Changes on the High Street

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Pierre

On the contrary, I believe the tax system should be updated and OTT players should pay a respective fair tax based on their revenue made in the countries they operate.

I agree 100% but the tax system cannot be trimmed around the edges. It need root and branch reform in parallel with the company legislation to mandate corporate decisions are in the best interests of not just the shareholders but the employees and the community they gain their revenue from.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by ianch99

I agree 100% but the tax system cannot be trimmed around the edges. It need root and branch reform in parallel with the company legislation to mandate corporate decisions are in the best interests of not just the shareholders but the employees and the community they gain their revenue from.

+1

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

Business owners need supported through this difficult time, that’s the role of Governments and Central Banks. That results in positive outcomes for everyone.

Must according to who? It’s not backed by science. It isn’t even backed by economics.

Non-Communists.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Non-Communists.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Non-Communists.

More inflammatory nonsense Old Boy.

After three weeks are over we should risk the lives of tens of thousands, if not more people, because the economy won’t cope? Any alternative thought is obviously Communist?

You are being ridiculous in the extreme to get a rise out of others. Which is a shame really, because it’s obvious to everyone else that the role of Government is to support people through difficulty.

The real risk to your ideology is that they actually do it I suppose and years of “there’s no magic money tree” goes out the window. There is a magic money tree - we just don’t think the poor are worth using it on.

I suppose though, ordinary folk and small businesses are probably to small to be worthy of bailouts in your eyes, only failing banks and failing airlines?

[tweetiepooh]

Denmark looks like it has the idea with excluding companies registered in tax-havens from new relief. In other words, if you've been paying you way you can get help. They also have added things about dividends and other trades for next 2 years.

This seems an eminently balanced way of looking at things.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by tweetiepooh

Denmark looks like it has the idea with excluding companies registered in tax-havens from new relief. In other words, if you've been paying you way you can get help. They also have added things about dividends and other trades for next 2 years.

This seems an eminently balanced way of looking at things.

Quite right. It’s the most basic bond between an individual and the state. You pay your fair share in, and you get something back.

If capitalism wasn’t in existential crisis before Coronavirus it is now hence the rush for businesses to get “back to normal”. The public, in this country and others, won’t tolerate billions in bailouts for big businesses when small businesses can’t even get support for 3-6 months.

Responsible Governments will seize the opportunity to buy assets and seek a return on investment longer term. The market has failed.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by tweetiepooh

Denmark looks like it has the idea with excluding companies registered in tax-havens from new relief. In other words, if you've been paying you way you can get help. They also have added things about dividends and other trades for next 2 years.

This seems an eminently balanced way of looking at things.

If it's a product provided or service from within a country, then the business is taxed within that country. If it is provided from OUTSIDE the country, then it is NOT taxable within that country. Apart from anything else, the COST of providing that product or service has also occurred OUTSIDE the country. Tax havens are used to send money that has ALREADY been taxed. Eg Business owner owns business that operates in country X, the business pays tax in country X, any money left over, may or may not, be sent to a tax haven.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by nomadking

If it's a product provided or service from within a country, then the business is taxed within that country. If it is provided from OUTSIDE the country, then it is NOT taxable within that country. Apart from anything else, the COST of providing that product or service has also occurred OUTSIDE the country. Tax havens are used to send money that has ALREADY been taxed. Eg Business owner owns business that operates in country X, the business pays tax in country X, any money left over, may or may not, be sent to a tax haven.

If there's no benefit to a tax haven why do they exist then, nomadking?

The obvious answer - to move profits that could be taxed in the United Kingdom elsewhere. I'm flabbergasted at why anyone would support this - given the precarious state of our economy at this challenging time.

[Carth]

Strange how tax works isn't it . . .

I get paid a wage which I pay tax on

Some of my (already taxed) wage buys petrol, which carries a tax

I then use that (double taxed) petrol in my car . . . which incidentally has to be taxed

it's a giggle aint it

Originally Posted by nomadking

If it's a product provided or service from within a country, then the business is taxed within that country. If it is provided from OUTSIDE the country, then it is NOT taxable within that country. Apart from anything else, the COST of providing that product or service has also occurred OUTSIDE the country. Tax havens are used to send money that has ALREADY been taxed. Eg Business owner owns business that operates in country X, the business pays tax in country X, any money left over, may or may not, be sent to a tax haven.

Fine - then they don't get a bail out from the country where they don't provide a product or service, or if they have their head office in another country (for tax purposes).

If you don't pay tax in a country (for whatever reason), you don't get tax-payers' money support.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Carth

Strange how tax works isn't it . . .

I get paid a wage which I pay tax on

Some of my (already taxed) wage buys petrol, which carries a tax

I then use that (double taxed) petrol in my car . . . which incidentally has to be taxed

it's a giggle aint it

It's complicated but rules is rules as they say.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by jfman

If there's no benefit to a tax haven why do they exist then, nomadking?

The obvious answer - to move profits that could be taxed in the United Kingdom elsewhere. I'm flabbergasted at why anyone would support this - given the precarious state of our economy at this challenging time.

I's not very patriotic from my point of view to defend such organisations. The British public was distinctly unimpressed with Richard Branson's plea for support to the British tax-payer for Virgin Atlantic.

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

I's not very patriotic from my point of view to defend such organisations. The British public was distinctly unimpressed with Richard Branson's plea for support to the British tax-payer for Virgin Atlantic.

Considering Delta (49% owners) returned $468 million to shareholders in September 2019, and had $4.0 billion of free cash flow on a year-to-date basis (after investing $3.5 billion into the business), perhaps they could help?

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Considering Delta (49% owners) returned $468 million to shareholders in September 2019, and had $4.0 billion of free cash flow on a year-to-date basis (after investing $3.5 billion into the business), perhaps they could help?

The first ports of call a business should go to are its shareholders and banks.