Keir Starmer

Advertise with us
UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
In business you are obliged to pay as little as you can pay legally. That's why people employ accountants.Campaign to get laws changed if you think they should pay more, morals have absolutely nothing to do with it. I assume you voluntarily pay more income tax than you have to?
 
ey_tony said:
...and therein lies the problem regarding the GFA.
You're approaching the issue as though it can't be resolved. It was never thought that there could be a solution prior to the GFA but it happened through negotiation and the same could be achieved with regard leaving the ECHC. It depends upon the willingness to resolve the issues.

Once again you're looking at the EU issue through the same flawed glasses.
The EU is a dreadful protectionist organisation that has access to our markets which benefits them in the form of a huge trading deficit in their favour and disadvantages the UK.
If they are alleged trading partners then why has there always been a huge trading deficit in their favour? That trading deficit should be greatly reduced by either making it easier to access to their markets or restricting the EU's access to our markets or by negotiating more favourable terms.

I can guarantee that if their access to our markets of such as their car industries was restricted it would go into rapid decline with the host nations going into recession but we don't seem to have stomach to face them down.
Click to expand...
Once again you're just batting off a request for a rationale of your views with a "it's your negative attitude that's the problem".

Which parts of the EU do you feel we cannot trade with? I think we can trade with all of it provided we recognise that we need to sell products and services that meet their chosen standards. That's exactly the same with any trading relationship.

The notion that we want to not be a member but have unfettered access to sell products and services without checks that what we are supplying complies to their standards is daft. Our choice to leave has created the frictional cost of doing business. If we restrict access to our car market jobs in the Midlands, North East, Merseyside are immediately at risk. We have very little leverage as capital and production will move. There never was an "oven ready deal".

Generally, brinksmanship in negotiating doesn't get the best outcome. It's far better to build on things that add value to both parties. It's to be hoped that the less confrontational approach that the current government seem to be trying to adopt can achieve this.

I'm sure you'll have a comeback that paints me as a pinko left wing negative person. I do really wonder how I've got through life hamstrung by not having your incisive and clear articulation of how to make things better ;)

AnywayI'm off to do some woodwork!
 
Maybe Phil and ey_tony are actually Brian Niccol and Jeff Bezos in disguise. That's the only logical reason I can think for why they'd be so defensive of massive corporate tax avoidance.

Being serious - and appealing to their clearly stated desire for hard work and absence of handouts; these multinationals are only able to operate (and make profit) in countries that have functioning economies. I.e. ones with working roads, rule of law, an educated population capable of working in their offices and factories; and (in the case of the UK) workers that should have a basic level of health due to the availability of the NHS. All of these services are funded by tax.

So by abusing legally available mechanisms to avoid paying tax on their UK earnings they are quite literally eating a free lunch. They are reaping the benefits of services (funded by tax payers) whilst not contributing to the running of those services. Sounds an awful lot like an absence of honest work, and effectively scrounging for handouts like lazy benefits cheats. The fact it's done in a shirt and suit rather than jeans and a t-shirt doesn't make it OK.
 
Phil Pascoe said:
In business you are obliged to pay as little as you can pay legally. That's why people employ accountants.Campaign to get laws changed if you think they should pay more, morals have absolutely nothing to do with it. I assume you voluntarily pay more income tax than you have to?
Click to expand...
I would agree that companies and individuals are entitled to arrange their affairs for their benefit rather than those of the tax man but there is no obligation to pay as little as you can legally.

The Companies Act requires directors of companies to act with regard to all stakeholders which includes shareholders, customers and the wider society in which the company operates. One of the listed companies I have been a director of paid more tax than it could have legally done as the board felt it was appropriate to do so.
 
Last edited:
sploo said:
So by abusing legally available mechanisms to avoid paying tax on their UK earnings they are quite literally eating a free lunch. They are reaping the benefits of services (funded by tax payers) whilst not contributing to the running of those services. Sounds an awful lot like an absence of honest work, and effectively scrounging for handouts like lazy benefits cheats. The fact it's done in a shirt and suit rather than jeans and a t-shirt doesn't make it OK.
Click to expand...
It's a really difficult one to solve as any attempt to move to a principle based tax regime will just attract more accountants and lawyers. That's not to say it's not worth doing more to close gaps though.

The Inland Revenue also has a massive backlog on enforcement and were criticised earlier this year for not having a plan to close it. Getting that under control would also help.
 
All taxation is "a slice of the action" Where wealth is being generated it has to be taxed for the benefit of nations.
America is going to have to get to grips with its multinationals companies, so that they are not stripping the wealth from other countries. If large multinationals continue to hoover up available trade across the world without paying a proportionate amount of tax. locally, then the countries in which they trade, will become poorer.
I would like to think that when I purchase things, that a just proportion of that revenue stays inside the country. And that it isn't being syphoned off to send the likes of Jeff Bazos to Mars. :LOL:
 
Blackswanwood said:
I would agree that companies and individuals are entitled to arrange their affairs for their benefit rather than those of the tax man but there is no obligation to pay as little as you can legally.

The Companies Act requires directors of companies to act with regard to all stakeholders which includes shareholders, customers and the wider society in which the company operates. One of the listed companies I have been a director of paid more tax than it could have legally done as the board felt it was appropriate to do so.
Click to expand...
What! as a member of a Board of Directors you paid more tax than required, that is the most stupid comment on the whole of this thread and I can't think that any same person would believe that to have been the case, in any case the BOD should have been voted out at the next AGM.
 
Blackswanwood said:
It's a really difficult one to solve as any attempt to move to a principle based tax regime will just attract more accountants and lawyers. That's not to say it's not worth doing more to close gaps though.

The Inland Revenue also has a massive backlog on enforcement and were criticised earlier this year for not having a plan to close it. Getting that under control would also help.
Click to expand...
One of the more stupid policies during austerity was the dismissal of so many tax enforcement officers.
Many recovered considerably more than their own salaries, so as a cost saving measure pretty daft.
The whole thing needs a massive overhaul and simplification. That might hopefully leave less opportunities for accountants to find loopholes for their clients.
 

Similar threads

Robbo3
Jokes - Marriage
Replies
5
Views
5K
Jonzjob
Jonzjob

Latest posts

Back
Top