3 ms·
If the Australian government feels so strongly about the declining revenue of news publishers, they have a host of reasonable options. They could subsidize them
by dvdkon 6y ago
If the Australian government feels so strongly about the declining revenue of news publishers, they have a host of reasonable options. They could subsidize them, they could lower their taxes, they could even substantially raise Google and Facebook's taxes (ideally without directly naming them in the law). But telling two (foreign!) companies "you have to pay these people, because you've outcompeted them" is just not how this is done. I don't see what made them choose this unprecedentedly direct and confrontational option.
- dbetteridge 6y agoThey already do effectively subsidise them (by not enforcing taxes properly) > 2013 News Corp had just won a court case against the Australian Tax Office (ATO) in the Federal Court and was duly awarded a tax refund of $882 million. At the Tax Office, they were not happy. Some badly wanted to appeal the decision. After all, News was then the ATO’s “number one corporate tax risk”, the nation’s premier tax dodger that is. > Insiders say the prospects of the Tax Office winning on appeal were good but the case was never re-contested. Taxpayers picked up the bill for what was a non-cash, paper transaction where News Corp’s Australian operations recorded a $2 billion loss and its tax haven entities a $2 billion gain. Their tax from the last 5 years was less than $10M, while they got government subsidies of $40M. So not only are they paying no tax, the taxpayers are paying THEM. An American company, btw. https://iknow.cch.com.au/document/atagUio1574205sl227210907/news-australia-holdings-pty-ltd-v-fc-of-t https://iknow.cch.com.au/document/atagUio1574205sl227210907/... (Court case with the Newscorp)