Australian Politics Forum - Top Companies That Pay No Tax

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 38847
Gender: male

Re: Top Companies That Pay No Tax
Reply #255 - Dec 21^st, 2015 at 3:17pm

tickleandrose wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 2:53pm:

crocodile wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 2:14pm:

Aussie wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 1:55pm:

Haven't read the Thread.....but.....has anyone commented on Murdoch's $B2.8 and no tax paid?

Perhaps. What is the $2.8 billion though. Is that revenue or profit. Have any losses from previous years been carried forward. What size dividend did they pay the shareholders. What was the size of the asset depreciation. Were they carrying any unsold stock. Until all those questions and probably a few more can be answered, any comments are not very insightful and probably damaging.

For example: in early 2015, the News Corp's Australia arm, recorded net profit of 142 million, comparing to 150 million the year earlier. How much company tax were paid?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-06/news-corp-profit-falls-as-australian-newspaper-revenues-decline/6074874

Ah!

News Corp v the Australian arm of Murdoch? I dunno.

Back to top

IP Logged

perceptions_now

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth WA
Gender: male

Re: Top Companies That Pay No Tax
Reply #256 - Dec 21^st, 2015 at 3:17pm

mariacostel wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 1:44pm:

Dnarever wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 11:46am:

mariacostel wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 9:45am:

Dnarever wrote on Dec 20^th, 2015 at 7:32pm:

Swagman wrote on Dec 20^th, 2015 at 7:15pm:

You also overlook that companies don't just pay tax on net profit? They also pay....

Payroll tax

Compulsory Workers comp

Compulsory superannuation guarantee

Compulsory outside the market Penalty rates

Holiday leave

Holiday leave loading

Long service leave

Company tax is paid on net profit. So if they're not paying tax the problem is profitability.

Rather pathetic list Swag, so they pay the costs of employing people. None of that relates to taxation.

IT COMPLETELY RELATES TO TAXATION!! It is a deductible cost of doing business!

You would think that the employer would end up paying for something without tax payer support ?

Has it every occurred to you that 'tax payers' are 100% funded by the companies you love to hate?

Really?

And, has it ever occurred to you, that YOU ARE NOT RIGHT!

Back to top

IP Logged

Bam

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21905
Gender: male

Re: Top Companies That Pay No Tax
Reply #257 - Dec 21^st, 2015 at 3:35pm

tickleandrose wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 12:46pm:

Its not that simple, I can give an example of tax evasion by the multinational company.

Example 1 - usual practice.

This company have 1 million dollars, its based solely in Australia. It invest the 1 million dollars. The overall profit for the year is say 100 000 dollars for the company net (deducted already the expenses including wages). So the company pay 100000 worth of company tax.

Example 2 - Questionable practice.

This company have 1 million dollars, but its 'based' in a nation with lax tax regulation. It sets up a company in Australia, and 'borrows' 1 million dollars from its other company at the interest rate of say 7% (note, business loan usually higher than home loan). The company makes 100 000 dollars like example 1 after usual deduction, but also deducts 70 000 in interest repayment. So all it have to do now is to pay 30 000 worth of company tax to Australia. The other 70 000 in profit goes to the head company in tax heaven, where it pays <10% tax.

Example 3 - More complicated questionable practice.

To avoid been nabbed by the ATO. This company went into sort of mutual alliance with another company. They both set up lending companies in the tax heaven borrows to each other. And thereby reducing their tax liability in Australia.

Note, the loser is not only the Australian people. But the biggest loser is actually the example 1 company who is based in Australia. That company have no chance to compete against the other examples. Because the other two, due to lowered lax liability, can put more funding into R&D, or lower prices. The company in Example 1 will probably have to either shut or do what the other company do as well.

This is why we need to close tax loopholes for corporations, especially multinationals. Australian corporations cannot compete effectively against the multinationals because the taxation playing field is not level.

Shutting down the loopholes - and doing so aggressively - would make it possible to reduce the corporate tax rate for all corporations, perhaps down to 25%, without increasing the deficit. Some unnecessary corporate tax deductions can be removed as well, but the priority should be removing tax loopholes.

Back to top

You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to hold opinions that you can defend through sound, reasoned argument.

IP Logged

Bam

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21905
Gender: male

Re: Top Companies That Pay No Tax
Reply #258 - Dec 21^st, 2015 at 3:48pm

crocodile wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 1:36pm:

tickleandrose wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 12:46pm:

Example 2 - Questionable practice.

This company have 1 million dollars, but its 'based' in a nation with lax tax regulation. It sets up a company in Australia, and 'borrows' 1 million dollars from its other company at the interest rate of say 7% (note, business loan usually higher than home loan). The company makes 100 000 dollars like example 1 after usual deduction, but also deducts 70 000 in interest repayment. So all it have to do now is to pay 30 000 worth of company tax to Australia. The other 70 000 in profit goes to the head company in tax heaven, where it pays <10% tax.

It doesn't matter where it borrows the money. Interest has to be paid whether it borrows from another subsidiary, the bank of China or Mr Khemlani.

The example given is a fictitious loan that is designed to send money out of Australia without being taxed.

For example, if the multinational "Megacorp" has branches in Australia and Singapore, and Megacorp sets up a financial structure where Megacorp Australia "borrows" money from Megacorp Singapore at a high interest rate, on paper it's simply interest payments on a loan, but in actual fact it is simply money being sent out of Australia tax-free.

Some other tax avoidance strategies used by multinationals:
* Transfer pricing
* Trademark holding companies
* Captive real estate trusts

Back to top

You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to hold opinions that you can defend through sound, reasoned argument.

IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: Top Companies That Pay No Tax
Reply #259 - Dec 21^st, 2015 at 3:54pm

Dnarever wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 2:26pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 2:21pm:

mariacostel wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 1:31pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 20^th, 2015 at 10:34pm:

funny how you include compulsory super in that list Swag ... I seem to remember employees getting it in lieu of a couple of years pay rises

makes me wonder how many more you got wrong. Roll Eyes

How do you think that makes it any less than an amount that still has top be paid?

it's paid by the employees not the employer Cheesy

You seem to have missed the point that the employer also claims the employees wages as a deduction, does not seem that the employer is really the employer, we are all paid by a tax subsidy. Our Taxes are used to cover our wages.

that made less sense than a combo JS/Greens post.

Back to top

drivel_fader_crop.jpg (24 KB | 26 )

IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: Top Companies That Pay No Tax
Reply #260 - Dec 21^st, 2015 at 3:56pm

perceptions_now wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 3:17pm:

mariacostel wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 1:44pm:

Dnarever wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 11:46am:

mariacostel wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 9:45am:

Dnarever wrote on Dec 20^th, 2015 at 7:32pm:

Swagman wrote on Dec 20^th, 2015 at 7:15pm:

You also overlook that companies don't just pay tax on net profit? They also pay....

Payroll tax

Compulsory Workers comp

Compulsory superannuation guarantee

Compulsory outside the market Penalty rates

Holiday leave

Holiday leave loading

Long service leave

Company tax is paid on net profit. So if they're not paying tax the problem is profitability.

Rather pathetic list Swag, so they pay the costs of employing people. None of that relates to taxation.

IT COMPLETELY RELATES TO TAXATION!! It is a deductible cost of doing business!

You would think that the employer would end up paying for something without tax payer support ?

Has it every occurred to you that 'tax payers' are 100% funded by the companies you love to hate?

Really?

And, has it ever occurred to you, that YOU ARE NOT RIGHT!

Nope. Feel free to tell us all about the non-employed taxpayers. Self-funded retirees perhaps... Thats about it.

Back to top

IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: Top Companies That Pay No Tax
Reply #261 - Dec 21^st, 2015 at 3:57pm

Bam wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 3:35pm:

tickleandrose wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 12:46pm:

Its not that simple, I can give an example of tax evasion by the multinational company.

Example 1 - usual practice.

This company have 1 million dollars, its based solely in Australia. It invest the 1 million dollars. The overall profit for the year is say 100 000 dollars for the company net (deducted already the expenses including wages). So the company pay 100000 worth of company tax.

Example 2 - Questionable practice.

This company have 1 million dollars, but its 'based' in a nation with lax tax regulation. It sets up a company in Australia, and 'borrows' 1 million dollars from its other company at the interest rate of say 7% (note, business loan usually higher than home loan). The company makes 100 000 dollars like example 1 after usual deduction, but also deducts 70 000 in interest repayment. So all it have to do now is to pay 30 000 worth of company tax to Australia. The other 70 000 in profit goes to the head company in tax heaven, where it pays <10% tax.

Example 3 - More complicated questionable practice.

To avoid been nabbed by the ATO. This company went into sort of mutual alliance with another company. They both set up lending companies in the tax heaven borrows to each other. And thereby reducing their tax liability in Australia.

Note, the loser is not only the Australian people. But the biggest loser is actually the example 1 company who is based in Australia. That company have no chance to compete against the other examples. Because the other two, due to lowered lax liability, can put more funding into R&D, or lower prices. The company in Example 1 will probably have to either shut or do what the other company do as well.

This is why we need to close tax loopholes for corporations, especially multinationals. Australian corporations cannot compete effectively against the multinationals because the taxation playing field is not level.

Shutting down the loopholes - and doing so aggressively - would make it possible to reduce the corporate tax rate for all corporations, perhaps down to 25%, without increasing the deficit. Some unnecessary corporate tax deductions can be removed as well, but the priority should be removing tax loopholes.

And naturally you cannot detail these 'loopholes' even though they aren't loopholes in the first place.

Back to top

IP Logged

crocodile

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6683
Gender: male

Re: Top Companies That Pay No Tax
Reply #262 - Dec 21^st, 2015 at 7:47pm

Bam wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 3:48pm:

crocodile wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 1:36pm:

tickleandrose wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 12:46pm:

Example 2 - Questionable practice.

This company have 1 million dollars, but its 'based' in a nation with lax tax regulation. It sets up a company in Australia, and 'borrows' 1 million dollars from its other company at the interest rate of say 7% (note, business loan usually higher than home loan). The company makes 100 000 dollars like example 1 after usual deduction, but also deducts 70 000 in interest repayment. So all it have to do now is to pay 30 000 worth of company tax to Australia. The other 70 000 in profit goes to the head company in tax heaven, where it pays <10% tax.

It doesn't matter where it borrows the money. Interest has to be paid whether it borrows from another subsidiary, the bank of China or Mr Khemlani.

The example given is a fictitious loan that is designed to send money out of Australia without being taxed.

You would have no idea regarding the veracity of the loan unless you were party to the negotiations

For example, if the multinational "Megacorp" has branches in Australia and Singapore, and Megacorp sets up a financial structure where Megacorp Australia "borrows" money from Megacorp Singapore at a high interest rate, on paper it's simply interest payments on a loan, but in actual fact it is simply money being sent out of Australia tax-free.

I'm afraid not. The ATO are not that dumb as to allow a loan that is never used to go through to the keeper. It's all covered in sub-section 230
https://www.ato.gov.au/law/view/document?DocID=TXR/TR20123/NAT/ATO/00001&PiT=999...

Some other tax avoidance strategies used by multinationals:
* Transfer pricing
* Trademark holding companies
* Captive real estate trusts

None of these methods are in any way unlawful. Multinational companies may choose to domicile their operation wherever they wish. If you think for one minute that tax advantages don't enter the equation you would be incredibly naïve. If the Aussie government want to price themselves out of the market the participants will take their business elsewhere. Finding a legislative way to enforce IP and copyright holdings is something that has escaped legislators for decades.

This seems to be the major gripe amongst the poor sods around here that don't like the way organisations look for ways to reduce operating costs. Finding legislative and punitive ways around this will only blow up in their faces with a whole raft of unintended consequences. The simple fact is that local corporate taxes are out of kilter with international practices.

The workers are the ones that bear most of the burden of corporate taxation. There is no benefit in chasing it. Corporate taxes need to come down. Miraculously, the xfer pricing might just stop and workers wages get a shot in the arm as well.

Back to top

Very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes.

IP Logged

Bam

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21905
Gender: male

Re: Top Companies That Pay No Tax
Reply #263 - Dec 21^st, 2015 at 8:19pm

mariacostel wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 3:57pm:

Bam wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 3:35pm:

tickleandrose wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 12:46pm:

Its not that simple, I can give an example of tax evasion by the multinational company.

Example 1 - usual practice.

This company have 1 million dollars, its based solely in Australia. It invest the 1 million dollars. The overall profit for the year is say 100 000 dollars for the company net (deducted already the expenses including wages). So the company pay 100000 worth of company tax.

Example 2 - Questionable practice.

This company have 1 million dollars, but its 'based' in a nation with lax tax regulation. It sets up a company in Australia, and 'borrows' 1 million dollars from its other company at the interest rate of say 7% (note, business loan usually higher than home loan). The company makes 100 000 dollars like example 1 after usual deduction, but also deducts 70 000 in interest repayment. So all it have to do now is to pay 30 000 worth of company tax to Australia. The other 70 000 in profit goes to the head company in tax heaven, where it pays <10% tax.

Example 3 - More complicated questionable practice.

To avoid been nabbed by the ATO. This company went into sort of mutual alliance with another company. They both set up lending companies in the tax heaven borrows to each other. And thereby reducing their tax liability in Australia.

Note, the loser is not only the Australian people. But the biggest loser is actually the example 1 company who is based in Australia. That company have no chance to compete against the other examples. Because the other two, due to lowered lax liability, can put more funding into R&D, or lower prices. The company in Example 1 will probably have to either shut or do what the other company do as well.

This is why we need to close tax loopholes for corporations, especially multinationals. Australian corporations cannot compete effectively against the multinationals because the taxation playing field is not level.

Shutting down the loopholes - and doing so aggressively - would make it possible to reduce the corporate tax rate for all corporations, perhaps down to 25%, without increasing the deficit. Some unnecessary corporate tax deductions can be removed as well, but the priority should be removing tax loopholes.

And naturally you cannot detail these 'loopholes' even though they aren't loopholes in the first place.

I have done so elsewhere. You know I have because you made personal attacks in response more than once. Providing a detailed argument for your benefit is like throwing pearls to swine. I also have not seen you make a single constructive contribution to the discussion nor offer any ideas of your own. Not even once.

Here are your previous underwhelming contributions to this debate.
mariacostel wrote on Nov 25^th, 2015 at 10:10am:

So basically just follow your ideology and bias?

mariacostel wrote on Dec 20^th, 2015 at 5:22pm:

As always, you are making quite silly statements. When Qantas wants to borrow $8B for new planes where does it go? Down to the local branch of the ANZ? When BHP needs to raise $3B for a new project does it run a Kickstarter?

Stop fixating on multinationals and actually express you endless hatred of AUSTRALIAN business. Details the deductions you disagree with instead of making wild and unspecified complaints.

So how about for a change YOU put up some ideas of your own?

Back to top

You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to hold opinions that you can defend through sound, reasoned argument.

IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 59186
Here
Gender: male

Re: Top Companies That Pay No Tax
Reply #264 - Dec 21^st, 2015 at 8:27pm

mariacostel wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 1:44pm:

Dnarever wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 11:46am:

mariacostel wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 9:45am:

Dnarever wrote on Dec 20^th, 2015 at 7:32pm:

Swagman wrote on Dec 20^th, 2015 at 7:15pm:

You also overlook that companies don't just pay tax on net profit? They also pay....

Payroll tax

Compulsory Workers comp

Compulsory superannuation guarantee

Compulsory outside the market Penalty rates

Holiday leave

Holiday leave loading

Long service leave

Company tax is paid on net profit. So if they're not paying tax the problem is profitability.

Rather pathetic list Swag, so they pay the costs of employing people. None of that relates to taxation.

IT COMPLETELY RELATES TO TAXATION!! It is a deductible cost of doing business!

You would think that the employer would end up paying for something without tax payer support ?

Has it every occurred to you that 'tax payers' are 100% funded by the companies you love to hate?

You are the person who pointed out that employee wages are tax deductible ?

Even the honest companies have their wage bill subsidised by the tax payer not only the few that I criticise.

Back to top

IP Logged

John Smith Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 75097 Gender:	Re: Top Companies That Pay No Tax Reply #265 - Dec 21^st, 2015 at 8:48pm mariacostel wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 3:56pm: Nope. Feel free to tell us all about the non-employed taxpayers. Self-funded retirees perhaps... Thats about it. not everyone works for companies maria lovestoflaphergums
Back to top	Our esteemed leader: I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus. IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: Top Companies That Pay No Tax
Reply #266 - Dec 22^nd, 2015 at 7:17am

Bam wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 8:19pm:

mariacostel wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 3:57pm:

Bam wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 3:35pm:

tickleandrose wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 12:46pm:

Its not that simple, I can give an example of tax evasion by the multinational company.

Example 1 - usual practice.

This company have 1 million dollars, its based solely in Australia. It invest the 1 million dollars. The overall profit for the year is say 100 000 dollars for the company net (deducted already the expenses including wages). So the company pay 100000 worth of company tax.

Example 2 - Questionable practice.

This company have 1 million dollars, but its 'based' in a nation with lax tax regulation. It sets up a company in Australia, and 'borrows' 1 million dollars from its other company at the interest rate of say 7% (note, business loan usually higher than home loan). The company makes 100 000 dollars like example 1 after usual deduction, but also deducts 70 000 in interest repayment. So all it have to do now is to pay 30 000 worth of company tax to Australia. The other 70 000 in profit goes to the head company in tax heaven, where it pays <10% tax.

Example 3 - More complicated questionable practice.

To avoid been nabbed by the ATO. This company went into sort of mutual alliance with another company. They both set up lending companies in the tax heaven borrows to each other. And thereby reducing their tax liability in Australia.

Note, the loser is not only the Australian people. But the biggest loser is actually the example 1 company who is based in Australia. That company have no chance to compete against the other examples. Because the other two, due to lowered lax liability, can put more funding into R&D, or lower prices. The company in Example 1 will probably have to either shut or do what the other company do as well.

This is why we need to close tax loopholes for corporations, especially multinationals. Australian corporations cannot compete effectively against the multinationals because the taxation playing field is not level.

Shutting down the loopholes - and doing so aggressively - would make it possible to reduce the corporate tax rate for all corporations, perhaps down to 25%, without increasing the deficit. Some unnecessary corporate tax deductions can be removed as well, but the priority should be removing tax loopholes.

And naturally you cannot detail these 'loopholes' even though they aren't loopholes in the first place.

I have done so elsewhere. You know I have because you made personal attacks in response more than once. Providing a detailed argument for your benefit is like throwing pearls to swine. I also have not seen you make a single constructive contribution to the discussion nor offer any ideas of your own. Not even once.

Here are your previous underwhelming contributions to this debate.
mariacostel wrote on Nov 25^th, 2015 at 10:10am:

So basically just follow your ideology and bias?

mariacostel wrote on Dec 20^th, 2015 at 5:22pm:

As always, you are making quite silly statements. When Qantas wants to borrow $8B for new planes where does it go? Down to the local branch of the ANZ? When BHP needs to raise $3B for a new project does it run a Kickstarter?

Stop fixating on multinationals and actually express you endless hatred of AUSTRALIAN business. Details the deductions you disagree with instead of making wild and unspecified complaints.

So how about for a change YOU put up some ideas of your own?

SO YOU ARENT GOING TO DETAIL your objections to a specific 'loophole'? Typical.

Back to top

IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: Top Companies That Pay No Tax
Reply #267 - Dec 22^nd, 2015 at 7:19am

Dnarever wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 8:27pm:

mariacostel wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 1:44pm:

Dnarever wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 11:46am:

mariacostel wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 9:45am:

Dnarever wrote on Dec 20^th, 2015 at 7:32pm:

Swagman wrote on Dec 20^th, 2015 at 7:15pm:

You also overlook that companies don't just pay tax on net profit? They also pay....

Payroll tax

Compulsory Workers comp

Compulsory superannuation guarantee

Compulsory outside the market Penalty rates

Holiday leave

Holiday leave loading

Long service leave

http://www.ozpolitic.com/yabbfiles/Templates/Forum/default/resize_wb.gif
Company tax is paid on net profit. So if they're not paying tax the problem is profitability.

Rather pathetic list Swag, so they pay the costs of employing people. None of that relates to taxation.

IT COMPLETELY RELATES TO TAXATION!! It is a deductible cost of doing business!

You would think that the employer would end up paying for something without tax payer support ?

Has it every occurred to you that 'tax payers' are 100% funded by the companies you love to hate?

You are the person who pointed out that employee wages are tax deductible ?

Even the honest companies have their wage bill subsidised by the tax payer not only the few that I criticise.

Explain to us all how employees wages are subsidised by the government in general.

Back to top

IP Logged

Bam

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21905
Gender: male

Re: Top Companies That Pay No Tax
Reply #268 - Dec 22^nd, 2015 at 8:04am

mariacostel wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2015 at 7:17am:

Bam wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 8:19pm:

mariacostel wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 3:57pm:

Bam wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 3:35pm:

tickleandrose wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 12:46pm:

Its not that simple, I can give an example of tax evasion by the multinational company.

Example 1 - usual practice.

This company have 1 million dollars, its based solely in Australia. It invest the 1 million dollars. The overall profit for the year is say 100 000 dollars for the company net (deducted already the expenses including wages). So the company pay 100000 worth of company tax.

Example 2 - Questionable practice.

This company have 1 million dollars, but its 'based' in a nation with lax tax regulation. It sets up a company in Australia, and 'borrows' 1 million dollars from its other company at the interest rate of say 7% (note, business loan usually higher than home loan). The company makes 100 000 dollars like example 1 after usual deduction, but also deducts 70 000 in interest repayment. So all it have to do now is to pay 30 000 worth of company tax to Australia. The other 70 000 in profit goes to the head company in tax heaven, where it pays <10% tax.

Example 3 - More complicated questionable practice.

To avoid been nabbed by the ATO. This company went into sort of mutual alliance with another company. They both set up lending companies in the tax heaven borrows to each other. And thereby reducing their tax liability in Australia.

Note, the loser is not only the Australian people. But the biggest loser is actually the example 1 company who is based in Australia. That company have no chance to compete against the other examples. Because the other two, due to lowered lax liability, can put more funding into R&D, or lower prices. The company in Example 1 will probably have to either shut or do what the other company do as well.

This is why we need to close tax loopholes for corporations, especially multinationals. Australian corporations cannot compete effectively against the multinationals because the taxation playing field is not level.

Shutting down the loopholes - and doing so aggressively - would make it possible to reduce the corporate tax rate for all corporations, perhaps down to 25%, without increasing the deficit. Some unnecessary corporate tax deductions can be removed as well, but the priority should be removing tax loopholes.

And naturally you cannot detail these 'loopholes' even though they aren't loopholes in the first place.

I have done so elsewhere. You know I have because you made personal attacks in response more than once. Providing a detailed argument for your benefit is like throwing pearls to swine. I also have not seen you make a single constructive contribution to the discussion nor offer any ideas of your own. Not even once.

Here are your previous underwhelming contributions to this debate.
mariacostel wrote on Nov 25^th, 2015 at 10:10am:

So basically just follow your ideology and bias?

mariacostel wrote on Dec 20^th, 2015 at 5:22pm:

As always, you are making quite silly statements. When Qantas wants to borrow $8B for new planes where does it go? Down to the local branch of the ANZ? When BHP needs to raise $3B for a new project does it run a Kickstarter?

Stop fixating on multinationals and actually express you endless hatred of AUSTRALIAN business. Details the deductions you disagree with instead of making wild and unspecified complaints.

So how about for a change YOU put up some ideas of your own?

SO YOU ARENT GOING TO DETAIL your objections to a specific 'loophole'? Typical.

I already have. If you're too stupid to click on the links to your own posts to read them in full, that's your problem. You're obviously trolling, that's why I'm not pandering to your whiny demands.

And where are YOUR ideas? Post them please.

Back to top

You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to hold opinions that you can defend through sound, reasoned argument.

IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: Top Companies That Pay No Tax
Reply #269 - Dec 22^nd, 2015 at 8:13am

Bam wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2015 at 8:04am:

mariacostel wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2015 at 7:17am:

Bam wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 8:19pm:

mariacostel wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 3:57pm:

Bam wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 3:35pm:

tickleandrose wrote on Dec 21^st, 2015 at 12:46pm:

Its not that simple, I can give an example of tax evasion by the multinational company.

Example 1 - usual practice.

This company have 1 million dollars, its based solely in Australia. It invest the 1 million dollars. The overall profit for the year is say 100 000 dollars for the company net (deducted already the expenses including wages). So the company pay 100000 worth of company tax.

Example 2 - Questionable practice.

This company have 1 million dollars, but its 'based' in a nation with lax tax regulation. It sets up a company in Australia, and 'borrows' 1 million dollars from its other company at the interest rate of say 7% (note, business loan usually higher than home loan). The company makes 100 000 dollars like example 1 after usual deduction, but also deducts 70 000 in interest repayment. So all it have to do now is to pay 30 000 worth of company tax to Australia. The other 70 000 in profit goes to the head company in tax heaven, where it pays <10% tax.

Example 3 - More complicated questionable practice.

To avoid been nabbed by the ATO. This company went into sort of mutual alliance with another company. They both set up lending companies in the tax heaven borrows to each other. And thereby reducing their tax liability in Australia.

Note, the loser is not only the Australian people. But the biggest loser is actually the example 1 company who is based in Australia. That company have no chance to compete against the other examples. Because the other two, due to lowered lax liability, can put more funding into R&D, or lower prices. The company in Example 1 will probably have to either shut or do what the other company do as well.

This is why we need to close tax loopholes for corporations, especially multinationals. Australian corporations cannot compete effectively against the multinationals because the taxation playing field is not level.

Shutting down the loopholes - and doing so aggressively - would make it possible to reduce the corporate tax rate for all corporations, perhaps down to 25%, without increasing the deficit. Some unnecessary corporate tax deductions can be removed as well, but the priority should be removing tax loopholes.

And naturally you cannot detail these 'loopholes' even though they aren't loopholes in the first place.

I have done so elsewhere. You know I have because you made personal attacks in response more than once. Providing a detailed argument for your benefit is like throwing pearls to swine. I also have not seen you make a single constructive contribution to the discussion nor offer any ideas of your own. Not even once.

Here are your previous underwhelming contributions to this debate.
mariacostel wrote on Nov 25^th, 2015 at 10:10am:

So basically just follow your ideology and bias?

mariacostel wrote on Dec 20^th, 2015 at 5:22pm:

As always, you are making quite silly statements. When Qantas wants to borrow $8B for new planes where does it go? Down to the local branch of the ANZ? When BHP needs to raise $3B for a new project does it run a Kickstarter?

Stop fixating on multinationals and actually express you endless hatred of AUSTRALIAN business. Details the deductions you disagree with instead of making wild and unspecified complaints.

So how about for a change YOU put up some ideas of your own?

SO YOU ARENT GOING TO DETAIL your objections to a specific 'loophole'? Typical.

I already have. If you're too stupid to click on the links to your own posts to read them in full, that's your problem. You're obviously trolling, that's why I'm not pandering to your whiny demands.

And where are YOUR ideas? Post them please.

I dont have any problems. That is YOUR department and yet, one you are unwilling to put in detail. Or maybe 'detail' means a different thing to you?

Back to top

IP Logged