6 ms·

This usually works like this: company doesn't pay tax, HMRC has to spend lots of money to prosecute them, company settles to pay a fraction of the tax. Doesn't

by Paul_S 11y ago

This usually works like this: company doesn't pay tax, HMRC has to spend lots of money to prosecute them, company settles to pay a fraction of the tax. Doesn't seem fair to me but HMRC already spent lots of money and to get them to pay it all up they would have to spend even more so in the end they would get less making them willing to compromise. Doesn't this crate an incentive for companies not to pay tax? Worst case scenario is you have to pay a fraction of that tax later.

MLR 11y ago
I think this is a change from that honestly, if I'm remembering correctly UK tax law was changed so that companies deemed to be going against the spirit of the law after an audit could be forced to pay the appropriate amount of tax - I imagine this is a consequence of that.
- peteretep 11y ago
  > against the spirit of the law Those are dangerous words...
  - umanwizard 11y ago
    Why? That's a core part of the definition of what it means to have a common-law legal system
  - MLR 11y ago
    Well that was my memory of it, how they put it can be read here, section B2. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/399270/2__HMRC_GAAR_Guidance_Parts_A-C_with_effect_from_30_January_2015_AD_V6.pdf https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachm...
- Malarkey73 11y ago
  This is an odd settlement though as it sort of ignores the law. Corporation tax is based on profits - which Google offshore to avoid UK tax (and many other places). Here they have said to them we see what you're doing - make nice. So they have drawn up a special formula (secret too) that pays a percentage of UK revenues - just for Google! And of course whilst secret it leaves Google open to manipulate their UK sales too - as whilst they clam some Billions in their UK accounts in their US accounts they claim many Billions more. With their now secret formula the UK public will never be able to pin them down when questioning what they are paying.
meowface 11y ago
It's shocking that there isn't an additional fine associated with it.
- duncan_bayne 11y ago
  It's a pretty common spelling mistake.
euyyn 11y ago
Isn't the case here that if you loose in court you have to pay the costs of the prosecution? It is in other cases. With only putting that in place, the prosecutor wouldn't have an incentive to settle if they think they're right.
- vixen99 11y ago
  lose
madaxe_again 11y ago
Don't forget that there's no punishment if you don't get caught, and if you do get caught, they'll ask you nicely to pay. If you don't, they'll forget it for you. This set of rules only applies if you're a multinational. If you're you or me or a small or medium business, you'll go to prison for decades. The world is totally fair.
- switch007 11y ago
  All we need to do is vote for a party that doesn't rub shoulders with heads of large companies...oh, we can't, they all do or would do.
  - madaxe_again 11y ago
    Our politicoeconomic system is constructed such that this is inevitable, yes. It rewards self-interest almost exclusively, and the more corrupt power you gain, the more corrupt power you gain. I know several MPs on this country - I went to school with them. They're all of a particular type - egoistic, manipulative, not terribly clever - and inexplicably popular. One of them dressed up as a nazi for a party, and sexually assaulted a passed out girl. This was 15 years ago. A large part of the reason for the shoulder rubbing is the same - school. In the US colleges and private prep schools are where these networks are built, in the UK, public (I.e. Private) school, and "doxbridge" are the power broking hubs. These people go on to run the world, as they inherit, and/or work with each other in their respective sectors. I largely shun my school network as I can't abide authoritarians, but my business is here in part at least because of it - started it with a friend from school. One of the core tenets of fascism is strong collusion and protection between state and large corporate interests. Wow, that was a Saturday morning angry ramble.
    - yarper 11y ago
      Please name and shame
      - madaxe_again 11y ago

by Paul_S 11y ago

MLR 11y ago

I think this is a change from that honestly, if I'm remembering correctly UK tax law was changed so that companies deemed to be going against the spirit of the law after an audit could be forced to pay the appropriate amount of tax - I imagine this is a consequence of that.

peteretep 11y ago
> against the spirit of the law Those are dangerous words...
- umanwizard 11y ago
  Why? That's a core part of the definition of what it means to have a common-law legal system
- MLR 11y ago
  Well that was my memory of it, how they put it can be read here, section B2. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/399270/2__HMRC_GAAR_Guidance_Parts_A-C_with_effect_from_30_January_2015_AD_V6.pdf https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachm...
Malarkey73 11y ago
This is an odd settlement though as it sort of ignores the law. Corporation tax is based on profits - which Google offshore to avoid UK tax (and many other places). Here they have said to them we see what you're doing - make nice. So they have drawn up a special formula (secret too) that pays a percentage of UK revenues - just for Google! And of course whilst secret it leaves Google open to manipulate their UK sales too - as whilst they clam some Billions in their UK accounts in their US accounts they claim many Billions more. With their now secret formula the UK public will never be able to pin them down when questioning what they are paying.

meowface 11y ago

It's shocking that there isn't an additional fine associated with it.

duncan_bayne 11y ago
It's a pretty common spelling mistake.

euyyn 11y ago

Isn't the case here that if you loose in court you have to pay the costs of the prosecution? It is in other cases. With only putting that in place, the prosecutor wouldn't have an incentive to settle if they think they're right.

vixen99 11y ago
lose

madaxe_again 11y ago

Don't forget that there's no punishment if you don't get caught, and if you do get caught, they'll ask you nicely to pay. If you don't, they'll forget it for you. This set of rules only applies if you're a multinational. If you're you or me or a small or medium business, you'll go to prison for decades. The world is totally fair.

switch007 11y ago
All we need to do is vote for a party that doesn't rub shoulders with heads of large companies...oh, we can't, they all do or would do.
- madaxe_again 11y ago
  Our politicoeconomic system is constructed such that this is inevitable, yes. It rewards self-interest almost exclusively, and the more corrupt power you gain, the more corrupt power you gain. I know several MPs on this country - I went to school with them. They're all of a particular type - egoistic, manipulative, not terribly clever - and inexplicably popular. One of them dressed up as a nazi for a party, and sexually assaulted a passed out girl. This was 15 years ago. A large part of the reason for the shoulder rubbing is the same - school. In the US colleges and private prep schools are where these networks are built, in the UK, public (I.e. Private) school, and "doxbridge" are the power broking hubs. These people go on to run the world, as they inherit, and/or work with each other in their respective sectors. I largely shun my school network as I can't abide authoritarians, but my business is here in part at least because of it - started it with a friend from school. One of the core tenets of fascism is strong collusion and protection between state and large corporate interests. Wow, that was a Saturday morning angry ramble.
  - yarper 11y ago
    Please name and shame
    - madaxe_again 11y ago