ForumGarden

The scandal of the multinationals that pay almost no tax on their UK profits - UK Politics - UK - The Independent

What utter bollocks. How about banning companies from trading unless they pay UK tax. You really think we would miss starbucks or amazon or that they forego all the money to be made? ? all that would happen is someone else would take over. Amazon is in danger of becoming a monopoly anyway.

Maybe they could start with Philip green and make an example of him.

gmc;1409885 wrote: The scandal of the multinationals that pay almost no tax on their UK profits - UK Politics - UK - The Independent

What utter bollocks. How about banning companies from trading unless they pay UK tax. You really think we would miss starbucks or amazon or that they forego all the money to be made? ? all that would happen is someone else would take over. Amazon is in danger of becoming a monopoly anyway.

Maybe they could start with Philip green and make an example of him.


Firstly you'd have to lay down the rules on acceptable costs and the derivation of profits attributable to the sales in this country. Before those rules are in place (i.e. now) HMRC have no way of calculating tax due and enforcing their decision. It is up to the government of the day to pass those rules into law - no use the media bashing the taxman for not grabbing the money.

Bryn Mawr;1409886 wrote: Firstly you'd have to lay down the rules on acceptable costs and the derivation of profits attributable to the sales in this country. Before those rules are in place (i.e. now) HMRC have no way of calculating tax due and enforcing their decision. It is up to the government of the day to pass those rules into law - no use the media bashing the taxman for not grabbing the money.


That was my point - at least it was meant to be - parliament makes the laws, this is a long standing problem that given the financial crisis should be a bigger priority that taking benefits away from people on the grounds that they are only ever claimed by a bunch of scroungers.

gmc;1409890 wrote: That was my point - at least it was meant to be - parliament makes the laws, this is a long standing problem that given the financial crisis should be a bigger priority that taking benefits away from people on the grounds that they are only ever claimed by a bunch of scroungers.


Keith Marsden said it better than I ever could :-



And if you've not yet enlisted in the army of the poor

Never fear, you've call-up papers on the way

Or perhaps you think you're fireproof, well you'd better think some more

For your turn is coming soon some future day

They don't need you on the land now or on the factory floor

They won't even need you when they go and start the final war

Best be ready when they start to ask what do they need you for

When you're only idle, undeserving poor

Didn't I recently have a rant about Starbucks ?

It is set up so that the UK division has to pay commission to the parent company for the use of the name........or something.

It then gets another company (not really another company) in another country, to buy the coffee and it then sells it to the UK company........or something.

It also borrowed (not really borrowed) it's set up money from another division of the same company (that is legally NOT the same company) that it has to repay at a larger than normal rate.......thus it needs relief for the payments.

And it's ALL legal.

So by taking £398 million with a Company market valuation of £24.9 billion......they paid NO corporation tax.

And it's all legal.......

It shouldn't be, by any stretch of the imagination.