Paradise papers

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

MightyMandarin

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

It might make sense to you but that argument is inherently flawed for two reasons.

1) It's completely contrary to the basic principle of modern capitalist society that everybody pays their fair share of taxes. They're there for a reason and whether you give all the money directly to charitable causes of your choice, or not, it's not your choice to make.

2) This "option" of choosing to pay or how much to pay in tax is available only to the most well-off. One can't just open a bank a/c in Bermuda with their piggybank savings, it's only accessible for those with millions in the bank, and this is why it's inherently unfair. Why are the rich allowed to skirt the law (even if they believe in the deluded notion that charity absolves one of all liability)?

Cookie_Monster

Lewis Hamilton caught up in it too, creating questionable companies to own his jet which he leases to himself through a couple of shell companies, avoiding a lot of VAT in the process.

astrofool

smurgen wrote: »

You're dead right man.it's disgusting the way the government spend money. Just two years ago my uncle was diagnosed with cancer and you know what the government done? Provided him with top care almost free of charge. What a shower of scumbags.that money coulda been way better spent maintaining a yacht for like a month or two.

Well, this is what the government should be spending money on. But to take your example, we've dramatically increased spending on health over the past decade and a half, with almost no improvement in waiting lists, or extra productivity, or outcomes (even controlling for population growth, technology changes and aging).

Were the government to somehow double their tax intake, it would not trickle down to the average person in any positive way, sure, a few groups would initially benefit (probably by getting more money back directly), but that benefit would be short lived as the government would find new ways to spend it badly. We'd also probably have rampant inflation as the public sector unions absorb the excess.

It's why the government always chases reform, and unions hate reform and just go after money (in the form of more pay or greater allowances).

astrofool

MightyMandarin wrote: »

It might make sense to you but that argument is inherently flawed for two reasons.

1) It's completely contrary to the basic principle of modern capitalist society that everybody pays their fair share of taxes. They're there for a reason and whether you give all the money directly to charitable causes of your choice, or not, it's not your choice to make.

2) This "option" of choosing to pay or how much to pay in tax is available only to the most well-off. One can't just open a bank a/c in Bermuda with their piggybank savings, it's only accessible for those with millions in the bank, and this is why it's inherently unfair. Why are the rich allowed to skirt the law (even if they believe in the deluded notion that charity absolves one of all liability)?

This is the crux, everyone should be able to optimize their tax situation, not just those wealthy enough, these are all territories supported directly by existing powers (the British Queen literally endorses many of these territories) and could be shut down overnight if the will was even slightly there (but it's not). Tax should drive behavior of individuals to be positive for society.

And look at it this way, everybody avoids tax, just to lesser or greater degrees, if I decide to buy an A1 rated car over a G rated car, I'm avoiding tax, or if I buy bread instead of garlic bread.

smurgen

astrofool wrote: »

smurgen wrote: »

You're dead right man.it's disgusting the way the government spend money. Just two years ago my uncle was diagnosed with cancer and you know what the government done? Provided him with top care almost free of charge. What a shower of scumbags.that money coulda been way better spent maintaining a yacht for like a month or two.

Well, this is what the government should be spending money on. But to take your example, we've dramatically increased spending on health over the past decade and a half, with almost no improvement in waiting lists, or extra productivity, or outcomes (even controlling for population growth, technology changes and aging).

Were the government to somehow double their tax intake, it would not trickle down to the average person in any positive way, sure, a few groups would initially benefit (probably by getting more money back directly), but that benefit would be short lived as the government would find new ways to spend it badly. We'd also probably have rampant inflation as the public sector unions absorb the excess.

It's why the government always chases reform, and unions hate reform and just go after money (in the form of more pay or greater allowances).

Government budgets were decimited ovee the last decade because of the bank bailout and subsequent recession.capital spending was cut. That's why health budgets suffered and tech spending etc in the sector wasn' maintained. And you're advocating people bypassing the government coffers further. You sound out of touch with reality.

Wanderer78

smurgen wrote: »

Government budgets were decimited ovee the last decade because of the bank bailout and subsequent recession.capital spending was cut. That's why health budgets suffered and tech spending etc in the sector wasn' maintained. And you're advocating people bypassing the government coffers further. You sound out of touch with reality.

....but but austerity is good for us?

Jawgap

smurgen wrote: »

Government budgets were decimited ovee the last decade because of the bank bailout and subsequent recession.capital spending was cut. That's why health budgets suffered and tech spending etc in the sector wasn' maintained. And you're advocating people bypassing the government coffers further. You sound out of touch with reality.

You're right health budgets didn't grow to sustain the existing model - but the problem isn't funding, its the inherent inefficiency in the way health delivery is structure in Ireland - too much politics (look at the farago the Children's Hospital is becoming).....too many of the wrong sized hospital doing the wrong things in the wrong locations....too little investment in primary and preventative care....and too little investment in (medical) allied and support functions....far too much bureaucracy.....and zero accountability.

And we'll still elect any ol' fool who campaigns to keep the local hospital open regardless of its circumstances, then wonder why the health service is an expensive basketcase :rolleyes:

Shurimgreat

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Where exactly are you living? What wars has Ireland been involved in lately?

As for NSA spying, every country has spies. Its a nessecary part of a nations security.

People will always look for reasons not to pay tax. That's why they have to be forced to pay tax.

The actions of big multinationals like Apple, Google, Facebook, etc when it comes to paying tax is disgraceful. Their greed is infinite it seems.

Shurimgreat

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Lewis Hamilton caught up in it too, creating questionable companies to own his jet which he leases to himself through a couple of shell companies, avoiding a lot of VAT in the process.

He is entitled to a VAT refund if he only uses his private jet for work purposes. Its the same for all the other jet users. Of course, its bullsh*t like most of these loopholes. He's been shown to use the jet to go on holidays as I am sure all the other owners do. In this case he's committing a fraud as are others. But whose going to check up on them? Many of these tax avoidance loopholes are actually examples of illegal tax evasion.

Some of them are akin to front companies used by organised crime for the purposes of money laundering.

Jawgap

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Where exactly are you living? What wars has Ireland been involved in lately?

As for NSA spying, every country has spies. Its a nessecary part of a nations security.

People will always look for reasons not to pay tax. That's why they have to be forced to pay tax.

The actions of big multinationals like Apple, Google, Facebook, etc when it comes to paying tax is disgraceful. Their greed is infinite it seems.

.....and yet people will continue to lap up their products and services

Shurimgreat

Jawgap wrote: »

.....and yet people will continue to lap up their products and services

Its kind of hard not to, particularly companies like Google.
All the big multinationals do it.

But you have bullsh*t from the big US tech giants about them being "different" and "progressive" and a force for good when in reality they are old style capitalism in a new guise.

The unwillingness to contribute enough money to the running of society casts a shadow over these companies.

Shurimgreat

Efficient tax planning seems to equate to paying next to no tax and giving two fingers to ordinary taxpayers.

jack hackett

I really love how Brendan O' Carroll tells everyone they should be donating to SVDP, yet his own family dont even pay their taxes which in actual fact contributes to homelessness and lack of services for the less well off, these guys make me laugh, same with Bono banging on about ending 3rd world poverty yet he avoids paying taxes which go towards those type of services, the good old Queen who is actually paid by tax payers has her estate avoiding tax, we are all supposed to obey the rules but they can do what they like

jmayo

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I hope the future missus doesn't have any connection to FBI.

cisk wrote: »

So the O’Carroll clan pay their wages to a company in Mauritius whom they are all investment managers in. They all then instruct the company to “loan” them their wages back to their bank account in the U.K which they pay no tax on.

I can see HMRC paying a visit to the "Brown" household.

What they were doing wasn't it appears tax avoidance, but tax EVASION.

3 members of the cast getting their wages paid into Mauritius companies and Brendan never twigged it?

I wonder is his mother spinning in her grave.

astrofool wrote: »

Here's the thing.

Governments spend money really badly, like awfully, tie it up in bureaucratic knots with masses of waste in duplication of how it is spent. What they spend it on also goes way over budget, or spent giving people massive wages which their work does not deserve.

If a wealthy individual, like say, Bill Gates, wants to make a positive difference to the world, they should avoid paying as much tax as possible, so they can spend it where it's needed, on say, curing malaria, or making drinking water available to all.

It just so happens that the greedy who want to keep all their money also do the same things. However, even in the hands of the greedy, it will probably do more good than if the government got control of it and frittered it away.

So then none of us should pay tax ?

Or is it only permissible for the ultra rich or where do you draw the line ?

BTW for every Bill Gates you get a lot of Donald Trumps or Koch Brothers I bet.

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

What about you know fire departments, paramedics, traffic police, highway maintenance ?
Who do you think should pay for those things ?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

jmayo

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Eh what's your opinion on Apple ?

They weren't even paying the corporate tax rate and as has been exposed were basically trying to subvert democracy in some jurisdictions in order to organise ultra favourable tax terms.

blinding

jack hackett wrote: »

I really love how Brendan O' Carroll tells everyone they should be donating to SVDP, yet his own family dont even pay their taxes which in actual fact contributes to homelessness and lack of services for the less well off, these guys make me laugh, same with Bono banging on about ending 3rd world poverty yet he avoids paying taxes which go towards those type of services, the good old Queen who is actually paid by tax payers has her estate avoiding tax, we are all supposed to obey the rules but they can do what they like

There is no point being the Elite without telling the little man , woman / inferiors what to do .

There is no point in being Bono if you can’t tell your inferiors what to do , What would be the Point ?

jack hackett

blinding wrote: »

There is no point being the Elite without telling the little man , woman / inferiors what to do .

There is no point in being Bono if you can’t tell your inferiors what to do , What would be the Point ?

good point, silly me what was i thinking :P

blinding

Its only fair that everyone should have one tax avoidance / evasion scam on the go .

All men and women are created equal so everybody should have a tax scam .

jack hackett

blinding wrote: »

Its only fair that everyone should have one tax avoidance / evasion scam on the go .

All men and women are created equal so everybody should have a tax scam .

well i think the government need to get the finger out on this one and make sure there is a provision made to supply every household with a tax avoidance scam and make sure the central bank get it done before Christmas

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

server down

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I tend to be more sympathetic to people creating jobs alright. Apple seem to be claiming that they want to maximise the money due to the US, where they believe the IP is created, but they want a tax break. The more they pay in Europe, the less they pay when they repatriate.

blinding

jack hackett wrote: »

well i think the government need to get the finger out on this one and make sure there is a provision made to supply every household with a tax avoidance scam and make sure the central bank get it done before Christmas

Now your talking . Perhaps there could be a scene in Mrs brown’s boys to educate all of the populace in tax evasion / avoidance .

Surely our betters wouldn’t begrudge the ordinary 5/8th their tax scam .

A scam for everybody . Who needs tax anyway ?

Saint Sonner

Uk tax payers pay tax to the Queen?

The Queen takes the tax and puts it somewhere where she Doesn’t have to pay tax on it?

 
My head hurts!!!

blinding

Saint Sonner wrote: »

Uk tax payers pay tax to the Queen?

The Queen takes the tax and puts it somewhere where she Doesn’t have to pay tax on it?

 
My head hurts!!!

Don’t tell ffg . They would go for a racket like that .

jmayo

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Yes Apple create and support jobs here, but so do a lot of other companies.
By the looks of it I would bet the scheme they operated under was their own idea and because back in the bad old 80s the state was desperate to keep jobs (pardon the pun) so they "offered" very favourable tax deal.

The thing is if you are indigenous Irish company, do you get the same favourable treatment?

server down wrote: »

I tend to be more sympathetic to people creating jobs alright. Apple seem to be claiming that they want to maximise the money due to the US, where they believe the IP is created, but they want a tax break. The more they pay in Europe, the less they pay when they repatriate.

But the rub is they are not repatriating the profits to the US, but storing them offshore.
They are waiting for a very favourable tax rate in the US before they ever feed any major profits back.
They are using their dominant position to get favourable outcomes.

People may excuse the companies like Apple or rich individuals like Bono finding ways of not paying taxes using the argument that shure don't they give something back in terms of jobs or wouldn't you do it yourself if you had the chance.
The latter is an old Irish mentality which sees "the system" as something that never concerns them, and one of the reason why we have had wholesale corruption, financial ineptitude and lack of regulation since the 70s.

The thing is the 90 plus percent of taxpayers don't have the chance and they are the ones that have to pay the taxes for the services that we all get to enjoy.

If a fire breaks out in Bonos gaff in Killliney he will expect the Dun Laoghaire Fire Brigade to respond.
If 20 fans start trying to climb over his wall I bet he would be quick to phone the Garda in Dun Laoghaire.

Likewise if a fire breaks out in Permabear's fancy gaff in North Carolina he will be on to the local fire department even if he reckons they should be privatised.

Someone has to pay for services and expecting the non millionaires to carry a bigger proportional chunk of it is not damn well fair from where I sit.

Maybe if I was a millionaire I might be more predisposed to hiding my loot ?
As it is I am not, thus I would be quiet happy to tell Bono and his like to p*ss on the fire until such time as they pair a comparative percentage of their earnings in tax.

jack hackett

blinding wrote: »

Now your talking . Perhaps there could be a scene in Mrs brown’s boys to educate all of the populace in tax evasion / avoidance .

Surely our betters wouldn’t begrudge the ordinary 5/8th their tax scam .

A scam for everybody . Who needs tax anyway ?

I think they may have already covered that in the mrs brown movie where she owed a heap of money to the revenue....

Jawgap

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Its kind of hard not to, particularly companies like Google.
All the big multinationals do it.

But you have bullsh*t from the big US tech giants about them being "different" and "progressive" and a force for good when in reality they are old style capitalism in a new guise.

The unwillingness to contribute enough money to the running of society casts a shadow over these companies.

Not really - no one has to buy an iPhone, there are alternatives. Just as there are alternatives to Google. And no one really 'needs' social media.

People buy/use them for reasons of convenience or because they've been hooked by the marketing. If enough people started to boycott them they'd change their practices quick enough.

blinding

jack hackett wrote: »

I think they may have already covered that in the mrs brown movie where she owed a heap of money to the revenue....

Life Imitating Artful Dodgers !

smurgen

One thing a person must remember.when you die you can't bring your money with you and one of the things you leave behind is your reputation.your reputation can't be bought but it can be destroyed.

jack hackett

smurgen wrote: »

One thing a person must remember.when you die you can't bring your money with you and one of the things you leave behind is your reputation.your reputation can't be bought but it can be destroyed.

true, instead of jimmy carr being remembered as a funny guy (or not funny depending on your tastes) hes going to be remembered as that guy who is a tax cheat

smurgen

jack hackett wrote: »

true, instead of jimmy carr being remembered as a funny guy (or not funny depending on your tastes) hes going to be remembered as that guy who is a tax cheat

Stupid laugh and a tax cheat. Another factor with all these offshore accounts is the AML quality.How do we know these funds aren't awash with terrorist/drug money?

jack hackett

smurgen wrote: »

Stupid laugh and a tax cheat. Another factor with all these offshore accounts is the AML quality.How do we know these funds aren't awash with terrorist/drug money?

Oh dont you know well they are full to the brim with the of proceeds of crime etc, if you go to any of these entities in any of these jurisdictions with a mountain of funds you wish to invest into their entity or country, you can be sure they arent going to dig too deeply into where the money came from...;)

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Grayson

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

It's my understanding that apple had three separate entities here. Two of which were used for funnelling money but had no employees. In fact the owners and board for those two met in the US.

Shurimgreat

I definitely think there needs to be an EU wide response to this. Otherwise you will have countries competing to accommodate the likes of Apple, Google, Facebook, etc. and their tax arrangements.

Its a pity companies like this can't be barred from doing business in the EU until they pay more tax. There needs to be an EU wide crackdown on them.

Also, the Jersey Islands and Isle of Man are in the EU I think. Also part of the UK if I am not mistaken. So why aren't they subject to the same tax laws as the rest of the UK?

I'd favour categorising all tax avoidance as tax evasion.

Shurimgreat

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I think you need to separate legitimate industry carried out by the big multinationals like Apple from the shell companies they use to funnel cash here there and everywhere for the purposes of tax avoidance.

Ireland is an attractive place to set up industries for these multinationals. We are in the EU, part of the EURO, speak English, well educated, stable democracy and pretty good infrastructure. So they are probably happy to have their industries here. But we shouldn't have anything to do with their tax avoidance shell companies. We shouldn't be facilitating large scale tax avoidance.

valoren

Just on Apple and it's taxes. The profits it has accumulated overseas is as much as $91 billion. This is deemed as 'foreign reinvested earnings'.

Guess how much it would cost in tax dollars to repatriate that money back to headquarters in the US?

$31.85 billion at 35% tax.

An iPhone made in china, by an Apple subsidiary, to a chinese consumer should not have the profit made on it taxed at US rates simply because the parent company is headquartered there.

It's a global company. Any CEO who looked to make such a move would be removed immediately. Economies go up and down. It makes sense for a tech company to maintain a cash pile to weather inevitable recessions, pay dividends etc. Change the rate and such huge companies might repatriate at more sensible taxation rates.

Ronaldinho

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I know that question wasn't directed at me, but yes I think it's fair.

With the best will in the world, not everyone can get a high paying job. To some extent it's not even sufficient to be smart or hard working - but you need to be smarter or more hard working that the fella next to you to get ahead.

Tax policy needs to reflect these realities and be sufficiently progressive so that people on lower incomes can lead a reasonably modest but comfortable lifestyle.

server down

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

The tax take is designed around screwing the middle guy.

server down

Apple’s rebuttal

https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2017/11/the-facts-about-apple-tax-payments/

gct

Its basically money laundering. every company or individual involved should be ashamed of themselves. It may not be illegal but it certainly is unethical and immoral. The rich elite getting richer while the poor get poorer is not sustainable. Eventually the Worm will turn.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

blinding

https://www.theguardian.com/uk

Off with their Heads Jeremy ( Corbyn )

Odhinn

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Contrary to your fairy land 'facts' earlier, lower income earners get hammered by indirect taxation.
https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/poorer-people-in-ireland-pay-out-more-of-their-income-in-tax-1.1910725

Shurimgreat

valoren wrote: »

Just on Apple and it's taxes. The profits it has accumulated overseas is as much as $91 billion. This is deemed as 'foreign reinvested earnings'.

Guess how much it would cost in tax dollars to repatriate that money back to headquarters in the US?

$31.85 billion at 35% tax.

An iPhone made in china, by an Apple subsidiary, to a chinese consumer should not have the profit made on it taxed at US rates simply because the parent company is headquartered there.

It's a global company. Any CEO who looked to make such a move would be removed immediately. Economies go up and down. It makes sense for a tech company to maintain a cash pile to weather inevitable recessions, pay dividends etc. Change the rate and such huge companies might repatriate at more sensible taxation rates.

Fair points. Maybe a tax at source is the only answer for those companies who engage in this type of thing. Not a VAT type tax, more an additional anti avoidance tax on those companies found to be engaged in shifty behaviour. They only get away with it because governments allow it.

jmayo

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

How do you know how much pressure Apple brought to bear to make the Irish state offer such a cosy arrangement ?
There is now documentary evidence as to the type of demands and questions they want answered by a state where they want to move their tax affairs.
Apple does provide jobs here, but they have had two companies that are just conduits for channeling profits so that they are untaxable.

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

When push comes to shove you would be damn glad of the publicly funded local fire crew coming to put out the fire or are you seriously trying to tell us you will wait for your privately funded fire crew to show up ?

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I wish I was contributing next to nothing in income taxes.
Of course I wouldn't be contributing as much as a high flyer like yourself. :rolleyes:
And someone else made a great point, indirect taxes hit lower earners more then high earners.
I am sure you have checked out the high level of indirect taxes in the likes of the Caymans.
The natives, who don't happen to work for those offshore institutions or fixers are paying through the nose for their food because all those institutions pay fook all.

Shurimgreat wrote: »

....
Its a pity companies like this can't be barred from doing business in the EU until they pay more tax. There needs to be an EU wide crackdown on them.

Also, the Jersey Islands and Isle of Man are in the EU I think. Also part of the UK if I am not mistaken. So why aren't they subject to the same tax laws as the rest of the UK?

I'd favour categorising all tax avoidance as tax evasion.

The Channel islands and Isle of Man are not part of the UK and thus not in the EU.
Thus they have their own tax regimes outside of the control of UK government and Westminster.

valoren wrote: »

Just on Apple and it's taxes. The profits it has accumulated overseas is as much as $91 billion. This is deemed as 'foreign reinvested earnings'.

Guess how much it would cost in tax dollars to repatriate that money back to headquarters in the US?

$31.85 billion at 35% tax.

An iPhone made in china, by an Apple subsidiary, to a chinese consumer should not have the profit made on it taxed at US rates simply because the parent company is headquartered there.

What about the IP, what about the development and design of the iphone.
Why bother sticking Designed in USA if it has no relation to the product ?

Are they paying tax in China on Chinese sales or was that not funneled back through one of those name plate companies in Ireland, now Jersey ?
The thing is Apple are in effect really paying no taxes anywhere.

valoren wrote: »

It's a global company. Any CEO who looked to make such a move would be removed immediately. Economies go up and down. It makes sense for a tech company to maintain a cash pile to weather inevitable recessions, pay dividends etc. Change the rate and such huge companies might repatriate at more sensible taxation rates.

Ahh FFS stop trying to lay it on so thick.
There are cash reserves and there are Apple's cash reserves which are as much as those of a pretty rich country.

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

As opposed to the people in the country you now reside who voted into office a complete populist rightist moron that promised a lot and at the same time offering tax cuts. :rolleyes:

Has it also crossed your mind that the middle classes might have to also pay less if the ultra rich paid a something like their share ?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Wanderer78

thank god for 'trickle down', shur we d be screwed if it wasnt for that!:D