HeadingNorth Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 ill be happy when they all pay an equal % of tax as me and you pay It would take a huge cut in corporation tax to bring their rate down to 20%. Are you sure's what you really want? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 It would take a huge cut in corporation tax to bring their rate down to 20%. Are you sure's what you really want? no im happy to be ripped off by parasites like the well off and for the life of me cant understand why people like you think its ok . brainwashed come to mind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emma royd Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 no im happy to be ripped off by parasites like the well off and for the life of me cant understand why people like you think its ok . brainwashed come to mind I suppose being brainwashed might be preventing you from understanding the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 I suppose being brainwashed might be preventing you from understanding the world. another one :hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fake Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Government passes retrospective tax changes and tells Barclays to pay £500 million more tax to HMRC http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17181213 Barclays Bank has been ordered by the Treasury to pay half-a-billion pounds in tax which it had tried to avoid. You missed this bit; "However, he adds that Barclays may end up paying no more than £150m of additional tax." So it looks like deals are being done to avoid the full amount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 no im happy to be ripped off by parasites like the well off That would explain you calling for a flat tax rate. As things stand now, the rich pay 40% income tax and corporations pay about the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puisseguin Posted February 29, 2012 Author Share Posted February 29, 2012 You missed this bit; "However, he adds that Barclays may end up paying no more than £150m of additional tax." So it looks like deals are being done to avoid the full amount. You should perhaps bear in mind that this is in addition to tax already paid and is a government initiative to close a tax loophole that the previous government clearly did nothing to plug. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12513747 Barclays has revealed it paid £113m in corporation tax to the UK in 2009, 2.4% of its £4.6bn annual profit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Barclays has revealed it paid £113m in corporation tax to the UK in 2009, 2.4% of its £4.6bn annual profit. That's an utterly meaningless statistic; UK tax is not payable on worldwide profits, only on UK profits. Indeed, if a bank's international businesses made money but its UK business ran at a loss, it could pay a corporation tax bill of ZERO in comparison to it's multi-billion annual profit, and the response would still be "so what?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
green Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 That's an utterly meaningless statistic; UK tax is not payable on worldwide profits, only on UK profits. Indeed, if a bank's international businesses made money but its UK business ran at a loss, it could pay a corporation tax bill of ZERO in comparison to it's multi-billion annual profit, and the response would still be "so what?" Im sure one day we will find out that your assumption is way off the mark, and the good ole boys at Barclays were shifting monies through their networks of tax havens to ensure as little tax was paid as possible based on their UK profits. Ill bet a weeks wage im right, and your very wrong. What you saying? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
green Posted March 1, 2012 Share Posted March 1, 2012 That is called a strawman - calling him out on an argument that he didn't make. What he said was that the quoted statistic was meaningless. Ive re-read what was said and i concur. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.