Re: Zero tax - Rolls Royce joins the club : Thu Mar 07, 2013 5:52 pm  

Him wrote:

Have they lost money in the UK?

I read somewhere that their UK and US operations had not been profitable. Whether that was all activities and whether or not it was an actual loss I do not know as I guess you don't. However, it is entirely feasible given the amount of losses RBS has incurred. Furthermore, as I said it could pay tax here without making a profit. As was said above £1.2 B / $ 1.2 B of fines would reduced accounting profits but not taxable ones. So they could make, say 0.5B loss here but pay tax on 0.7 B (all other things being equal).

Re: Zero tax - Rolls Royce joins the club : Thu Mar 07, 2013 5:54 pm  

DaveO wrote:

Did you read what he wrote? It is essentially about how multinational companies attribute profits across the group and his conclusion is the UK should be attributed with a much higher profit than it has been.

I did and what he wrote, as I explained, was deliberatley slanted to achieve a conclusion he wanted. If his averaging had have been detrimental to his argument he would have considered things on a more realistic basis. He should know better.

Re: Zero tax - Rolls Royce joins the club : Thu Mar 07, 2013 6:00 pm  

Rooster Booster wrote:

They MUST pay tax. End of. It's disgraceful the way larger corporations seem to have governments by the short and curlies, often threatening to close places down and thereby increasing unemployment.

Or. You could always buy shares in them. A quick look shows they've more than doubled in the last year. Rich people would have and pension funds probably have also.

Until there is a global tax system that will be the case. Governments choose to be grabbed by the short and curiles they can easily be tough if they wish. Look at the way the US has treated European banks, BP, etc. The fact that our government is so soft is not the fault of the companies it is due to inept politicians and a wet electorate.

Re: Zero tax - Rolls Royce joins the club : Thu Mar 07, 2013 8:28 pm  

Dally wrote:

Until there is a global tax system that will be the case. Governments choose to be grabbed by the short and curiles they can easily be tough if they wish. Look at the way the US has treated European banks, BP, etc. The fact that our government is so soft is not the fault of the companies it is due to inept politicians and a wet electorate.

Yeah, I know. Poor form ain't it?

[DaveO]

Re: Zero tax - Rolls Royce joins the club : Thu Mar 07, 2013 9:26 pm  

Dally wrote:

I did and what he wrote, as I explained, was deliberatley slanted to achieve a conclusion he wanted. If his averaging had have been detrimental to his argument he would have considered things on a more realistic basis. He should know better.

If his averaging had have been detrimental to his argument he wouldn't have had an argument. It's either reasonable to apply the formula he did to apportion profits or it isn't but the results of applying it are as he stated.

Re: Zero tax - Rolls Royce joins the club : Thu Mar 07, 2013 9:32 pm  

DaveO wrote:

If his averaging had have been detrimental to his argument he wouldn't have had an argument. It's either reasonable to apply the formula he did to apportion profits or it isn't but the results of applying it are as he stated.

It is not reasonable. Therefore he has no point.

What is a good point is the one he makes about country by country reporting. That would increase transparency and catch the rogues, especially if management charges, royalties, intra-country transfers had to be spelt out in detail and if transactions with low-tax jurisdictions had to be shown and summarised as to their effect.

Re: Zero tax - Rolls Royce joins the club : Thu Mar 07, 2013 9:39 pm  

So a bank that gets caught out laundering $hundreds of billions and pays the US a $1.2bn fine, then swans around shifting money across borders to minimise tax payments, awards its CEO with a bonus? The cunt should be in jail. At least Elizabeth Warren seems to be gunning for 'em

So a bank that gets caught out laundering $hundreds of billions and pays the US a $1.2bn fine, then swans around shifting money across borders to minimise tax payments, awards its CEO with a bonus? The cunt should be in jail. At least Elizabeth Warren seems to be gunning for 'em

Re: Zero tax - Rolls Royce joins the club : Fri Mar 08, 2013 9:16 am  

Dally wrote:

Until there is a global tax system that will be the case. Governments choose to be grabbed by the short and curiles they can easily be tough if they wish. Look at the way the US has treated European banks, BP, etc. The fact that our government is so soft is not the fault of the companies it is due to inept politicians and a wet electorate.

That's because no one normal-sized country can afford to go it alone ... but if a group of them decided to do something about it, their collective elbow could have the power ... they could tell any company to get stuffed unless they toe the line.

It would have to be a large collective.

Like the EU, for example.

[DaveO]

Re: Zero tax - Rolls Royce joins the club : Fri Mar 08, 2013 9:19 am  

Dally wrote:

It is not reasonable. Therefore he has no point.

That is a matter of opinion and I would say he does have a point. He is simply applying known formula to illustrate what contribution of group profits should be attributed to the UK.

What is a good point is the one he makes about country by country reporting. That would increase transparency and catch the rogues, especially if management charges, royalties, intra-country transfers had to be spelt out in detail and if transactions with low-tax jurisdictions had to be shown and summarised as to their effect.

And because it isn't transparent he made his calculations.

Re: Zero tax - Rolls Royce joins the club : Fri Mar 08, 2013 11:34 am  

Dally wrote:

It is not reasonable. Therefore he has no point.

What is a good point is the one he makes about country by country reporting. That would increase transparency and catch the rogues, especially if management charges, royalties, intra-country transfers had to be spelt out in detail and if transactions with low-tax jurisdictions had to be shown and summarised as to their effect.

Haven't this bunch of shysters decided against legislating for transparent reporting because it would be "too difficult for multi-nationals to administer"? Dodging the fooking tax seems to present them with little difficulty