4 ms·

I really hope a new tax bill comes through, I am tired of US companies (and others) that can simply avoid paying tax while small shops pay a lot of taxes in the

I really hope a new tax bill comes through, I am tired of US companies (and others) that can simply avoid paying tax while small shops pay a lot of taxes in the EU. They use our well developed infrastructure for their own benefit and does not pay anything back. I hope they get a fat bill.

l5870uoo9y 9y ago
The underlying problem is that companies take advantage of "globalization". Companies can legally move not only their production abroad but also the profit. So companies naturally — with the blessing of American business inteligensia — avoid taxes. I think national control of the economy is eminent and is the only way forward if you want to realize and spread some of the tremendous opportunities and benefits that automatization and digitalization brings us.
- microcolonel 9y ago
  Fundamentally the "problem" lies in the fact that the nominal tax rate they can expect to pay in the United States is the highest among all the developed nations. Ireland is prudent and wise enough to be the better home for their revenues. Globalization means that nations, provinces, and municipalities compete for the patronage of businesses. If you want a global economy, but you also want to be the legal home of Google and Microsoft, you will need to compete globally to offer better ROI: both in the cost of doing business, and in the proportion of the return which they get to keep. This is also why we keep piling on exceptions and deductions in order to stop the bleeding and keep at least some major firms from migrating all of their capital out of the country.
  - heavenlyblue 9y ago
    Fundamently the problem lies in the fact that civilised countries forget how much more social security a corporation gets from operating a business in there: no hostile takeovers, police coming in time, medical insurance for their employees, functional legal systems. Take all of this away and a corporation is going to be killed instantly (you're a victim of fraud on a massive scale? you haven't payed your taxes this year, so no retribution for you). So no, I don't think the fundamental issue is just the ROI.
    - microcolonel 9y ago
      > Fundamently the problem lies in the fact that civilised countries forget how much more social security a corporation gets from operating a business in there: no hostile takeovers, police coming in time, medical insurance for their employees, functional legal systems. Wouldn't this all impact ROI?
      - heavenlyblue 9y ago
        It would, but it does not since it is provided essentially for free.
  - Faark 9y ago
    That's not "competition" between countries. You talking about shitty tax law that doesn't take into account bad acting countries (even within the EU). I don't care about a companies legal home. If they want to make business with consumers in my country those deals should yield taxes to my country. That seems to be the intend of the article's proposal. But the EU also wants to make it easy for companies to offer their products in all member states without making tax dealings to complicated. Having a different set of rules once the company exceeds some revenue doesn't feel like a perfect solution, but way better than them not contributing.
    - microcolonel 9y ago
      > bad acting countries In what way is Ireland a bad actor? Locally operated businesses get a good deal too. What about Poland? Those shipyards aren't moving to your tax hell any time soon, but that doesn't make Poland a "bad actor". It may surprise you, but no country has the obligation to exploit and screw over businesses as much as yours would like to.
  - l5870uoo9y 9y ago
    You can't complete with a country like Singapore, which literally asked foreign hedge fund managers to help write their tax laws. You can setup a company in Singapore for 1000$ per year and you pay no tax on all income outside Singapore.
    - microcolonel 9y ago
      Why can't you compete with a country like Singapore? Aside from very strict regulations on social taboos (being visibly naked through a window, chewing gum, drugs [a superset of each major religious group's preferences]), Singapore functions quite well. They have less than 2% unemployment, they are highly developed, GDP per capita is only slightly lower than the United States, income inequality is fairly high, but absolute poverty is exceedingly rare and mobility is good. Of course, there are cultural differences which would probably get in the way of the U.S. reaching goals like this with such efficiency, but surely Singapore proves that it's possible.
microcolonel 9y ago
They pay for your infrastructure already (aside from last-mile stuff, which you pay for [partially] whether or not it's a local company). If you tax it, the prices just go up, nothing really changes.
- danmaz74 9y ago
  > They pay for your infrastructure already Lol, what? The whole point is that WE pay for the infrastructure with our taxes, and those companies use the infrastructure without paying for it.
  - princeb 9y ago
    > those companies you mean the people who work to build the structure, the teams, the lines of reporting, the buildings, the equipment, the products, the provision of sales and customer service, the management of all of these... they don't pay tax? what is a company? who is a company? if you remove all the things that already pay tax (i.e. people) from a company, does the company still exist? and can it pay tax?
    - newen 9y ago
      When the owner/stockholder lives in the US and peddle their stuff in France, and don't pay France taxes while using their infrastructure.
- staticelf 9y ago
  Except that Facebook, for instance, got 36 million crowns from the Swedish Government. They don't even pay for their own infrastructure. https://translate.google.se/translate?sl=sv&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=sv&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Ffeber.se%2Fwebb%2Fart%2F295498%2Ffacebook_fr_36_miljoner_i_bidr%2F&edit-text= https://translate.google.se/translate?sl=sv&tl=en&js=y&prev=...
LoSboccacc 9y ago
meanwhile, common people pay even more than small shops - about 60% total income compared to around 20%
Eridrus 9y ago
I don't really see why foreign companies should be paying any (non-sales) tax in the EU at all. If you ship a physical product to the EU from China, no-one expects the Chinese factory to pay taxes on their EU revenues. Of course tech companies are not blameless here, they have decided that paying taxes in Ireland is preferable to paying taxes in the US, but if they had their tax location in the US, I don't see how the EU would have a leg to stand on.
- staticelf 9y ago
  So you mean that companies like Facebook and Google that uses my countrys roads, medical system (for their employees, you don't need to pay for that in my country) and similar stuff, they should pay no tax? Facebook have a big datacenter in my country, partly funded by the government. But yeah, they should pay no taxes. They only consume a lot more of everything than any other company and should give nothing back. I hope you are not serious.
  - Eridrus 9y ago
    Your employees pay taxes for healthcare, I'm sure you have some sort of tax on petrol to maintain your roads, I'm sure the local trucking company that actually drove on the roads paid some taxes. I'm sure they pay property taxes on the land they use if you have them. I'm sure they pay for water permits and all that for cooling too. The question is, why is your country entitled to tax their revenue/profits? That is far bigger than the marginal stress they put on your resources. If they were a company selling physical products that they paid someone like DHL to deliver, this would be a completely silly discussion.
    - staticelf 9y ago
      > The question is, why is your country entitled to tax their revenue/profits? That is far bigger than the marginal stress they put on your resources. Because my country offers highly educated personell and their education is enabled to exist due to taxes not only towards people being employed but for companies taking out profits as well. The idea of a company taking out profits from another country even if the value of the product is created in my country by our trained personell is fucked up and will in the long run result be an economic disaster for my country since we can't fund our establishments. Also, it will render the market less competative since smaller shops have a harder time to compete against these giants who pay nearly 0% tax.
AndrewKemendo 9y ago
They use our well developed infrastructure for their own benefit Can you explain your reasoning more? So, for example an internet user in the EU is paying some local ISP to request services from google.com. The ISP presumably pays taxes on the revenues or profits from using local fiber & infrastructure in order to connect the user with google.com. In this case, they are no different than any other website/domain/internet service aside from scale and all of the taxes to fund infrastructure would come from the ISP and some portion of government financing. What I am missing is how Google is "us[ing] our well developed infrastructure for their own benefit" in a different manner than say skysports.com?
- staticelf 9y ago
  Well, Google operates more than in the web browser. They have a spawn in most countries and mine is no different. If they employ people in Sweden, sick days are covered by the government, health, roads, parental leave, governmental services, public transportation etc.. If they avoid taxes by simply saying they have no profit here, because they give all the revenue to the parent company, it means that everybody else in Sweden needs to cover their costs since they will probably pay close to zero in taxes. While any other shop needs to pay taxes. I don't know if skysports operate in Sweden, but my guess is that they do not. The thing is, I don't want Sweden to become like the US. Because our way of doing things are so much superior in my mind. I don't want to get a bill after I go to the hospital, I want free education, I want good roads and internet connectivity. All the stuff we have companies like these help to destroy to increase their profits.

l5870uoo9y 9y ago

The underlying problem is that companies take advantage of "globalization". Companies can legally move not only their production abroad but also the profit. So companies naturally — with the blessing of American business inteligensia — avoid taxes. I think national control of the economy is eminent and is the only way forward if you want to realize and spread some of the tremendous opportunities and benefits that automatization and digitalization brings us.

microcolonel 9y ago
Fundamentally the "problem" lies in the fact that the nominal tax rate they can expect to pay in the United States is the highest among all the developed nations. Ireland is prudent and wise enough to be the better home for their revenues. Globalization means that nations, provinces, and municipalities compete for the patronage of businesses. If you want a global economy, but you also want to be the legal home of Google and Microsoft, you will need to compete globally to offer better ROI: both in the cost of doing business, and in the proportion of the return which they get to keep. This is also why we keep piling on exceptions and deductions in order to stop the bleeding and keep at least some major firms from migrating all of their capital out of the country.
- heavenlyblue 9y ago
  Fundamently the problem lies in the fact that civilised countries forget how much more social security a corporation gets from operating a business in there: no hostile takeovers, police coming in time, medical insurance for their employees, functional legal systems. Take all of this away and a corporation is going to be killed instantly (you're a victim of fraud on a massive scale? you haven't payed your taxes this year, so no retribution for you). So no, I don't think the fundamental issue is just the ROI.
  - microcolonel 9y ago
    > Fundamently the problem lies in the fact that civilised countries forget how much more social security a corporation gets from operating a business in there: no hostile takeovers, police coming in time, medical insurance for their employees, functional legal systems. Wouldn't this all impact ROI?
    - heavenlyblue 9y ago
      It would, but it does not since it is provided essentially for free.
- Faark 9y ago
  That's not "competition" between countries. You talking about shitty tax law that doesn't take into account bad acting countries (even within the EU). I don't care about a companies legal home. If they want to make business with consumers in my country those deals should yield taxes to my country. That seems to be the intend of the article's proposal. But the EU also wants to make it easy for companies to offer their products in all member states without making tax dealings to complicated. Having a different set of rules once the company exceeds some revenue doesn't feel like a perfect solution, but way better than them not contributing.
  - microcolonel 9y ago
    > bad acting countries In what way is Ireland a bad actor? Locally operated businesses get a good deal too. What about Poland? Those shipyards aren't moving to your tax hell any time soon, but that doesn't make Poland a "bad actor". It may surprise you, but no country has the obligation to exploit and screw over businesses as much as yours would like to.
- l5870uoo9y 9y ago
  You can't complete with a country like Singapore, which literally asked foreign hedge fund managers to help write their tax laws. You can setup a company in Singapore for 1000$ per year and you pay no tax on all income outside Singapore.
  - microcolonel 9y ago
    Why can't you compete with a country like Singapore? Aside from very strict regulations on social taboos (being visibly naked through a window, chewing gum, drugs [a superset of each major religious group's preferences]), Singapore functions quite well. They have less than 2% unemployment, they are highly developed, GDP per capita is only slightly lower than the United States, income inequality is fairly high, but absolute poverty is exceedingly rare and mobility is good. Of course, there are cultural differences which would probably get in the way of the U.S. reaching goals like this with such efficiency, but surely Singapore proves that it's possible.

microcolonel 9y ago

They pay for your infrastructure already (aside from last-mile stuff, which you pay for [partially] whether or not it's a local company). If you tax it, the prices just go up, nothing really changes.

danmaz74 9y ago
> They pay for your infrastructure already Lol, what? The whole point is that WE pay for the infrastructure with our taxes, and those companies use the infrastructure without paying for it.
- princeb 9y ago
  > those companies you mean the people who work to build the structure, the teams, the lines of reporting, the buildings, the equipment, the products, the provision of sales and customer service, the management of all of these... they don't pay tax? what is a company? who is a company? if you remove all the things that already pay tax (i.e. people) from a company, does the company still exist? and can it pay tax?
  - newen 9y ago
    When the owner/stockholder lives in the US and peddle their stuff in France, and don't pay France taxes while using their infrastructure.
staticelf 9y ago
Except that Facebook, for instance, got 36 million crowns from the Swedish Government. They don't even pay for their own infrastructure. https://translate.google.se/translate?sl=sv&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=sv&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Ffeber.se%2Fwebb%2Fart%2F295498%2Ffacebook_fr_36_miljoner_i_bidr%2F&edit-text= https://translate.google.se/translate?sl=sv&tl=en&js=y&prev=...

LoSboccacc 9y ago

meanwhile, common people pay even more than small shops - about 60% total income compared to around 20%

Eridrus 9y ago

I don't really see why foreign companies should be paying any (non-sales) tax in the EU at all. If you ship a physical product to the EU from China, no-one expects the Chinese factory to pay taxes on their EU revenues. Of course tech companies are not blameless here, they have decided that paying taxes in Ireland is preferable to paying taxes in the US, but if they had their tax location in the US, I don't see how the EU would have a leg to stand on.

staticelf 9y ago
So you mean that companies like Facebook and Google that uses my countrys roads, medical system (for their employees, you don't need to pay for that in my country) and similar stuff, they should pay no tax? Facebook have a big datacenter in my country, partly funded by the government. But yeah, they should pay no taxes. They only consume a lot more of everything than any other company and should give nothing back. I hope you are not serious.
- Eridrus 9y ago
  Your employees pay taxes for healthcare, I'm sure you have some sort of tax on petrol to maintain your roads, I'm sure the local trucking company that actually drove on the roads paid some taxes. I'm sure they pay property taxes on the land they use if you have them. I'm sure they pay for water permits and all that for cooling too. The question is, why is your country entitled to tax their revenue/profits? That is far bigger than the marginal stress they put on your resources. If they were a company selling physical products that they paid someone like DHL to deliver, this would be a completely silly discussion.
  - staticelf 9y ago
    > The question is, why is your country entitled to tax their revenue/profits? That is far bigger than the marginal stress they put on your resources. Because my country offers highly educated personell and their education is enabled to exist due to taxes not only towards people being employed but for companies taking out profits as well. The idea of a company taking out profits from another country even if the value of the product is created in my country by our trained personell is fucked up and will in the long run result be an economic disaster for my country since we can't fund our establishments. Also, it will render the market less competative since smaller shops have a harder time to compete against these giants who pay nearly 0% tax.

AndrewKemendo 9y ago

They use our well developed infrastructure for their own benefit Can you explain your reasoning more? So, for example an internet user in the EU is paying some local ISP to request services from google.com. The ISP presumably pays taxes on the revenues or profits from using local fiber & infrastructure in order to connect the user with google.com. In this case, they are no different than any other website/domain/internet service aside from scale and all of the taxes to fund infrastructure would come from the ISP and some portion of government financing. What I am missing is how Google is "us[ing] our well developed infrastructure for their own benefit" in a different manner than say skysports.com?

staticelf 9y ago
Well, Google operates more than in the web browser. They have a spawn in most countries and mine is no different. If they employ people in Sweden, sick days are covered by the government, health, roads, parental leave, governmental services, public transportation etc.. If they avoid taxes by simply saying they have no profit here, because they give all the revenue to the parent company, it means that everybody else in Sweden needs to cover their costs since they will probably pay close to zero in taxes. While any other shop needs to pay taxes. I don't know if skysports operate in Sweden, but my guess is that they do not. The thing is, I don't want Sweden to become like the US. Because our way of doing things are so much superior in my mind. I don't want to get a bill after I go to the hospital, I want free education, I want good roads and internet connectivity. All the stuff we have companies like these help to destroy to increase their profits.