the troubadour

The situation being the corporates have long avoided paying their fair share. Time to go after tax avoiders whom reap havoc on the community and name and shame and go after a fair contribution.

the troubadour

That's just it in many cases if not most they haven't earned it. See it more as an entitlement. I suspect some cosmetic tightening up will proceed, but as usual it will be average wage earners that carry the can. The rich through creative accounting will forever deprive the rest of us whom desire it ,of a fairer and more equable society.

Beoz

That said it all right there. Until you bring along an argument that doesn't involve me me me, then you can't be taken seriously.

the troubadour

A quite typical response from those with the affliction no doubt. Not to say a classic example and a snippet being taken out of context if ever there was one.


No some of us don't mind paying our fair dues with the betterment of society and help if we need it in mind.


Of course those depriving the system trough dodgy creative accounting are the me,me,me's which you adequately describe if confused whom to point the finger.


Until the abuse by corporates and rich has been fully addressed I am afraid it is commenters as yourself, whom will be not taken seriously and laughed out of court.


A little more reflection on reality and less defence of those that need no defending and indeed need to be brought to book would do your cause no end of good.


The blatant defence of those creating great havoc on society with their greed without questioning on your part furthers the absurdity of your soap box.

Beoz

Really. Care to name any of these corps or wealthy who don't pay tax and care to tell us how they do it. On top of care to tell us how they do not contribute.

In addition you've still failed to tell us where you keep your super or who its invested with. Lets start with you first.

I may be leading you down the garden path here but it is your story.

the troubadour

Yes really? I doubt you need to ask just which corporations. It being rather out in the public domain, especially in more recent times.


No idea why you persist in your erroneous assumptions. You will now be aware it is the PAYG often asset less class that generally are not in the position to hide away fortunes in tax free jurisdictions or pursue creative tax avoidance schemes and trusts etc.


Then your economic assumptions do tend to be flawed on all fronts.

Beoz

I guess we are at the usual stalemate then. You are unable to ever give any detail or facts on the details. Can't be taken seriously.

You can easily take your Super or any further savings, and make a profit without declaring that profit. Got nothing to do with PAYG I'm afraid.

the troubadour

You offer nothing to be taking seriously. Just desiring the present unworkable status quo.


PAYG are as well you know the meat in the sandwich. They can't easily set up trust accounts or hide wealth in international jurisdictions.
Even many of the more traditional Lib's realise this as fact. Just as the banks need to be brought under greater scrutiny. Switzerland is looking to pass new laws governing aspects of this. Lets hope the people there approve the proposals.

Beoz

So how did David Cameron invest in a perceived tax avoidance country when he was on PAYE? Such a big deal if as you say PAYE or PAYG's can't invest (or hide wealth if you want to call it that) in international jurisdictions. You aren't making common sense.

Further more, if we revert back to corporate tax, you seemed to have conveniently overlooked new laws implemented by Joe Hockey.

Joe Hockey's multinational crackdown is 'bad tax law' that will spark global revenue wars, say experts

which also voices concerns that I have raised.

But tax experts are warning that the laws could deter business investment and spark revenue wars with overseas tax authorities.

Regardless of that, seems like you are getting your wish.

Thanks Joe. Thanks Libs.

Google restructures to avoid hefty penalties in Australia, as tax bill hits $16 million

the troubadour

Game up for some of the big players and their dodges.(well at least it is in the open but doubt game up) Google being a classical example. I doubt it is only the Lib's reluctantly confronting issues. A lot of jurisdictions are confronting the issue of avoidance, which will be the only assurance of bringing rogue corporations to heel.


Obviously 'tax experts' and accountants advising in the area will be down beat on measures likely to push down their demand. It can't come before time as far as I'm concerned, as has been going on far too long at a huge cost to society.
The only hope is they are serious and not window dressing to appease the ever growing dissent in what is going on.

Beoz

Actually the game is up for those who could have potentially had a job from these multi-nationals.

We are no longer hiring in Australia. Too expensive to do business in Australia. Easier to hire Singaporeans and pay low corporate tax.

You see, the narrow minded, don't think beyond this. I suppose I can't be too harsh on those have never worked for a multi-national and fail to understand how it works.

That said its still possible to lower corporate tax rates and tighten loopholes to keep things moving.

the troubadour

Rather obviously Australia will not compete with sweat shop conditions in various parts of Asia. Regardless of how low Australia goes in working conditions, it just can't compete. Fact.


Of course there is a rather famous business women who thinks a few bucks would be about right to retain competition.


Where a big chunk of the world has gone wrong is the slavish following of the global neoliberal agenda that will ensure falling living standards and ever declining conditions in a totally flawed economic concept in place to reward a few.

GarryP

And the cheapest labour of all is no labour. If you are looking to create a new business today, you look to do it in a way that it doesn't have a large labour component. That both reduces your costs, and increases your scalability and thus growth curve.

So when you couple in automation, the issue is there will be large numbers of unemployed people.

The solution is to change the basic structures, and indeed the basics of taxation. Less free rides for companies, more effective taxation.

Multinationals are going to have to pay to sell in future - I guarantee it.

Beoz

Oh the naivety of it all.

You guys really think its about sweatshops? Yesterday's news.

Its all about tech companies, financial institutions, etc. Simply, if you are charged above the rest for having a base in Australia, you just don't operate out of Australia.

You don't open an office, you don't hire local staff to generate and maintain business, you don't generate profit in Australia, you ultimately pay less and less tax.

I do hope this is starting to make sense.

scrubbedexpat098

What we need is the complete collapse of society or WWIII to make money men and sails men obsolete, leave rebuilding infrastructure to those of us that can.