Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Businesses Google Government The Almighty Buck United Kingdom

Amazon, Google and Apple Won't Need To Pay Tax, Despite Goverment Threats 327

Posted by timothy
from the rent-done-been-sought dept.
girlmad writes "Despite moves by government to get Google, Amazon and Apple to admit they make sales in the UK and US, and therefore should pay tax on these earnings, this article argues these are empty threats and that any taxes paid will get returned to the tech giants in government grants and subsidies. Tough luck to the small firms out there."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Amazon, Google and Apple Won't Need To Pay Tax, Despite Goverment Threats

Comments Filter:
  • Remind me,,, (Score:4, Insightful)

    by MitchDev (2526834) on Sunday May 19, 2013 @09:29AM (#43767509)

    why class warfare is alive and well and why everyone hates the government so fucking much?

    • Re:Remind me,,, (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Brave Guy (457657) on Sunday May 19, 2013 @09:53AM (#43767597)

      Not everyone hates the government. The executives of big companies are actually so fond of them that they even take their government chums out to expensive restaurants and parties on their private yachts.

      It's just the poor people who hate the government, because they're all nasty and poor and horrible.

      And the middle classes, whose tax money is going on unpopular schemes like wars and helping poor people.

      Oh, and the professionals/entrepreneurs, because after years of hard work, sacrifice and risk-taking that will stop many in their tracks, those who do succeed are then considered "rich" and taxed sharply, while the people who are actually rich have enough mobility to avoid those same high taxes, which is why the very high tax rates don't actually raise much money for the government anyway.

      • by Sponge Bath (413667) on Sunday May 19, 2013 @10:05AM (#43767661)

        It's just the poor people who hate the government, because they're all nasty and poor and horrible.

        Arthur: Bloody peasants!

      • Re:Remind me,,, (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 19, 2013 @10:58AM (#43767891)

        Oh, and the professionals/entrepreneurs, because after years of hard work, sacrifice and risk-taking that will stop many in their tracks, those who do succeed are then considered "rich" and taxed sharply, ...

        I really don't put Mark Zuckerberg and all the other "professionals/entrepreneurs" in that category.

        And everyone works hard, takes risks and sacrifices. Everyone. It's just a question of what to sacrifice.

        I have a relative - one of those "professionals/entrepreneurs" - as he puts it, "I worked 30 years and had a few lucky breaks to achieve my 'fame' (that's the way he put it)"

        He's also on his third wife and a few screwed up kids.

        Unfortunately, for every "success" story, the people don't realize that there are thousands of others who did exactly the same thing but failed; sometimes to ruinous consequences. And yet folks point to the few successes and say "look! anyone can do it if you just had the gumption!' Like everyone who's failed wasn't worthy; and everyone who's succeeded did so because they were worthy of said success.

        Are you going to tell me that someone who just happened to be at the right place at the right time is a success because of his hard work?

        That's an insult to those out there who are truly working their asses off and taking risks.

        And the "professionals" you mention. You mean doctors? They take no risks. If you are lucky enough to have been born with the talents to do well (No matter how hard I worked, I couldn't pass Organic Chem.) in that field, you are pretty much guaranteed a nice lifestyle. It's no coincidence that MDs are always on top of the lists of highest paid professions. It has nothing to do with brains because if that were the case, then Physicists would be on the top.

        • Re:Remind me,,, (Score:4, Interesting)

          by Anonymous Brave Guy (457657) on Sunday May 19, 2013 @11:57AM (#43768125)

          Just to be clear, I'm looking at all of this from a UK perspective.

          There are some professions that are very well-paid, if and when you make it to the higher levels. You mentioned doctors, so let's consider that. Those hospital consultants and GPs who are earning a tidy living at 40 were probably junior doctors at 25. Maybe it's different in the US, but in the UK that means working around twice as many hours as most of us do, severely limiting social life and relationships and several years, and getting paid a fairly feeble wage, certainly far less than anyone with the drive and aptitude to become a senior doctor later could be earning in another field. Even when they become senior doctors, these are people who may be charged with making decisions that are literally life and death, and a lot of them are still working pretty long hours with all the admin that comes with those jobs on top of their clinical work. I don't think paying those people a high wage is at all unreasonable in return for all they did earlier in their lives to get there and in recognition of the skill and experience that they possess as a result. If you want an insult, bundle people like that in the "rich" pile with movie stars, celebrity sportspeople, and old money inheritors who might never have put in an honest day's work in their lives.

          As for the entrepreneurs, you're quite right that it's a big risk and many people lose even if they do nothing wrong, but I think it's laughable to pretend that "everyone" works as hard and takes the same level of risk and makes the same level of sacrifice in life. Anyone who is bootstrapping a new business is probably giving up a lot that they could have had and done in order to get that business going, and even if the business is successful it will be paying tax itself and probably contributing to the economy by employing further people before it pays out any big profits. Again, it seems crazy to me that we might look at someone who has maybe risked all their savings, delayed having a family, learned a multitude of useful skills, basically given up a few years of their lives to get a business going, and then if their business is successful still begrudge them earning even 2-3x what they could easily have made in a regular day job. And yet, that is where the top tax rate in the UK kicks in at the moment.

      • by flyneye (84093)

        It would be nice to see these entities seized by the IRS and large parts sold off to their competitors. That would certainly stop such huge grants and subsidies in favor of smaller ones spread out. Then your horrible poor and middles could fill the new positions and enjoy the revenues spread amongst their communities.
        With the previously owned bits spread out, then we will see some innovation flourish because the new humbled titans will have to do something for US today to stay in the race. Your rich profess

        • Re:Remind me,,, (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Capt. Skinny (969540) on Sunday May 19, 2013 @11:46AM (#43768085)
          It would be nice to see the IRS threatened mafia-style for gouging the rich just "because they can afford it." I'm sure the poorest of the poor would consider the middle class as being able to afford a near-40% marginal tax rate on their earnings, because relative to them, the middle class is "rich." But the middle class would beg to differ, and would argue that millionaires should pay huge tax bills. They fail to recognize the hypocrisy in taking that position.
          • by peragrin (659227) on Sunday May 19, 2013 @12:07PM (#43768169)

            Here is the trick no one earning over a million dollars annually is actually paying the 35% tax rate. The ones who get screwed are the ones earning more than $250,000 annually but less than a Million.

            Ideally the thing to do is to tax investments that last less than an hour at 50%. Right now if you look at wall street the country is experiencing double digit growth. As wall street is supposed to be based on the fundamentals of the companies. it becomes surprising that the companies in question are experiencing at best moderate growth of 1-3%. The rest is the HFT and day trading that bankers love. It does add some liquidity to the market but HFT

            Lastly the rich The top 10% of the country controls 75% of the wealth that means they should be paying for 75% of the tax bills but in reality are only paying 50%.

            • Re:Remind me,,, (Score:4, Insightful)

              by JaredOfEuropa (526365) on Sunday May 19, 2013 @02:30PM (#43768885) Journal
              Wow, I'd like a 35% tax rate; ours in NL starts at around that percentage, and goes up to 52%... with that upper bracket kicking in real fast at around €55.000 taxable income. Then there's 21% VAT, municipal taxes (increasing faster than our significant yearly inflation), road tax and the tax on petrol (2/3rds of the price at the pump is tax), the list goes on... Kind of sucks though that here the same thing applies to businesses as well: the large ones can negotiate a low rate, the small ones get stiffed. My business gets taxed at 20%, and on what I take out I pay an additional 25% dividend tax. The big guys? They pay little, it's for good reason that so many international corporations set up their Euro HQ in the Netherlands. And guys like Bono (U2) are doing the same thing.

              I suppose it is the same all over: poor people or businesses have little money to tax, and the rich/large ones make sure their interests are mobile: tax them too much and they'll up and leave. It's the ones in the middle who get screwed.
              • Re:Remind me,,, (Score:5, Interesting)

                by gnasher719 (869701) on Sunday May 19, 2013 @08:00PM (#43770229)

                Wow, I'd like a 35% tax rate; ours in NL starts at around that percentage, and goes up to 52%... with that upper bracket kicking in real fast at around â55.000 taxable income.

                "Taxable income" is the important term. Talking about the tax rate is pointless when you don't add what "taxable income" is. In one country, the cost of driving to work is deducted from your income to calculate "taxable income". In another country, they are seriously thinking about adding the benefit of having a free parking space where you work to your income to calculate "taxable income". In one country, mortgage payments are deducted from your income, in another country they aren't.

                "Tax rate" on its own is meaningless. What you need to know is how much tax people in comparable situations actually pay.

            • by adolf (21054)

              I have an idea: Anyone "earning" more than $1 million per year pays no Federal taxes. At all.

              Instead, they just have to spend at least half of their "earnings" on goods and services. Every year. I don't care what they spend it on: Could be yachts, could be Oreos. Could be Chinese-made trinkets or American-made binoculars or Italian sports cars.

              Don't care: They must spend it on goods and services. Not domestic investments. Not off-shore resources. And then prove that they've done so, every year, an

    • Re:Remind me,,, (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ebno-10db (1459097) on Sunday May 19, 2013 @10:06AM (#43767679)

      Remind me why class warfare is alive and well and why everyone hates the government so fucking much?

      Because a key tactic in class warfare is the 0.01% getting the government to do their bidding.

    • Re:Remind me,,, (Score:5, Informative)

      by lightknight (213164) on Sunday May 19, 2013 @10:58AM (#43767897) Homepage

      Simple really: things look as different from the bottom as they do from the middle and the top. Your poor hate being poor, your middle class are typically striving to make it up another rung, and your rich don't want to fall from their perch. Your poor work with the idea of 'making it,' so that they can be free of the mentality of being poor, as well as the belief that with moving up the ladder means less problems; it does not, it just means different problems. When you're poor, you think as soon as you get another $10K, you'll pay back all your friends, be extra nice, relax, etc.: the reality is, when that $10K comes, your friends will find you, and any voluntary remembrance for their aid becomes an involuntary shakedown, during which the worst of humanity is shown to you. The middle class want to move up, going from middle middle class to upper middle class, or whatever; they try to curry favor on both sides: they want rich friends, the right connections, etc., but they also want to 'remember where they came from' with the poor, as some sort of pride of having worked their way up. The rich want to avoid becoming poor or middle class; it's one thing to be down several million from the fortune you inherited, it's another to not be able to afford to visit Europe whenever the whim strikes you.

      Each class has certain 'requirements' as far as being a part of it. This is why someone who acquires a fortune through a lottery is not suddenly thought of as being a part of the upper class; chances are, that money will be gone in a few year's time, and no attempt at understanding the change in class occurs.

      As for why everyone hates the government, why, that's simple: your host government is typically the one wielding the most amount of power over your life (save yourself, or your deity), and as such, is the scapegoat for everything that does wrong in your life during your day, from the stubbed toe you got rolling out of bed, to the parking ticket you received. He who has the power, gets the blame! It sucks, but it seems to hold true. Heck, the upper class has worked for ages on how to displace power from blame...that's why you have 'management' running companies, instead of the owners themselves. And their successes have been...somewhat lackluster, to be honest. Lately they've been getting nailed for it...see how many companies have gone tits up, and how the political class is basically losing any semblance of currency with the populace.

    • why class warfare is alive and well and why everyone hates the government so fucking much?

      You have few real options other than 401k... Which is basically a life raft for the stock market and corporate controlled tax racked / devaluation weapon all rolled into one. Moo. You're being farmed.

    • Re:Remind me,,, (Score:4, Insightful)

      by BasilBrush (643681) on Sunday May 19, 2013 @12:17PM (#43768207)

      Ah, the logical disfunctionality of the anarcho-capitalist. Multi-national corporations play off different countries governments against each other so they end up paying little tax. And somehow that's the government's doing wrong, rather than the the multi-national corporations.

  • by GenieGenieGenie (942725) on Sunday May 19, 2013 @09:34AM (#43767525)
    And for those of you who think this is partisan-minded, the "other" guys (hah! what a joke) would have done exactly the same.
    • by jareth-0205 (525594) on Sunday May 19, 2013 @09:42AM (#43767549) Homepage

      And for those of you who think this is partisan-minded, the "other" guys (hah! what a joke) would have done exactly the same.

      So your point is 'we' are to blame because we voted them into office when we had a choice to vote for someone else... who you also admit would have done the same thing...

      Nice logic there.

      • by tmosley (996283)
        So there can only be Republicans or Democrats? Is it even possible for a person to think in a way that is different from those two corrupt and fascist ideologies?

        Nice logic there.
        • We are talking about the UK, which has a 3/4-party system, none of which are called Republicans or Democrats.

          • You can always count on New Labour to stick up for the 99%. Ignore details like Blair making millions from JP Morgan Chase. He had to find some job after being PM, right?
            • by Patch86 (1465427)

              New Labour is, thankfully, almost dead. If Miliband manages to win the next election, it will probably be buried. Why do you think grandees like Blair and Mandelson are so quick to put the boot in to him? They're terrified he might win by pursuing a platform other than New Labour. If Miliband loses, it'll throw Labour right back into the throes of New Labour again, in the belief that it's the "only way to win".

              Of course they said the same about Cameron and the Tory "Nasty Party", and that didn't exactly tur

              • Thanks for the update on UK politics. As an American I admit I don't follow it closely enough to engage in real debate. The Blair thing stuck in my craw because it's analogous to the "Third Way" Democrats in the US. Sounds like there's some hope over there. With Obama and his likely successors in the US, not so much.

                P.S. Just out of curiosity, under what circumstances would you be willing to call the American War of Independence an unfortunate misunderstanding and take us back?

                • Well you'd have to give up the guns, and the constitutional right to teach your children to shout "God Hates Fags!" at people's funerals. We're a bit snooty about such primitive behaviours.

            • New Labour has been out of power for 3 years. Is anything getting better? No, it's getting worse. Which is no surprise for anyone that remembers the previous Tory government. Though it has been a bit of a surprise for a lot of people who used to support Lib Dems.

              Lets face it, not even the swivel-eyed loons from the shire Tory associations are happy with the current shambles.

              • To be fair, the incoming government this time was going to inherit a poisoned chalice in so many ways that whoever won they would never have a fighting chance. The only strategic difference was that Labour basically knew they had no chance of winning outright before the election campaign even started, so they could safely poison the well knowing that even in their worst plausible outcome they would have someone to share the blame with in a coalition.

                I'm not convinced that most European governments really ha

      • by AxemRed (755470)
        There were more than 2 choices. The Republicans and Democrats have everyone convinced that if you vote for a 3rd party, you're throwing your vote away. They rally people around hot-button issues to distract everyone from the fact that they are 90% the same. If people want change they need to stop voting for Republicans and Democrats, especially at the national level. Even if you don't care, go out and vote for a 3rd party candidate. Barring a miracle, they're not going to win any major elections right away.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 19, 2013 @09:48AM (#43767579)

      In Soviet Russia

      Governments manipulate corporations

    • by stenvar (2789879)

      Congress sets tax policy, and representatives are all over the map politically. You can make a difference, once representative at a time. And you have to get started during the primaries, not once it comes down to a binary choice.

  • We need millions of taxpayers, especially small businesses to not only refuse to pay their taxes but dare the government to arrest them for tax evasion until we have a fair and easy to enforce tax code. When I say dare, I mean in the sense of forcing the government to literally go to war or back down and fix the system.

    • OK, you go first. I hear they've got 3 hot meals, free boarding, and cable TV in the joint.

    • Your taxes go to pay for things we ALL need. Like roads, and firemen and teachers. When someone cheats on their taxes, they're cheating ALL of us!

      Ahh ha ha! Why do you guys make me read this shit? They know we're just going to tax the crap out of them to pay for hooker and cocaine parties for Washington lobbyists! Why LIE to them? !#%!WA

      • Re:Don't You See... (Score:4, Interesting)

        by ShanghaiBill (739463) * on Sunday May 19, 2013 @12:45PM (#43768335)

        Your taxes go to pay for things we ALL need. Like roads, and firemen and teachers.

        Roads are paid for (mostly) by fuel taxes. Fireman and teachers are paid out of local property taxes. Those taxes are fair, reasonable, and almost impossible to avoid. Income taxes, on the other hand, are easy to avoid by anyone who puts some effort into it. I am self employed, have a six figure income and, through completely legal means, I pay no income tax. The problem is not that the system needs some tweaks to close "loopholes", but that trying to tax net productive activity (rather than consumption or ownership) has perverse side effects and is fundamentally unfair. No country has ever made income tax work well.

    • We need millions of taxpayers, especially small businesses to not only refuse to pay their taxes

      Not necessary. The system has already been rigged by propagators of the Laffer curve myth so that the government collects only a small fraction of the taxes necessary to pay for its operation. So you're already not paying most of your taxes.

  • by NotSoHeavyD3 (1400425) on Sunday May 19, 2013 @09:59AM (#43767627)
    Oh wait, I forgot rule number whatever. "Whenever a rich and important company or person says they're for a tax that should cover them, SURPRISE it ends up covering everybody except them." (OOhh, I'll call it the Buffett Rule.)
  • Ya don't say... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Ritz_Just_Ritz (883997) on Sunday May 19, 2013 @10:01AM (#43767635)

    Megacorps hiring legions of lawyers, accountants and lobbyists to limit/eliminate their tax liabilities. And politicians sucking up to the money bags whilst feigning outrage for the little guy. I'm shocked....just shocked, I say.

  • Google, Apple and Amazon are not doing anything wrong. They are in business to make money for their stockholders of which many I bet are UK citizens. In some jurisdictions they are legally REQUIRED to operate their enterprises to the best legal advantage of their stockholders.

    Those UK citizens pay taxes on the dividends and capital gains they realize from owning stock in these companies. Not only that but these companies provide extremely useful services to UK citizens thereby enriching their lives.

    They ALS

    • by ebno-10db (1459097) on Sunday May 19, 2013 @10:34AM (#43767791)

      Google, Apple and Amazon are not doing anything wrong.

      Well, they're not doing anything illegal. And that's the crime, that the government can be bought (and cheaply). I can't speak in much detail for the UK, but in the US the Supreme Court has taken "money is speech" (true only in a limited way and in limited circumstances) to absurd extremes. The logical conclusion is that me handing a politician a briefcase stuffed with unmarked non-sequential $100 bills is protected free speech.

  • So it would seem that taxes, like laws, are for little people. Whereas writing the specs for the laws and the taxes, well that's for the corporations (which are people!) and for the special 1% big people. Well, no one said life was going to be fair, did they? :>)
  • Small firms have it so rough and they deserve our pity, even though they have lobbyist groups like Confederation of British Industry who will make sure that small firms don't have to make up for the loss in tax revenue.

    Fuck the people who lose out on services and have to pay higher taxes to make up for the lack of revenue, though. Those people clearly don't deserve pity because they aren't a business or corporation. Only businesses deserve our pity.

  • I've been following this whole shitfest in the UK quite closely for the past few months, and one amusing thing has consistently struck me - the government are trying to be the goody-goody party in all of this, claiming that the companies involved are being evil and ethically corrupt when it comes to "fair share" taxation, while at the very same time flat out refusing to acknowledge that those companies are not doing anything illegal under the current tax regime.

    The government also has ruled out changing the tax law to prevent the current behaviours,because then they lose the trivially easy PR they get from "taking the companies to task" infront of Parliament and the media.

    It's time to admit that the current tax law doesn't work once you are above PAYE (that's the government standard taxation for employees - normal people in the UK do not have to do any filings because it's all done by the HMRC for them and tax is taken out of their pay checks each month).

    Setting up a company in the UK costs about $40. Doing annual returns for that company costs about $350. By working for that company for no wage, and taking out directors dividends, you save serious amounts of money through not having to pay income tax as the Corporate tax rates are significantly smaller than the income tax rates. This scheme is so heavily and widely used, even MPs in all parties got shamed earlier this year when they were named using it - but it's still completely legal.

    No one should be expected to voluntarily pay more tax than they legally are required to, and no one should be shamed for not paying more tax than they are legally required to - if you want someone to pay more tax than they are legally required to, then legally require them to pay more tax! Don't beat around the bush, change the fucking law.

    • ...claiming that the companies involved are being evil and ethically corrupt when it comes to "fair share" taxation, while at the very same time flat out refusing to acknowledge that those companies are not doing anything illegal under the current tax regime.

      Completely true and the government certainly shoulders some of the blame but they are also stuck in a very hard place. They could certainly change the tax law but the problem is how? They are up against multi-national corporations who will do anything they can to avoid paying tax and have armies of lawyers and a global reach to do just that. It is hard to see how any tax law can actually stop these companies and billionaires without being so strict, severe or complex that it will hurt smaller companies.

    • by itsdapead (734413)

      I've been following this whole shitfest in the UK quite closely for the past few months, and one amusing thing has consistently struck me - the government are trying to be the goody-goody party in all of this, claiming that the companies involved are being evil and ethically corrupt when it comes to "fair share" taxation, while at the very same time flat out refusing to acknowledge that those companies are not doing anything illegal under the current tax regime.

      This is just the government playing to the peanut gallery. If it was easy to change the law without breaching international treaties, pissing off lots of party donors and making the tax code even more labyrinthine than it already is (then watching ninja accountants find brand new loopholes and wheezes) then it would have been done years ago. So, they just wheel in a few high-profile household name firms, give them a public handbagging, maybe shame them into handing over a few bottle caps and bits of knotted

    • by AmiMoJo (196126) * <mojo@NOspaM.world3.net> on Sunday May 19, 2013 @04:06PM (#43769279) Homepage

      I guess you haven't been following it as closely as you think you have because Vince Cable's excuse was that Google is not doing anything illegal.

      The simple fact is that the Tory party does not want to close these loopholes because many of their friends make use of them. They make some noise about it, go on Radio 4 and Newsnight and announce it in the Commons, but are careful not to really do anything.

      The problem with only paying what the law requires is that these companies then arrange their corporate structure to avoid paying almost anything, against he spirit of the law. It then becomes a game of cat and mouse, except that parliament moves so slowly the mouse always finds a new hole to dive down as soon as there is talk of closing the old one off. You can't easily legislate to make them pay more tax, although it looks like the EU might have found a way to do it if every country acts simultaneously.

      Maybe the last line of any tax law should be "no funny games".

      Oh, and don't forget Google did actually lie. They said there were no sales done in the UK, yet most of their staff list sales as part of their duties on their CVs and in their job titles.

  • Despite moves by government to get Google, Amazon and Apple to admit they make sales in the UK and US, and therefore should pay tax on these earnings [...]

    Tim Cook seems to claim the opposite:

    I can tell you unequivocally Apple does not funnel its domestic profits overseas. We don't do that. We pay taxes on all the products we sell in the U.S., and we pay every dollar that we owe.

    So is he a bare-faced liar, or is the article summary bollocks? Sources please.

    • Re:Dubious. (Score:4, Informative)

      by gnasher719 (869701) on Sunday May 19, 2013 @10:58AM (#43767895)

      So is he a bare-faced liar, or is the article summary bollocks? Sources please.

      Given the choice "X, or the article summary is bollocks", the correct answer is _always_ "the article summary is bollocks". You should know that.

      Now the truth is that Apple is indeed not funnelling domestic profits overseas. What they are doing, they are keeping overseas profits overseas.

  • Democracy and Capitalism do NOT mix.
    • Unfortunately neither do democracy and full-blown socialism, because the government owning all the means of production would give it limitless power. In the real world, the best we can do is a compromise. I do agree that these days it's clear which way the "compromise" is leaning.
      • As unpopular as it is, I am in favor of dictatorship as long as the dictator is a benevolent one who actually cares about the well-being of the common folk.

        • As unpopular as it is, I am in favor of dictatorship as long as the dictator is a benevolent one who actually cares about the well-being of the common folk.

          Are you serious, or is my sarcasm detector out-of-whack?

  • misleading article (Score:5, Informative)

    by jbmartin6 (1232050) on Sunday May 19, 2013 @10:40AM (#43767823)
    The article doesn't say, but it appears that when it says "tax" it is referring to *income* tax. For some reason, a lot of people forget that corporations, unlike people, pay income tax on NET rather than gross. In other words, the corporation pays all of its expenses, then pays income tax on what is left over. Those expenses include your salary, your benefits, new capital projects, and so on. Meanwhile, the real tax burden of the organization is much higher when you add in all the other taxes they are paying: sales tax, property tax, tariffs, and so on. The story that these corporations aren't paying very much in "taxes" is a gross distortion. They just aren't paying very much in income taxes, which is by design.
    • Despite moves by government to get Google, Amazon and Apple to admit they make sales in the UK and US [...]

      The summary places the subject partly within the context of the recent sales tax debate in the US. The article doesn't talk about this, nor does it make any mention of grants and subsidies from the US. Even if it did, this would be missing the point. The taxes would not simply be "empty threats", whatever that means here. Even if the companies receive benefits from the government, they have cause to

    • by PPH (736903)

      For some reason, a lot of people forget that corporations, unlike people, pay income tax on NET rather than gross

      But corporations are people. Why can't I pay income taxes on my net rather than gross?

  • The government's sole purpose of this action is to put into place more mechanisms to extract new taxes. The standard way all elected governments of the world get away with sticking it to the people with more unfair laws is to play the long game and start really small.

    The gov knows that once the basic mechanism is in place, it is irreversible, consequently they initally make it sound harmless and agree to anything to get it in place (even initially giving up any benefit, such as that all the collected taxes

  • ... eliminate all corporate taxes? Will that draw international corporations to come here. It probably would ... until ... they realize that we are taxing the people so hard that the cost of employing them here is too high. So they would just set up headquarters here, and hire the actual production people (workers) wherever they are the cheapest. So what do we gain? I say just drive them out.

What this country needs is a good five dollar plasma weapon.

Working...