LEAVE the Conservative Party and save your country!
Comments
-
Ah isn't he the CMC boss? Grubby spreadbetters.
Didn't he used to sleep in monaco and fly his PJ over to London every day to work, to avoid paying UK tax?0 -
You'd have to be earning ridiculous amounts of taxable income to justify that cost wouldn't you? Then again I guess the cost could be written off as a business expense.rick_chasey said:Ah isn't he the CMC boss? Grubby spreadbetters.
Didn't he used to sleep in monaco and fly his PJ over to London every day to work, to avoid paying UK tax?
I also initially misread it as he used to fly in his PJs to London every day which puts a different context on things!0 -
-
What, spreadbetting or the House of Lords?rick_chasey said:It's a really grubby business which preys on people's worst instincts.
0 -
-
I've read two articles about the First Homes scheme, and still don't understand who the money goes from and to.
New homes are up to 50% cheaper for first time buyers, and then cheaper if sold to another first time buyer, but how does that work? Who wants to resell for less than market rate unless someone is making up the difference?0 -
Yeah I don’t understand that either.kingstongraham said:I've read two articles about the First Homes scheme, and still don't understand who the money goes from and to.
New homes are up to 50% cheaper for first time buyers, and then cheaper I'd sold to another first time buyer, but how does that work? Who wants to resell for less than market rate unless someone is making up the difference?
Surely if you are forced to sell at 50% you double the asking price0 -
50% of the market rate, I think. It sounds like a long running nightmare to administer once it is inevitably scrapped.rick_chasey said:
Yeah I don’t understand that either.kingstongraham said:I've read two articles about the First Homes scheme, and still don't understand who the money goes from and to.
New homes are up to 50% cheaper for first time buyers, and then cheaper I'd sold to another first time buyer, but how does that work? Who wants to resell for less than market rate unless someone is making up the difference?
Surely if you are forced to sell at 50% you double the asking price0 -
Worthwhile mentioning a rare victory since they are so rare.
Looks like Biden and the other G7 members managed to twist Suank’s arm enough to start the process to close the tax haven model.
Race to the bottom has been halted 🙌🏻.
0 -
I think you are being optimistic but it is a good start.rick_chasey said:Worthwhile mentioning a rare victory since they are so rare.
Looks like Biden and the other G7 members managed to twist Suank’s arm enough to start the process to close the tax haven model.
Race to the bottom has been halted 🙌🏻.0 -
-
I've always wondered how the new homes that get built with covenants that they are only for locals (in places like Devon and Cornwall) work. I think it's a good thing and much needed but what's stopping them selling on to 'incomers' and pocketing the benefit?kingstongraham said:I've read two articles about the First Homes scheme, and still don't understand who the money goes from and to.
New homes are up to 50% cheaper for first time buyers, and then cheaper if sold to another first time buyer, but how does that work? Who wants to resell for less than market rate unless someone is making up the difference?0 -
It’s the sort of multinational rules based systems they give up a bit of sovereignty that I so love apparently.rick_chasey said:Worthwhile mentioning a rare victory since they are so rare.
Looks like Biden and the other G7 members managed to twist Suank’s arm enough to start the process to close the tax haven model.
Race to the bottom has been halted 🙌🏻.
For once Sunak saw it the same way0 -
As with nearly everything in tax, there is a fair bit more to it than the headlines. I'll be reading the detailed developments with some interest as its part of my job, but tbh most countries have had the tools to fight tax haven abuse for years, mainly in the controlled foreign company regs.rick_chasey said:
It’s the sort of multinational rules based systems they give up a bit of sovereignty that I so love apparently.rick_chasey said:Worthwhile mentioning a rare victory since they are so rare.
Looks like Biden and the other G7 members managed to twist Suank’s arm enough to start the process to close the tax haven model.
Race to the bottom has been halted 🙌🏻.
For once Sunak saw it the same way
Theres also the question of how much difference it will make.
Start by asking yourself how many countries have headline rates below 15%. In the EU (off the top of my head) it is the mighty economies of Ireland, Hungary and Serbia. And no G7 or G20 members have rates below that IIRC.
All this for a tax that accounts for less than 10% of total tax revenues (in the UK at least but that is probably not far off the mark for quite a few others).
All it will do for me is add to my departments workload as there will invariably be a lot of admin to prove it makes very little or no difference. I suppose it gives the usual ill-informed big business bashers a nice warm feeling though
Edit: Sunak probably doesn't mind as the UK rate is already above the threshold."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
-
Sounds like it's giving you a nice warm feeling then. Which is odd, as effectively this is cartel behaviour.rick_chasey said:The Adam Smith institute is *not happy* which is a good sign
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
States are not private businesses and the multinational business model requires a multinational tax and regulatory framework.
Current situation is the multinationals exploit the loopholes in a national framework.0 -
Bit of a sweeping generalisation about the behaviour of multinationals.rick_chasey said:States are not private businesses and the multinational business model requires a multinational tax and regulatory framework.
Current situation is the multinationals exploit the loopholes in a national framework.
I've already told you the tools are already there to deal with this. This is to a large extent grandstanding which will create extra admin for every sizeable multinational business regardless of whether they are exploiting the rules or not.
And it is still cartel behaviour as they are colluding to fix a minimum price. In any other situation it would be illegal and punishable by large fines."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I think the important bit isn't the minimum tax rate.0
-
There is so much more to tax than rates, but it is rates which grab the headlines. That's why Rick is getting so excited.kingstongraham said:I think the important bit isn't the minimum tax rate.
What do you think the important part is?"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Scrapping the digital services taxes and going for a different way of taxing in the country the company operates. I think the companies won't mind that as an alternative.Stevo_666 said:
There is so much more to tax than rates, but it is rates which grab the headlines. That's why Rick is getting so excited.kingstongraham said:I think the important bit isn't the minimum tax rate.
What do you think the important part is?0 -
I have no skin in the game. But do you think this is a retrograde step? It makes sense to me. There’s been ‘legal’ tax avoidance and this is just the first step to ensure some parity. It’s been the Conservative policy to clamp down on tax avoidance measures for years, and now they’re committed to the levelling up myth. Is it such a problem?Stevo_666 said:
There is so much more to tax than rates, but it is rates which grab the headlines. That's why Rick is getting so excited.kingstongraham said:I think the important bit isn't the minimum tax rate.
What do you think the important part is?
Not digging, genuinely interested as this is your professional area…0 -
That's not right.kingstongraham said:
Scrapping the digital services taxes and going for a different way of taxing in the country the company operates. I think the companies won't mind that as an alternative.Stevo_666 said:
There is so much more to tax than rates, but it is rates which grab the headlines. That's why Rick is getting so excited.kingstongraham said:I think the important bit isn't the minimum tax rate.
What do you think the important part is?
'Pillar 1' of the OECD initiative is the replacement for the digital services tax: that is still being introduced. It deals with taxing rights where there is no/limited physical presence.
The minimum tax initiative is 'Pillar 2' which is grabbing the headlines currently and is in addition to Pillar 1.
On top of the very substantial amount of legislation in place already.
Unfortunately a lot of devil will be in the details and this is yet to be determined. I suppose it will keep demand for tax people high."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I'm not getting excited about the rate mentioned.Stevo_666 said:
There is so much more to tax than rates, but it is rates which grab the headlines. That's why Rick is getting so excited.kingstongraham said:I think the important bit isn't the minimum tax rate.
What do you think the important part is?
I'm excited at the idea that big economies are working together to try and close the tax haven loophole, by making corporate tax about where the economic activity occurs and not where the corporation decides to book the profit.0 -
You clearly don't understand the issue. Companies cannot just 'book the profit' wherever they choose and there are existing controlled Foreign Company (CFC) regs to deal with that which I've already referred to above, ones which specifically have substance tests/look at location of economic activity etc and impose tax on the shareholder where these are not met. On top of this there are the transfer pricing regs which impose arms length requirements on all intra-group transactions.rick_chasey said:
I'm not getting excited about the rate mentioned.Stevo_666 said:
There is so much more to tax than rates, but it is rates which grab the headlines. That's why Rick is getting so excited.kingstongraham said:I think the important bit isn't the minimum tax rate.
What do you think the important part is?
I'm excited at the idea that big economies are working together to try and close the tax haven loophole, by making corporate tax about where the economic activity occurs and not where the corporation decides to book the profit.
What do you think is new here?"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
The problem is that you don't have to look very hard to find companies paying low single digit taxes compared to their profits in the countries in which they operate and generated those profits. So if the rules are working so well then why is there so many examples of companies paying 1-5% tax rates on the profits in countries such as the UK. My limited company does not pay such a low rate so why is your low tax rate related to scale of the business is what all small to medium enterprises in the UK are asking.Stevo_666 said:
You clearly don't understand the issue. Companies cannot just 'book the profit' wherever they choose and there are existing controlled Foreign Company (CFC) regs to deal with that which I've already referred to above, ones which specifically have substance tests/look at location of economic activity etc and impose tax on the shareholder where these are not met. On top of this there are the transfer pricing regs which impose arms length requirements on all intra-group transactions.rick_chasey said:
I'm not getting excited about the rate mentioned.Stevo_666 said:
There is so much more to tax than rates, but it is rates which grab the headlines. That's why Rick is getting so excited.kingstongraham said:I think the important bit isn't the minimum tax rate.
What do you think the important part is?
I'm excited at the idea that big economies are working together to try and close the tax haven loophole, by making corporate tax about where the economic activity occurs and not where the corporation decides to book the profit.
What do you think is new here?0 -
The likes of Starbucks / Costa use their Luxembourg (or other very low corporate tax located companies) comapnies to create loans to their UK companies so the repayment costs offset any profits they generate in the UK. They copy this across the globe so create artifically low profits or losses in the higher taxed regimes and increased profits in the low tax regimes.
That is what Rick and many others want prevented (and I'm firmly in Rick's camp on this one).
Corporation tax works for national companies, but it doesn't work for global companies and as a result there isn't a level playing field.1 -
-
That is entirely what happens in practice. Anyone off the top of their head can name a bunch of companies that do this.Stevo_666 said:
You clearly don't understand the issue. Companies cannot just 'book the profit' wherever they choose and there are existing controlled Foreign Company (CFC) regs to deal with that which I've already referred to above, ones which specifically have substance tests/look at location of economic activity etc and impose tax on the shareholder where these are not met. On top of this there are the transfer pricing regs which impose arms length requirements on all intra-group transactions.rick_chasey said:
I'm not getting excited about the rate mentioned.Stevo_666 said:
There is so much more to tax than rates, but it is rates which grab the headlines. That's why Rick is getting so excited.kingstongraham said:I think the important bit isn't the minimum tax rate.
What do you think the important part is?
I'm excited at the idea that big economies are working together to try and close the tax haven loophole, by making corporate tax about where the economic activity occurs and not where the corporation decides to book the profit.
What do you think is new here?
For example:
https://www.euronews.com/2021/05/04/amazon-paid-no-corporation-tax-in-europe-last-year-despite-record-44bn-sales-income0 -
Also, the offshoots in the low tax areas own all the IP and the branches here have to pay them a fee to use that IP and services associated with them...apparently.0
