3 ms·

NY Times infographic here: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/04/28/business/Double-Irish-With-A-Dutch-Sandwich.html http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/201

by clobber 14y ago

NY Times infographic here: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/04/28/business/Double-Irish-With-A-Dutch-Sandwich.html http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/04/28/business/Doubl... Sadly, this is the 'norm' for many, many corporations - including Google.

paulsutter 14y ago
Your criticism may be better directed at those who write the laws, not those who follow them. It's not only the norm, it a company's fiduciary responsibility to minimize tax liabilities. If these activities are against the intent of the law, a simple rule change should suffice.
- ljf 14y ago
  Indeed, I personally believe that many corporations in the UK should pay more in tax - with less loopholes to escape from paying tax. But shouting at businesses isn't going to change anything, only shouting at politicians is going to to do that. It seems though the only way to mobilise people to do this is to outrage them with the disparity between how they have to act and how companies are allowed to act. As an aside, UK manufacturing is tiny, but from 2000 onwards , taken as a whole, has paid more in corporation tax than the entire huge banking system.
- clobber 14y ago
  I certainly can't blame a company for taking advantage of existing loopholes and we should challenge our lawmakers to close said loopholes. However, I can question their ethics, stock market be damned. This whole "it was my duty" mentality and shifting the blame... hmm, now where have I heard that before?
  - paulsutter 14y ago
    If the behavior is unethical, what exactly would be the correct and ethical way for these companies to calculate their taxes? If it's so cut and dried for you, maybe you can help us all out here. You call it a loophole, suggesting that there is a design flaw in the law that is being exploited. What specific part of the law is flawed, and what was the drafting intent that has been misapplied in the law as it stands? I'm really serious. It's disappointing to me that so many people are ready to assume unethical intentions, when the details and issues are far from clear to me (and likely not clear to them). Maybe there is a country that has done it correctly? Accounting for business in multiple tax jurisdictions is really complex, and I can only assume that we had some really thoughtful people drafting the existing laws.

by clobber 14y ago

paulsutter 14y ago

Your criticism may be better directed at those who write the laws, not those who follow them. It's not only the norm, it a company's fiduciary responsibility to minimize tax liabilities. If these activities are against the intent of the law, a simple rule change should suffice.

ljf 14y ago
Indeed, I personally believe that many corporations in the UK should pay more in tax - with less loopholes to escape from paying tax. But shouting at businesses isn't going to change anything, only shouting at politicians is going to to do that. It seems though the only way to mobilise people to do this is to outrage them with the disparity between how they have to act and how companies are allowed to act. As an aside, UK manufacturing is tiny, but from 2000 onwards , taken as a whole, has paid more in corporation tax than the entire huge banking system.
clobber 14y ago
I certainly can't blame a company for taking advantage of existing loopholes and we should challenge our lawmakers to close said loopholes. However, I can question their ethics, stock market be damned. This whole "it was my duty" mentality and shifting the blame... hmm, now where have I heard that before?
- paulsutter 14y ago
  If the behavior is unethical, what exactly would be the correct and ethical way for these companies to calculate their taxes? If it's so cut and dried for you, maybe you can help us all out here. You call it a loophole, suggesting that there is a design flaw in the law that is being exploited. What specific part of the law is flawed, and what was the drafting intent that has been misapplied in the law as it stands? I'm really serious. It's disappointing to me that so many people are ready to assume unethical intentions, when the details and issues are far from clear to me (and likely not clear to them). Maybe there is a country that has done it correctly? Accounting for business in multiple tax jurisdictions is really complex, and I can only assume that we had some really thoughtful people drafting the existing laws.