its bank account. But with the new taxes it would be (R - RT). Naturally the company would just increase the reve…
Say we have a hypothetical company that operates only in Sweden and Ireland, and has offices only in Ireland. It has a revenue of €10M and a profit of €1M.
This company had €4M (40%) of it's revenue in Sweden (tax rate 22%) and 60% of the revenue in Ireland (tax rate 12.5%). How should this corporation be taxed?
By proportion of revenue according to the normal tax rate in the country. So
In Sweden: Tax 40% (the proportion of revenue) of the profit
(€4M/10M) * €1M * 0.22 = €88k
In Ireland : Tax 60% of the profit
(€6M/10M) * €1M * 0.125 = €75k
So the total tax went from €125k to €163k, because the corporation was forced to pay taxes where it made business, rather than on Ireland alone.
Basically you just pretend that the corporation was in fact two corporations, where one €4M revenue corporation was in Sweden and the other was a €6M revenue corporation in Ireland. That's all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They pay for your infrastructure already Lol, what? The whole point is that WE pay for the infrastructure with our taxes, and those companies use the infrastructure without paying for it.
> those companies you mean the people who work to build the structure, the teams, the lines of reporting, the buildings, the equipment, the products, the provision of sales and customer service, the management of all of these... they don't pay tax? what is a company? who is a company? if you remove all the things that already pay tax (i.e. people) from a company, does the company still exist? and can it pay tax?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"they have a legal option not todo do business in europe" Do you see any way to do that other than to prevent eu businesses buying ads from google? Because i think that might have a few severe unintented consequences for businesses in the eu, and have exactly zero impact on google.
You think Google no longer being able to do business in a market so large (~500 million people?) that it eclipses the US by a comfortable margin will have no impact on them? That would damage Google a lot more than it would damage the EU nations.
Those eyeballs will still be worth the same.
it will make as much difference to google use as the us copyright fine made to sci hub.
"you are the product"
I wonder how much tax revenue the EU would have lost if Google and Facebook didn't exist.
This isn't the point here though? These companies are doing business in the EU and not playing fair by not paying their share of taxes. This isn't about preventing them from existing, it's about making them contribute what they owe to the EU countries.
$5bn isnt going to balance Greece's budget. Setting aside the potential arguments defending Google (I have genuinely have no opinion on them or any of the other companies), a comprehensive law that requires every internet company to track every dollar by country and pay proportional taxes on their revenue could, in my opinion, severely cripple innovation in a continent that is finding itself falling behind at a global scale due to a variety of macro-issues. I like to give governments the benefit of the doubt that they won't do something silly like that, but then I look at this net neutrality issue and start to wonder.
Bottom line, there does not appear to be a consensus on this issue "morally" (for lack of a better word) which is why we're seeing such diversity of views on HN and globally. Just throwing it out there...
I really hope a new tax bill comes through, I am tired of US companies (and others) that can simply avoid paying tax while small shops pay a lot of taxes in the EU. They use our well developed infrastructure for their own benefit and does not pay anything back. I hope they get a fat bill.
Of course tech companies are not blameless here, they have decided that paying taxes in Ireland is preferable to paying taxes in the US, but if they had their tax location in the US, I don't see how the EU would have a leg to stand on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Require UsTech to run their sales to their Ireland and German customers through their Ireland and German subsidiaries. Then tax them based upon the result of their (sales to Irish customers - Irish costs) and in Germany, the equavelent (sales to German customers - German costs). It's quite possible in those two places, they would pay no tax because their costs are higher, but this is also an incentive to keep employi…
A problem with this solution -- as a US company without a German subsidiary (but as with most online businesses, with German customers), do I now have to pay taxes in Germany? If the former, the logical conclusion of that approach is that every startup has to pay taxes in all 195 countries of the world, as soon as they open for business. This could be on $0.01 of ad revenue. If the latter, I'm strongly incentivized t…
They would only be able to deduct German costs, defined as the employment of someone with a NI number (or German equivalent) or another business with a tax number.