Guest sibon Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Erroneous comparison. Footballers get paid their market rate...if people didn't want to watch them they wouldn't get paid what they do. Except that most clubs run at a loss. Propped up by benefactors, who may, or may not be, tax evaders. I'm a Sheffield Wednesday fan and our owner has been cleared of all charges:D So has Redknapp's dog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sibon Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Sibon, read the monbiot article i clipped. The Con Dems brought these powers in.... I really can't read any more George Monbiot. There are limits to my dedication and he drives me nuts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxman Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 On News at ten tonight an MP has advised people to boycott Starbucks for non payment of corporation tax. This is a tax on their profits, and they have paid £0. As the MP said there are plenty of other coffee shops on the high street that pay their fair share, so people can show their disapproval by voting with their feet and using those. I know this has been mentioned before, but it's the first time I've heard a member of Parliament suggest it. Maybe this is the start of real people power. Instead of spouting off in the press the MP might like to propose a change in the law.....something he never did when Labour were in government, and then, if his ideas were taken up the tax loophole could be closed. It's dead easy.....IF politicians want to close tax loopholes they will pass laws to do so. Then HMRC will try to uphold those rules. IF politicians don't want to close loopholes they won't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
green Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 I really can't read any more George Monbiot. There are limits to my dedication and he drives me nuts. He does that to me sometimes too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Instead of spouting off in the press the MP might like to propose a change in the law.....something he never did when Labour were in government, and then, if his ideas were taken up the tax loophole could be closed. It's dead easy.....IF politicians want to close tax loopholes they will pass laws to do so. Then HMRC will try to uphold those rules. IF politicians don't want to close loopholes they won't. Yep,Labour had 13 years to close any loophole they wanted to..wonder why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
green Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Instead of spouting off in the press the MP might like to propose a change in the law.....something he never did when Labour were in government, and then, if his ideas were taken up the tax loophole could be closed. It's dead easy.....IF politicians want to close tax loopholes they will pass laws to do so. Then HMRC will try to uphold those rules. IF politicians don't want to close loopholes they won't. Mr Taxman, how do you feel when you see your superiors leaving the service to work for said big business and showing them the loops? This must surely be soul destroying? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
green Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Except that most clubs run at a loss. Propped up by benefactors, who may, or may not be, tax evaders. I'm a Sheffield Wednesday fan and our owner has been cleared of all charges:D So has Redknapp's dog. The Rangers tax story is an interesting one.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donuticus Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Won't make a blind bit of difference. The way Starbucks gets away with...operates is nothing new, tons more (UK) businesses have been doing exactly the same for years and years: they run the UK operation at break even (no profit to tax) or even at a slight loss (enough to offset any sort of tax liability, through relevant reliefs), and whatever profit they make is paid out as a business liability to a holding company overseas (somewhere with a much lesser rate of corpo tax, most probably Ireland Switzerland, as it happens) under a license to use the trade marks, trade dress, trade secrets (recipes etc.) (which are all owned by the holding co. and licensed to the trading arm co.) Standard stuff. All explained here for Starbucks, scroll to around middle of the page ("A LICENCE TO LOSE MONEY" sub-title). To do away with that, you need to either meddle directly into such businesses' affairs (a most unlikely proposition), or legislate the problem closed. EDIT at Harleyman US companies have been evading the "useless US tax collection system" for donkeys, locating their EU HQs in Ireland for the exact same 'tax trick' as I describe above. You might want to google Microsoft's Round Island One, for instance (or read the above linky, which also refers to it) All of which is perfectly legal. Any entity (person/business) that pays more tax than it is legally obliged too is foolish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Instead of spouting off in the press the MP might like to propose a change in the law.....something he never did when Labour were in government, and then, if his ideas were taken up the tax loophole could be closed. It's dead easy.....IF politicians want to close tax loopholes they will pass laws to do so. Then HMRC will try to uphold those rules. IF politicians don't want to close loopholes they won't. Yes, but this is one of the reasons why the tax system is so complicated. Because legislation is used in a way it was never intended by crafty accountants, as soon as one loophole is closed, another one opens up. Each time they fix one, the tax system becomes more complicated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sibon Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 All of which is perfectly legal. Any entity (person/business) that pays more tax than it is legally obliged too is foolish. Not true. I currently pay £60 per annum more than I need to. To not pay the £60 would take me three hours of work. I'm not that cheap:D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.