Try This Google..........Bermuda, Tax Avoidance

[Tonington]

Before people get too self righteous about taxing companies out of existence they might consider just where their pension funds are parked. Careful you don't bite the hand that feeds you.

Taxed out of existence? The current system of shifting revenues is more of this race to the bottom. Taxed out of existence is nonsense. The purpose of those taxes should be to help keep the economy that spawned the transactions going. If the tax generated by the revenue is gone, but the transactions still remain, then someone is shifting the burden onto others. I don't get to choose which jurisdiction I'm going to pay a value added tax on when I travel abroad and purchase something. Why should a corporation get to change their jurisdiction away from where revenue is actually generated to avoid taxes? I'd love to hear the apologists explain the rational behind that one.

I guess some day with the current thinking among some financial managers we should be so careful of the hand that feeds us, that we can all be working for the same wages as those off-shored jobs in China? No thanks.

A better idea is to protect the middle class with sensible rules that allow corporations to derive profits for shareholders, and for people to still enjoy the benefits of a strong middle class. The constant need to squeeze more out of the economy, the need for constant growth, it's going to lead to some uncomfortable realizations.

There needs to be a healthy balance. Otherwise it's a parasitic relationship.

 

[gopher]

quoting Captain:


Quote: Originally Posted by gopher

When I worked for the IRS's tax shelter unit those shelter schemes involved investments of tens of thousands of dollars. That might be pocket change for you but it certainly isn't for me.
​

I agree, but the fact remains that you are able to legitimately take advantage of those perfectly legal avenues if you so choose.




Not if you choose but if you can AFFORD it.

 

[tay]

Tax avoidance is a perfectly acceptable and legal practice.

I guess that the take-away on this is that Democrats should have expected to see a reaction from Corp America such as what we see here.

I will agree that it's a legal practice but not one that's acceptable to the majority of taxpayers.

And the take-away is that Politicians passed laws long ago to allow this type of action so only they can change it............



The head of the internet giant Google has defiantly defended his company’s tax avoidance strategy claiming he was “proud” of the steps it had taken to cut its tax bill which were just “capitalism”.


“I am very proud of the structure that we set up. We did it based on the incentives that the governments offered us to operate,” he said.

Read more: Google boss Eric Schmidt: I'm proud of our tax avoidance scheme...it's called capitalism - UK, Local & National - Belfasttelegraph.co.uk

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

It's only a matter of time before the floodgates open and more multinationals start to assume the same practice as Google and Apple.... It'll be endless fun to observe the incessant moaning about these companies not paying their 'fair share' into the kitty.

On a related note, I wonder if this event might influence the Democrats to move to the middle on their tax increases?

Yeah, I doubt it too

The countermeasure will be to add regulations and levies agains corporations doing business in USA who avoid paying taxes. Then the corps will find a new loophole then some more regulations will be added.

I don't see this as being anything to do with which party is in power (other than the willingness not to look the other way) as I am pretty sure Google was doing this through the Bush years too. If you can pay 0 taxes, it doesn't matter the tax rate, you will not wish to pay it.

 

[Bar Sinister]

There is a simple solution to companies moving their assets offshore - make it illegal. Companies that do business in a certain country must pay taxes there before they move their cash to another nation. And close the loopholes that allow companies to pretend that they haven't made a profit. After that they can do what they want with their money.

 

[captain morgan]

Not if you choose but if you can AFFORD it.

Ahhh, I see now, you're upset that you can't take advantage of it because it doesn't make financial sense for you, therefore it's a form of welfare

Guess what else doesn't make financial sense... Doing business in a jurisdiction that will demand 3-4 times the taxes than the nation just off that coast.

The countermeasure will be to add regulations and levies agains corporations doing business in USA who avoid paying taxes. Then the corps will find a new loophole then some more regulations will be added.

I don't see this as being anything to do with which party is in power (other than the willingness not to look the other way) as I am pretty sure Google was doing this through the Bush years too. If you can pay 0 taxes, it doesn't matter the tax rate, you will not wish to pay it.

It's a myth that a corp pays zero taxes (read: doesn't part with any money).... The entire debacle around Warren Buffet exemplifies this issue.. Buffet issues a statement that he paid a lower percentage than his secretary which elicits an outcry from the 99% - what Buffet forgot to mention was that he donated well over a billion dollars to charity that year... A wee little omission of the facts.

That donation he made goes a lot farther to send a message that he didn't want to support the bloated gvt bureaucracy and decided to send the funds on a more direct path to the end users.

There is a simple solution to companies moving their assets offshore - make it illegal. Companies that do business in a certain country must pay taxes there before they move their cash to another nation. And close the loopholes that allow companies to pretend that they haven't made a profit. After that they can do what they want with their money.

Sounds good.... The assets will never enter the nation to begin with.

Problem solved

 

[earth_as_one]

Buffet was referring to the fact that the dividend tax rate is much lower then the income tax rate.

I am a Google shareholder. I benefit personally from Google's tax avoidance. However if the money was made in the USA, then it should be taxed in the USA. I disagree with millions of poor people having to pay additional taxes because Google has found a way to circumvent US tax law.

I don't blame Google. I blame the legislators who created the loopholes or have the power to close these loopholes and don't.

Of course the tax rate should increase with income. People living at or below the poverty line should not only not pay taxes, they should be net tax beneficiaries, up to the point where their basic needs (food, clothing, shelter and education) are met. Everything after that should be taxed at an ever increasing rate. The more money you have to spend on luxuries, the more taxes you should have to pay. Nothing could be more fair, then making sure poor people aren't starving, they have a roof over their heads and the ability to educate themselves to become more productive members of society, earn a decent living and ultimately start paying taxes too.

 

[DaSleeper]

Of course the tax rate should increase with income. People living at or below the poverty line should not only not pay taxes, they should be net tax beneficiaries, up to the point where their basic needs (food, clothing, shelter and education) are met. .

They are..... in Canada anyways ...
My mother-in-law....The last few years of her life....while paying $0 taxes was receiving $600 to $800 in refund in provincial and federal tax credits...
The reason I know....I was doing her taxes......

 

[earth_as_one]

Assuming she isn't a wealthy person, I'm pleased my tax dollars help your mother.

 

[DaSleeper]

assuming she isn't a wealthy person, i'm pleased my tax dollars help your mother-in-law.

fify
EDIT She wasn't She just had survivor benefit from her husband+ CPP and OAS...She thought I was good at filling taxes but the only reson she was getting that high in rebates is because the rent in that place was eating up most of those retiement cheques...

 

[earth_as_one]

The taxes Google didn't pay could have helped about 2 million people like your mother.

 

[taxslave]

The taxes Google didn't pay could have helped about 2 million people like your mother.

Except that you missed the one most important fact about corporate taxes. That is:
Business, large or small do not pay taxes, never have and never will. To a business all taxes are a cost of doing business and are just added to the retail price of their product/service. So by increasing corporate taxes all you are doing is increasing the retail price of a product that you the consumer must purchase with after tax dollars. So in effect all that tax money comes from consumers pockets. At some point by raising corporate taxes one of two things will happen.
1) The product produced is priced out of the market and the company goes bankrupt throwing all employees out of work.
2) The company is able to move to a better business climate and the former employees are thrown out of work and the company now pays taxes and employees in a different area.

 

[captain morgan]

Buffet was referring to the fact that the dividend tax rate is much lower then the income tax rate.

... And?

How come no mention of Buffet donating over a billion to charity to reduce his overall rate?

If you want, get rid of a preferred capital gains tax entirely, but don't forget to apply that tax to all folks (read: no preferred tax rate for home owners in America when they sell a house - it all gets taxed as income).

Of course the tax rate should increase with income. People living at or below the poverty line should not only not pay taxes, they should be net tax beneficiaries, up to the point where their basic needs (food, clothing, shelter and education) are met. Everything after that should be taxed at an ever increasing rate. The more money you have to spend on luxuries, the more taxes you should have to pay. Nothing could be more fair, then making sure poor people aren't starving, they have a roof over their heads and the ability to educate themselves to become more productive members of society, earn a decent living and ultimately start paying taxes too.

Excepting a line where one doesn't pay any taxes, all your suggesting is punishing success and advancement.

The taxes Google didn't pay could have helped about 2 million people like your mother.

The moment that you lean on using emotionally charged parables to defend a position is the moment that you've lost the battle and the war

 

[taxslave]

The taxes Google didn't pay could have helped about 2 million people like your mother.

The taxes that the US government squandered busting people for smoking pot could probably eradicate poverty. Learn to pick your battles.

 

[Tonington]

Except that you missed the one most important fact about corporate taxes. That is:
Business, large or small do not pay taxes, never have and never will. To a business all taxes are a cost of doing business and are just added to the retail price of their product/service. So by increasing corporate taxes all you are doing is increasing the retail price of a product that you the consumer must purchase with after tax dollars. So in effect all that tax money comes from consumers pockets. At some point by raising corporate taxes one of two things will happen.
1) The product produced is priced out of the market and the company goes bankrupt throwing all employees out of work.
2) The company is able to move to a better business climate and the former employees are thrown out of work and the company now pays taxes and employees in a different area.

Except that you missed the most important fact, that this isn't a case of raising tax rates. Google is shifting reporting to avoid paying taxes. And do you think Apple will reduce the price of their products when they avoid taxes, or will they enjoy the higher margin? Consumers will not save money, because the products are priced by what the market will allow. And consumers are doubly stiffed because now there is less revenue to pay for the same services.

Also you missed a third option, as I already mentioned the price is most often controlled by market factors. Some corporations cannot simply add the cost of increased taxes to their product, because it will price them out of the market. So they have to eat it and manage to get along like the rest of us...

 

[captain morgan]

Except that you missed the most important fact, that this isn't a case of raising tax rates. Google is shifting reporting to avoid paying taxes.

I believe that the threat of the tax increases played a role in the decision that Google made... They have been around for quite some time now, but made their decision just recently

 

[Highball]

GE, GM, Emerson, and others have over 1/2 of their manufacturing performed off shore using off shore labor. And they want to be called American Corportate icons? 70% of the GM automobiles are now manufactured in a GM plant built with US Bail Out monies near Shanghai. And they want another bailout too. Why? To build a new facility in India for the other 30% of their production and be able to slip under the UAW screen. But 28% of their income is now being used for Corporate Performance bonus to employees who used to be US based and are now off shore, exempt from US taxes. American Patriot industry? Nor any more just another group practicing legal treason made possible by laws instigated and backed by their own Lobbyists.

 

[captain morgan]

GE, GM, Emerson, and others have over 1/2 of their manufacturing performed off shore using off shore labor. And they want to be called American Corportate icons? 70% of the GM automobiles are now manufactured in a GM plant built with US Bail Out monies near Shanghai. And they want another bailout too. Why? To build a new facility in India for the other 30% of their production and be able to slip under the UAW screen. But 28% of their income is now being used for Corporate Performance bonus to employees who used to be US based and are now off shore, exempt from US taxes. American Patriot industry? Nor any more just another group practicing legal treason made possible by laws instigated and backed by their own Lobbyists.

Look into the elements that motivate all of these companies to establish offshore components... They aren't doing it for sh*ts and giggles.

Maybe this example will offer some insight on why these decisions are made:

Warren Buffett And George Soros Want Higher Estate Tax Than Obama Proposes - Forbes

"For someone who dies before the end of the year the unified credit will cover the estate tax on $5,120,000 with a top marginal rate of 35%. Based on law in place now, that goes to $1,000,000 and a top marginal rate of 55% on January 1, 2013."

... But you'll also notice that Buffet has taken steps to shelter a bunch of his money from the tax man come 2013

Berkshire buyback seen clashing with estate tax push | Reuters

That major investor is believed to be Buffet