Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Logging in...
Previously on "Should Google pay their fair share of tax?"
While the tax is certainly low you've got to balance it out with the fact that everything else costs that a fair amount more from basics such as groceries/gas/electric/etc through to travel/cars/houses/etc although at least house prices aren't as crazy as London. Still, a great place all round if you like the lifestyle a small island environment offers.
I'd say that anyone thinking of moving there should do their research carefully beforehand and know what they're letting themselves in for. The same can probably be said for the Channel Islands.
"The company claims that all UK sales are 'closed' in Dublin, with its lower rate of tax, allowing the US business to legally avoid an estimated £200million a year in UK tax.
It also was also reported today that the much-heralded 'Google tax' which the Chancellor said would be his weapon against multi-national companies, was not used against Google.
The 'diverted profit tax' (DPT) was designed to tackle firms who registered their British sales in other countries, such as Ireland.
But The Times reported today that the tax was not used in the securing the web giant's £130million tax bill, because officials decided the firm's offshore arrangements were legitimate."
"The company claims that all UK sales are 'closed' in Dublin, with its lower rate of tax, allowing the US business to legally avoid an estimated £200million a year in UK tax.
It also was also reported today that the much-heralded 'Google tax' which the Chancellor said would be his weapon against multi-national companies, was not used against Google.
The 'diverted profit tax' (DPT) was designed to tackle firms who registered their British sales in other countries, such as Ireland.
But The Times reported today that the tax was not used in the securing the web giant's £130million tax bill, because officials decided the firm's offshore arrangements were legitimate."
Do most employers allow you to claim for a 2nd house ?
If my work requires me to spend time away from home then they would pay for the hotel, or for the rent on a property if that makes more sense.
This "we should all act exactly the same way" argument is just idiotic simple-minded fallacy. An MP's life and work-week is vastly different from a 9-5 employee, which is vastly different from a contractor working away all week, which is again different from a contractor working in the Eurozone for months at a time.
Stop with the "mummy he got a biscuit it's not fair if I don't get one too" jealousy.
Two mechanisms off the top of my head could be deemed as 'fair'...
1) If UK turnover represents 20% of Google's global turnover, then Google should pay UK Corp Tax on 20% of their global profits.
-- or --
2) Remove tax relief on monies sent to other companies within the group's overseas tax havens for the purposes of shifting profit from one part of the global group to another. Obviously, legitimate expenses incurred from overseas groups should be allowable for relief. Probably harder to police than [1].
For large multinationals corp tax should be on actual profits made in the territory with actual costs (wholly and exclusively) incurred in that territory only - Google got some offices in UK, so that's ok - salaries etc fully deductable, but booking sales via Ireland was totally unacceptable from day one.
£130 mln they agreed to pay is very low, but I guess at least going forward they'd have to be paying a lot more than before.
Two mechanisms off the top of my head could be deemed as 'fair'...
1) If UK turnover represents 20% of Google's global turnover, then Google should pay UK Corp Tax on 20% of their global profits.
-- or --
2) Remove tax relief on monies sent to other companies within the group's overseas tax havens for the purposes of shifting profit from one part of the global group to another. Obviously, legitimate expenses incurred from overseas groups should be allowable for relief. Probably harder to police than [1].
Leave a comment: