by bootload on 1/23/16, 1:21 AM
"Despite the UK being one of Google's biggest markets, it paid £20.4m in taxes in 2013."Squeeze the SOBs. This was the response from Google Australia boss, Maile Carnegie about tax:
"called before the Senate tax inquiry to answer accusations that the company was dodging tax here after revelations its Australian arm paid $7.1 million in tax in 2013 on a profit of $46.5 million and revenue of $357.7 million." [0]
and then:
"criticism of the company’s tax bill was understandable, but failed to recognise the level of investment the company made in the local economy. She pointed to the presence of 450 Google engineers in Australia, who she said conducted work that could easily be done more cheaply elsewhere." [1]
[0] "Google Australia boss Maile Carnegie: People, get ready" ~ http://www.theaustralian.com.au/life/weekend-australian-maga...
[1] "Google boss calls for simpler, transparent global tax system" ~ http://www.afr.com/technology/technology-companies/google/go...
by Paul_S on 1/23/16, 1:09 AM
This usually works like this: company doesn't pay tax, HMRC has to spend lots of money to prosecute them, company settles to pay a fraction of the tax. Doesn't seem fair to me but HMRC already spent lots of money and to get them to pay it all up they would have to spend even more so in the end they would get less making them willing to compromise.
Doesn't this crate an incentive for companies not to pay tax? Worst case scenario is you have to pay a fraction of that tax later.
by dingdingdang on 1/23/16, 1:13 AM
Why can a super successful company like Google not take open pride in doing a bit of civic duty? The fact that they have to be cajoled into doing what is pretty much standard fare to make society function does NOT enamour me as a customer towards their long term well being in any way whatsoever - quite the opposite: I would happily jump ship if a transparent civilly minded alternative emerged (mostly thinking gmail/google-search here).
by Isn0gud on 1/23/16, 12:52 AM
The term "agrees to" really bugs me...
by warrenmiller on 1/23/16, 8:42 AM
Genuine question: what would happen if my small UK company didn't pay its corporation tax?
by yarper on 1/23/16, 10:21 AM
The absolute worst thing about this is that large corporations get a solid tax advantage in the UK compared to small businesses without the money or swing with HMRC to compete.
by revelation on 1/23/16, 1:36 AM
So from £30m to >£130m? How do you do that without tax evasion? Seems like the company officials need to be prosecuted.
by nickpp on 1/23/16, 1:17 AM
Not sure I got this right, but they're saying the rules changed under them and the new rules increased the taxes?!
by thebouv on 1/23/16, 12:01 AM
So pretty much nothing to them?
by Neil44 on 1/23/16, 9:32 AM
It should be pointed out that this £130M is intended to cover the last ten years.
by lukasm on 1/23/16, 10:51 AM
I'd love to see an experiment with 1% revenue tax.