ricgem2002 Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 This is what you said And you were and still are wrong. If you wanted to say that not all tax avoidance is applicable to all people, then say that. (It will of course be stating the obvious). i knew you would agree with me in the end (but you have a better way of putting it well done) just fyi im never wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 Could this be the beginning of the end for offshore tax avoidance? http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crickhowell-welsh-town-moves-offshore-to-avoid-tax-on-local-business-a6728971.html I can see many, many small businesses jumping on board, at which point the government will suddenly be very keen to change the law and close it down... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*_ash_* Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 Could this be the beginning of the end for offshore tax avoidance? http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crickhowell-welsh-town-moves-offshore-to-avoid-tax-on-local-business-a6728971.html I can see many, many small businesses jumping on board, at which point the government will suddenly be very keen to change the law and close it down... Are they trying to change the law so tax is paid on sales? Crickhowell residents want to share their tax avoidance plan with other towns, in a bid to force the Treasury into legislation to crack down on loopholes which allowed the likes of Amazon to pay just £11.9m of tax last year on £5.3bn of UK internet sales. Caffé Nero, which has not paid corporation tax in the UK since 2008, despite recording sales worth £1.2 billion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 Are they trying to change the law so tax is paid on sales? I'd find these cases more convincing if the campaigners didn't try to trick us by quoting sales figures rather than profits figures for these companies. The reality is that the UK is in tax competition with the rest of the world. Strict high tax enforcement would probably reduces revenue. If small businesses can't compete, then it's probably better to cut their tax rates rather than trying to increase the effective tax rate on the likes of Amazon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 (edited) Are they trying to change the law so tax is paid on sales?No, that's just for context, or journalistic patter. It would be completely unrealistic, make the UK about competitive as North Korea to do business in, and kill off entrepreneurship altogether for a start. Besides the fact that sales are already effectively taxed, with VAT. What the Treasury needs to do is attack mechanisms to offshore profits after sales. The UK is too big a commercial market for most players to just up sticks and give No.11 the rods altogether, so there's got to be a way somehow. unbeliever's last sentence (index tax rate on business size - with the size determined according to relevant criteria reasonably neutral for SMEs) is a good idea, amongst others. But so long as there's no political will... Edited November 11, 2015 by L00b Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 Tax is already paid on sales, VAT. Corporation tax on sales couldn't work AFAICS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 Tax is already paid on sales, VAT. Corporation tax on sales couldn't work AFAICS. Isn't VAT only really paid by the end user..ie us the consumer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 I'd find these cases more convincing if the campaigners didn't try to trick us by quoting sales figures rather than profits figures for these companies. The reality is that the UK is in tax competition with the rest of the world. Strict high tax enforcement would probably reduces revenue. If small businesses can't compete, then it's probably better to cut their tax rates rather than trying to increase the effective tax rate on the likes of Amazon. How can you quote a profit figure when the profit is moved offshore in a way that means it is never declared? ---------- Post added 11-11-2015 at 14:59 ---------- Isn't VAT only really paid by the end user..ie us the consumer? Yes, definitely. ---------- Post added 11-11-2015 at 15:02 ---------- No, that's just for context, or journalistic patter. It would be completely unrealistic, make the UK about competitive as North Korea to do business in, and kill off entrepreneurship altogether for a start. Besides the fact that sales are already effectively taxed, with VAT. What the Treasury needs to do is attack mechanisms to offshore profits after sales. The UK is too big a commercial market for most players to just up sticks and give No.11 the rods altogether, so there's got to be a way somehow. unbeliever's last sentence (index tax rate on business size - with the size determined according to relevant criteria reasonably neutral for SMEs) is a good idea, amongst others. But so long as there's no political will... Some business really do have a large revenue but low margin though... And others make it look like that by offshoring their profits to Ireland and the Netherlands... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 Some business really do have a large revenue but low margin though... And others make it look like that by offshoring their profits to Ireland and the Netherlands... Of course, and I'm quietly confident the net profits realised by Amazon, Starbucks and many other headlining businesses are much lower than what many people imagine, even on billions of turnover. Still, the name of the game is to take the covers off intergroup agreements with far less than arm's-length terms, under which subsidiaries-in-all-but-name, e.g. eBay Luxembourg SA, pay the mothership (or Caymans-based IP holding company controlled by the mothership) an annual royalty for the use of the mothership-or-IP-Holding Co-owned eBay trademarks in Europe which is calculated to amount to 99% of the profit realised by eBay Luxembourg SA year-in year-out, strangely regardless of variations therein... ...and that, let me tell you from the coalface, is a game played by all sundry from a long date, including significantly more, and significantly smaller, SMEs than the afore-mentioned "headlining businesses". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 Mainly I'm interested in whether I can open a company in the Channel Islands like the businesses in this town, and then charge my limited company for management services (contracting myself to actually provide them) and thus move my profit offshore. That bit I assume is all fairly straight forwards? Then I'll pay myself dividend and pay the usual tax on that I assume, since I'm resident in the UK, but I will have avoided the majority of the corporation tax that would be due if I operated solely within the UK mainland. Is that basically how it works? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now