The Tax Thread
Comments
-
I guess it's about ideology? You know, the Tories are the party of no/low deficit, whilst Labour are tax and spend.
"At the end of the day", political parties are about ideology and not about following the science or evidence-based decision making (in spite of what they may claim).0 -
I was addressing the point made by SC.Do you really think I'm not aware of the economic aspects of this? Sigh...rick_chasey said:
Problem is Stevo it’s an economic issue not a tax and accounting one.Stevo_666 said:
Like I said, I'll be looking at the whole picture from a professional and more objective point of view - rather than your approach of deciding in advance that the budget is rubbish because you don't like them.surrey_commuter said:If they do reverse the corp tax cuts then that is a quite remarkable policy u turn.
The previous argument was that it was too easy to avoid to be worth bothering with which meant Laffer applied if you made yourself relatively competitive, plus it gave a big lift to inward investment.
If all of the above is true it would suggest that they don’t just want to fvck business but be seen to fvck business.
I wonder if there is residual anger that 99% of them did not support Brexit?
On the tax competitiveness front, its definitely a factor which will also need to be looked at in the context of what other countries are doing. What are your thoughts on the proposed Biden tax rises, for example?"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Don’t know anything about themStevo_666 said:
Like I said, I'll be looking at the whole picture from a professional and more objective point of view - rather than your approach of deciding in advance that the budget is rubbish because you don't like them.surrey_commuter said:If they do reverse the corp tax cuts then that is a quite remarkable policy u turn.
The previous argument was that it was too easy to avoid to be worth bothering with which meant Laffer applied if you made yourself relatively competitive, plus it gave a big lift to inward investment.
If all of the above is true it would suggest that they don’t just want to fvck business but be seen to fvck business.
I wonder if there is residual anger that 99% of them did not support Brexit?
On the tax competitiveness front, its definitely a factor which will also need to be looked at in the context of what other countries are doing. What are your thoughts on the proposed Biden tax rises, for example?
My ideas on tax are broad base, low rate with as close to no exceptions as possible.
I felt the corp tax cuts were possibly going too far but you put up a very strong case for why we should look to match Ireland.0 -
Not sure quite what you are asking. I think some wonder how you rationalise the your views you've posted on government spending and borrowing with the apparent unwavering support of Johnson's big spending and borrowing.Stevo_666 said:
Why do you think that?rjsterry said:
Little bit oversensitive there. Nobody has posted that they think the budget is rubbish. And the thread isn't just about the budget. Personally, I can't see a major problem with a point or two on the rate over 5 years. If your business is struggling anyway, then there won't be much CT to pay in the first place. I also think freezing the IT thresholds is fine. Not sure of the wisdom of fiddling with stamp duty and am unconvinced that it helps the people it claims to be aimed at.Stevo_666 said:
Like I said, I'll be looking at the whole picture from a professional and more objective point of view - rather than your approach of deciding in advance that the budget is rubbish because you don't like them.surrey_commuter said:If they do reverse the corp tax cuts then that is a quite remarkable policy u turn.
The previous argument was that it was too easy to avoid to be worth bothering with which meant Laffer applied if you made yourself relatively competitive, plus it gave a big lift to inward investment.
If all of the above is true it would suggest that they don’t just want to fvck business but be seen to fvck business.
I wonder if there is residual anger that 99% of them did not support Brexit?
On the tax competitiveness front, its definitely a factor which will also need to be looked at in the context of what other countries are doing. What are your thoughts on the proposed Biden tax rises, for example?
It doesn't take a genius to work out SC's angle based on his post and what we already know of his views about Boris and the government.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Please quote me where I've said that. You seem to be spoiling for an argument where there isn't one yet as the budget hasn't even been announced yet.rjsterry said:
Not sure quite what you are asking. I think some wonder how you rationalise the your views you've posted on government spending and borrowing with the apparent unwavering support of Johnson's big spending and borrowing.Stevo_666 said:
Why do you think that?rjsterry said:
Little bit oversensitive there. Nobody has posted that they think the budget is rubbish. And the thread isn't just about the budget. Personally, I can't see a major problem with a point or two on the rate over 5 years. If your business is struggling anyway, then there won't be much CT to pay in the first place. I also think freezing the IT thresholds is fine. Not sure of the wisdom of fiddling with stamp duty and am unconvinced that it helps the people it claims to be aimed at.Stevo_666 said:
Like I said, I'll be looking at the whole picture from a professional and more objective point of view - rather than your approach of deciding in advance that the budget is rubbish because you don't like them.surrey_commuter said:If they do reverse the corp tax cuts then that is a quite remarkable policy u turn.
The previous argument was that it was too easy to avoid to be worth bothering with which meant Laffer applied if you made yourself relatively competitive, plus it gave a big lift to inward investment.
If all of the above is true it would suggest that they don’t just want to fvck business but be seen to fvck business.
I wonder if there is residual anger that 99% of them did not support Brexit?
On the tax competitiveness front, its definitely a factor which will also need to be looked at in the context of what other countries are doing. What are your thoughts on the proposed Biden tax rises, for example?
It doesn't take a genius to work out SC's angle based on his post and what we already know of his views about Boris and the government."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
In summary, he's putting them up. My prediction is that others countries will follow suit to fill the coffers post pandemic, each in their own way.surrey_commuter said:
Don’t know anything about themStevo_666 said:
Like I said, I'll be looking at the whole picture from a professional and more objective point of view - rather than your approach of deciding in advance that the budget is rubbish because you don't like them.surrey_commuter said:If they do reverse the corp tax cuts then that is a quite remarkable policy u turn.
The previous argument was that it was too easy to avoid to be worth bothering with which meant Laffer applied if you made yourself relatively competitive, plus it gave a big lift to inward investment.
If all of the above is true it would suggest that they don’t just want to fvck business but be seen to fvck business.
I wonder if there is residual anger that 99% of them did not support Brexit?
On the tax competitiveness front, its definitely a factor which will also need to be looked at in the context of what other countries are doing. What are your thoughts on the proposed Biden tax rises, for example?
My ideas on tax are broad base, low rate with as close to no exceptions as possible.
I felt the corp tax cuts were possibly going too far but you put up a very strong case for why we should look to match Ireland.
The main thing is that we are competitive compared to the main alternatives, which isn't that hard when comparing to the major European competition and not too shab y in the G20 rankings (other comparisons are available)
https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/corporate-tax-rate?continent=g20
I remember the Irish debate - it is also wrapped up in what they do with other taxes in combination with a competitive 'headline' corporate tax rate which is the national tax equivalent of the supermarket 'loss leader' to entice customers in, to put it crudely."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I'm really not. Just interested in what you think.Stevo_666 said:
Please quote me where I've said that. You seem to be spoiling for an argument where there isn't one yet as the budget hasn't even been announced yet.rjsterry said:
Not sure quite what you are asking. I think some wonder how you rationalise the your views you've posted on government spending and borrowing with the apparent unwavering support of Johnson's big spending and borrowing.Stevo_666 said:
Why do you think that?rjsterry said:
Little bit oversensitive there. Nobody has posted that they think the budget is rubbish. And the thread isn't just about the budget. Personally, I can't see a major problem with a point or two on the rate over 5 years. If your business is struggling anyway, then there won't be much CT to pay in the first place. I also think freezing the IT thresholds is fine. Not sure of the wisdom of fiddling with stamp duty and am unconvinced that it helps the people it claims to be aimed at.Stevo_666 said:
Like I said, I'll be looking at the whole picture from a professional and more objective point of view - rather than your approach of deciding in advance that the budget is rubbish because you don't like them.surrey_commuter said:If they do reverse the corp tax cuts then that is a quite remarkable policy u turn.
The previous argument was that it was too easy to avoid to be worth bothering with which meant Laffer applied if you made yourself relatively competitive, plus it gave a big lift to inward investment.
If all of the above is true it would suggest that they don’t just want to fvck business but be seen to fvck business.
I wonder if there is residual anger that 99% of them did not support Brexit?
On the tax competitiveness front, its definitely a factor which will also need to be looked at in the context of what other countries are doing. What are your thoughts on the proposed Biden tax rises, for example?
It doesn't take a genius to work out SC's angle based on his post and what we already know of his views about Boris and the government.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
here is a part of a piece in today's Times that shows how Irelad has benefited from lowering corporation tax
Why do Pfizer, Apple, Google, Microsoft, Allergan, Facebook, Oracle, Merck, Boston Scientific, Ingersoll Rand, Dell, Medtronic and SanDisk base their international headquarters in Ireland or book revenues through the country? Presumably not the weather, nor Dublin’s extraordinary cultural endowment. The answer, of course, is tax.
The headline rate of Irish corporation tax is 12.5 per cent, one of the lowest in Europe. There is a lower rate of 6.5 per cent on research and development and intellectual property, which makes Ireland extremely attractive to American technology and life sciences companies. Plus Ireland has no thin capitalisation rules, which means that Irish corporates can be financed with 100 per cent debt, no equity. As a result many US companies based in Ireland pay an effective corporation tax rate somewhere between 0 per cent and 6 per cent.
The benefits to the Irish economy are legion. In 2016-17 foreign firms accounted for 80 per cent of Irish corporation tax and employed 25 per cent of the Irish labour force. Dublin employs a very effective strategy to attract inward investment and maximise benefits to its economy and tax base.2 -
While a low rate has undoubtedly help attract large multinationals to Ireland, it's of little consequence for the other half of the economy that is made up of millions of SMEs.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
May I also point out that managing a nation the size of UK is different to a nation with a population the size of a reasonably large city. (you could fit Ireland twice over into London)
Some options available to smaller countries are not available to larger.
0 -
It is, because it creates plenty of relatively well paid jobs which is good - for people who will be customers of said SMEs - which is also good.rjsterry said:While a low rate has undoubtedly help attract large multinationals to Ireland, it's of little consequence for the other half of the economy that is made up of millions of SMEs.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
You're right that it is different for smaller nations - but as it is more difficult to lure both investment and expats into quite a few smaller nations, they need to try harder. Which to some extent explains why the low tax rate countries are more often the smaller ones.rick_chasey said:May I also point out that managing a nation the size of UK is different to a nation with a population the size of a reasonably large city. (you could fit Ireland twice over into London)
Some options available to smaller countries are not available to larger."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Jeez, now who's spoiling for an argument? I'm not saying it's a bad thing. Just that attracting multinationals with a competitive rate is only one of a number of considerations. That's hardly controversial. What kind of figure did you have in mind for 'plenty'? Anecdotally of course, but I've not noticed any particular bias in our clients towards larger enterprises. More the opposite if anything.Stevo_666 said:
It is, because it creates plenty of relatively well paid jobs which is good - for people who will be customers of said SMEs - which is also good.rjsterry said:While a low rate has undoubtedly help attract large multinationals to Ireland, it's of little consequence for the other half of the economy that is made up of millions of SMEs.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
'Plenty' is a reasonable statement given what is said in SCs post above about these firms employing 25% of the Irish Labour force.rjsterry said:
Jeez, now who's spoiling for an argument? I'm not saying it's a bad thing. Just that attracting multinationals with a competitive rate is only one of a number of considerations. That's hardly controversial. What kind of figure did you have in mind for 'plenty'? Anecdotally of course, but I've not noticed any particular bias in our clients towards larger enterprises. More the opposite if anything.Stevo_666 said:
It is, because it creates plenty of relatively well paid jobs which is good - for people who will be customers of said SMEs - which is also good.rjsterry said:While a low rate has undoubtedly help attract large multinationals to Ireland, it's of little consequence for the other half of the economy that is made up of millions of SMEs.
You have to admit the Irish strategy has been pretty effective based on the stats above. As mentioned above, this unlikely to be the pull of the Irish weather or the cultural Mecca of Dublin, is it?"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
because Labour doesn't care about reducing or even managing national debt and making the books balance and the tories do / need to after coronavirus?kingstongraham said:Not sure why Labour would be against increased tax on those who managed to still be making a profit, when the tories seem in favour. Anyone?
0 -
I admire your positivity in thinking that Labour's policies for the immediate aftermath of the pandemic have a chance of being enacted.david37 said:
because Labour doesn't care about reducing or even managing national debt and making the books balance and the tories do / need to after coronavirus?kingstongraham said:Not sure why Labour would be against increased tax on those who managed to still be making a profit, when the tories seem in favour. Anyone?
1 -
So here are some OBR numbers...rick_chasey said:He’s mad to raise taxes so soon. Nutter behaviour.
^^ look how big the fiscal drag is!
0 -
would you mind explaining that first graph?rick_chasey said:
So here are some OBR numbers...rick_chasey said:He’s mad to raise taxes so soon. Nutter behaviour.
^^ look how big the fiscal drag is!0 -
What bit don’t you get?surrey_commuter said:
would you mind explaining that first graph?rick_chasey said:
So here are some OBR numbers...rick_chasey said:He’s mad to raise taxes so soon. Nutter behaviour.
^^ look how big the fiscal drag is!0 -
True, losers don't get to make the decisions.kingstongraham said:
I admire your positivity in thinking that Labour's policies for the immediate aftermath of the pandemic have a chance of being enacted.david37 said:
because Labour doesn't care about reducing or even managing national debt and making the books balance and the tories do / need to after coronavirus?kingstongraham said:Not sure why Labour would be against increased tax on those who managed to still be making a profit, when the tories seem in favour. Anyone?
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
It is an interesting approach to look to raise corp tax - it takes the legs from under Labour. Could an element of the thinking to limit the opposition’s armoury?
Also, we’ve gotta expect interest rates to rise at some point so we can’t wait forever to dig into the huge debt we’ve piled up.0 -
Would businesses not prefer an increase in corporation tax partially offset by a reduction in employers ni? If pandemic fairness is the justification.0
-
I am not even sure his trailed measures amount to rearranging the deckchairs, more choosing a new tune for the band to play.kingstonian said:It is an interesting approach to look to raise corp tax - it takes the legs from under Labour. Could an element of the thinking to limit the opposition’s armoury?
Also, we’ve gotta expect interest rates to rise at some point so we can’t wait forever to dig into the huge debt we’ve piled up.
If they were serious they would cut non Covid spending and could start with vanity projects such as HS20 -
What happens when every country does this. What does Ireland do then. Seems to me this only works for a smaller country close to a larger country kind of thingsurrey_commuter said:here is a part of a piece in today's Times that shows how Irelad has benefited from lowering corporation tax
Why do Pfizer, Apple, Google, Microsoft, Allergan, Facebook, Oracle, Merck, Boston Scientific, Ingersoll Rand, Dell, Medtronic and SanDisk base their international headquarters in Ireland or book revenues through the country? Presumably not the weather, nor Dublin’s extraordinary cultural endowment. The answer, of course, is tax.
The headline rate of Irish corporation tax is 12.5 per cent, one of the lowest in Europe. There is a lower rate of 6.5 per cent on research and development and intellectual property, which makes Ireland extremely attractive to American technology and life sciences companies. Plus Ireland has no thin capitalisation rules, which means that Irish corporates can be financed with 100 per cent debt, no equity. As a result many US companies based in Ireland pay an effective corporation tax rate somewhere between 0 per cent and 6 per cent.
The benefits to the Irish economy are legion. In 2016-17 foreign firms accounted for 80 per cent of Irish corporation tax and employed 25 per cent of the Irish labour force. Dublin employs a very effective strategy to attract inward investment and maximise benefits to its economy and tax base.0 -
It's obviously been great for Ireland. I don't think I'm going out on too much of a limb in suggesting that the UK now is quite a different place from Ireland 15-20 years ago. Bulgaria's rate is even lower, but it's not quite had the same effect there. I would guess that we already have quite a few larger enterprises based in the UK, and we're already fairly competitive so as you say with everyone looking to pay their bills I would guess we can afford to ease up the rate slightly without scaring people away.Stevo_666 said:
'Plenty' is a reasonable statement given what is said in SCs post above about these firms employing 25% of the Irish Labour force.rjsterry said:
Jeez, now who's spoiling for an argument? I'm not saying it's a bad thing. Just that attracting multinationals with a competitive rate is only one of a number of considerations. That's hardly controversial. What kind of figure did you have in mind for 'plenty'? Anecdotally of course, but I've not noticed any particular bias in our clients towards larger enterprises. More the opposite if anything.Stevo_666 said:
It is, because it creates plenty of relatively well paid jobs which is good - for people who will be customers of said SMEs - which is also good.rjsterry said:While a low rate has undoubtedly help attract large multinationals to Ireland, it's of little consequence for the other half of the economy that is made up of millions of SMEs.
You have to admit the Irish strategy has been pretty effective based on the stats above. As mentioned above, this unlikely to be the pull of the Irish weather or the cultural Mecca of Dublin, is it?
I get why from a Chancellor's point of view, these are the businesses to target; all I'm saying is that from an SME point of view - which is most businesses, unless you are specifically servicing one of those larger enterprises, whether it is 19, 20 or 21% doesn't change the world.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Benefits.
0 -
You can’t not do things because other countries may copy you.john80 said:
What happens when every country does this. What does Ireland do then. Seems to me this only works for a smaller country close to a larger country kind of thingsurrey_commuter said:here is a part of a piece in today's Times that shows how Irelad has benefited from lowering corporation tax
Why do Pfizer, Apple, Google, Microsoft, Allergan, Facebook, Oracle, Merck, Boston Scientific, Ingersoll Rand, Dell, Medtronic and SanDisk base their international headquarters in Ireland or book revenues through the country? Presumably not the weather, nor Dublin’s extraordinary cultural endowment. The answer, of course, is tax.
The headline rate of Irish corporation tax is 12.5 per cent, one of the lowest in Europe. There is a lower rate of 6.5 per cent on research and development and intellectual property, which makes Ireland extremely attractive to American technology and life sciences companies. Plus Ireland has no thin capitalisation rules, which means that Irish corporates can be financed with 100 per cent debt, no equity. As a result many US companies based in Ireland pay an effective corporation tax rate somewhere between 0 per cent and 6 per cent.
The benefits to the Irish economy are legion. In 2016-17 foreign firms accounted for 80 per cent of Irish corporation tax and employed 25 per cent of the Irish labour force. Dublin employs a very effective strategy to attract inward investment and maximise benefits to its economy and tax base.
Why are you so sure that if the CT rates had been reversed those companies would not be in the UK0 -
Lol you're all talking higher taxes when the OBR is saying higher taxes or reduced spending is going to put the UK further in the hole.
This is what's going to ruin British democracy.0 -
Clearly there's a bit more to it than just the rate or they'd all be based in Sofia rather than Dublin. I'd suggest a well-educated anglophone workforce was also a consideration.surrey_commuter said:
You can’t not do things because other countries may copy you.john80 said:
What happens when every country does this. What does Ireland do then. Seems to me this only works for a smaller country close to a larger country kind of thingsurrey_commuter said:here is a part of a piece in today's Times that shows how Irelad has benefited from lowering corporation tax
Why do Pfizer, Apple, Google, Microsoft, Allergan, Facebook, Oracle, Merck, Boston Scientific, Ingersoll Rand, Dell, Medtronic and SanDisk base their international headquarters in Ireland or book revenues through the country? Presumably not the weather, nor Dublin’s extraordinary cultural endowment. The answer, of course, is tax.
The headline rate of Irish corporation tax is 12.5 per cent, one of the lowest in Europe. There is a lower rate of 6.5 per cent on research and development and intellectual property, which makes Ireland extremely attractive to American technology and life sciences companies. Plus Ireland has no thin capitalisation rules, which means that Irish corporates can be financed with 100 per cent debt, no equity. As a result many US companies based in Ireland pay an effective corporation tax rate somewhere between 0 per cent and 6 per cent.
The benefits to the Irish economy are legion. In 2016-17 foreign firms accounted for 80 per cent of Irish corporation tax and employed 25 per cent of the Irish labour force. Dublin employs a very effective strategy to attract inward investment and maximise benefits to its economy and tax base.
Why are you so sure that if the CT rates had been reversed those companies would not be in the UK1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
That has to be be the ultimate straw man argument, you introduced Sofia and then tell me I need to consider a well educated anglophone workforce.rjsterry said:
Clearly there's a bit more to it than just the rate or they'd all be based in Sofia rather than Dublin. I'd suggest a well-educated anglophone workforce was also a consideration.surrey_commuter said:
You can’t not do things because other countries may copy you.john80 said:
What happens when every country does this. What does Ireland do then. Seems to me this only works for a smaller country close to a larger country kind of thingsurrey_commuter said:here is a part of a piece in today's Times that shows how Irelad has benefited from lowering corporation tax
Why do Pfizer, Apple, Google, Microsoft, Allergan, Facebook, Oracle, Merck, Boston Scientific, Ingersoll Rand, Dell, Medtronic and SanDisk base their international headquarters in Ireland or book revenues through the country? Presumably not the weather, nor Dublin’s extraordinary cultural endowment. The answer, of course, is tax.
The headline rate of Irish corporation tax is 12.5 per cent, one of the lowest in Europe. There is a lower rate of 6.5 per cent on research and development and intellectual property, which makes Ireland extremely attractive to American technology and life sciences companies. Plus Ireland has no thin capitalisation rules, which means that Irish corporates can be financed with 100 per cent debt, no equity. As a result many US companies based in Ireland pay an effective corporation tax rate somewhere between 0 per cent and 6 per cent.
The benefits to the Irish economy are legion. In 2016-17 foreign firms accounted for 80 per cent of Irish corporation tax and employed 25 per cent of the Irish labour force. Dublin employs a very effective strategy to attract inward investment and maximise benefits to its economy and tax base.
Why are you so sure that if the CT rates had been reversed those companies would not be in the UK
We are talking about the UK rate of CT and looking at what lessons we can learn from Ireland. Am happy to listen to other advantages Ireland has over the UK because I can’t think of any0
