Almost £4b more in cuts coming in the budget.

[the fonz 10]

Tackling injustice and inequality on our society has nothing to do with tax. I'm beginning to think that conflation should be taxed.

 

What do you think tax is for Eric?

 

Have a read of this

 

http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2014/11/01/the-morality-of-taxation-or-david-cameron-got-this-one-wrong/

[Berberis 10]

What do you think tax is for Eric?

 

Have a read of this

 

http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2014/11/01/the-morality-of-taxation-or-david-cameron-got-this-one-wrong/

 

Someone's blog is not proof of anything.

[tinfoilhat 11]

They are wrong though Fonzy.

 

If there is something that needs changing because society deems it, the change needs to be codified into the tax legislation, not pressure from newspaper headlines and advertising clickbait for people who don't understand what they are reading.

 

Then it will be law and is still won't be a moral issue. Get it?

 

It must be a moral issue to a degree, or the corporation tax paid by any major corporation with a half decent accounts and legal team would pay nothing wouldn't they?

[the fonz 10]

Someone's blog is not proof of anything.

 

Agreed but it makes sense doesn't it?

 

Doesn't his argument for fair taxation make sense?

[RonJeremy 10]

I wish tax was a moral and not a legal issue. I would pay an awful lot less tax and be happy. I could then give some money to those who deserve it.

Whose morals btw? Yours? Mine? Abu Hamza's? Moral issue: my elbow.

[the fonz 10]

I wish tax was a moral and not a legal issue. I would pay an awful lot less tax and be happy. I could then give some money to those who deserve it.

Whose morals btw? Yours? Mine? Abu Hamza's? Moral issue: my elbow.

 

Ultimately the morals of investors if things like the FTSE4Good become more popular.

 

Corporate Social Responsibility is important to any big multinational.

 

Facebook seem to have caved to someones morals.

[Eric Arthur 10]

It must be a moral issue to a degree, or the corporation tax paid by any major corporation with a half decent accounts and legal team would pay nothing wouldn't they?

 

Not in the slightest. Morals might come into how a government decides to implement tax laws according to what citizens want. I'd agree that is a simple perspective but you'll forgive me for this purpose.

 

The bottom line is that corporations don't and can't care. They just do what it is legally asked to do. No more and no less. Morals don't come into it. Only the law matters.

 

If tax were a moral issue there would be lines of Sheffield Forumers handing cash over to HMRC to.

tackle injustice and inequality on our society

I don't see that line. I do smell a lot of hypocrisy.

[tinfoilhat 11]

I wish tax was a moral and not a legal issue. I would pay an awful lot less tax and be happy. I could then give some money to those who deserve it.

Whose morals btw? Yours? Mine? Abu Hamza's? Moral issue: my elbow.

 

Do you move money to offshore accounts or use various legal albeit aggressive tax avoidance techniques to avoid paying your tax at Ron Jeremy Inc or do you pay some? If you do pay, why?

[L00b 441]

It must be a moral issue to a degree, or the corporation tax paid by any major corporation with a half decent accounts and legal team would pay nothing wouldn't they?

Taxation does not exist 'because' or to 'fund the poor': it exists to pay for the State's expenditures, all of them, be they social, infrastructural, security-related, <etc>.

 

In that context, though the redistributive function of taxation may lead to a conclusion that there is a moral component to it, that redistributive function is (i) only one function amongst so many others and (ii) only ever a matter of implementation specifics (how much gets taken from the wealthiest source(s), on a scale from nowt to 100%, and how much of that take does the taxpaying entity benefits directly and indirectly, in terms of safety and mitigation of other risks, facilitated travel/distribution/communications, <etc>).

 

It is the Governement's job to legislate and enforce taxation, it isn't the taxpayer's. Greed (and other arch-fundamental human traits) which motivates the minimisation of one's tax liability, does the rest.

Do you move money to offshore accounts or use various legal albeit aggressive tax avoidance techniques to avoid paying your tax at Ron Jeremy Inc or do you pay some? If you do pay, why?

What difference does it make?

[tinfoilhat 11]

Not in the slightest. Morals might come into how a government decides to implement tax laws according to what citizens want. I'd agree that is a simple perspective but you'll forgive me for this purpose.

 

The bottom line is that corporations don't and can't care. They just do what it is legally asked to do. No more and no less. Morals don't come into it. Only the law matters.

 

If tax were a moral issue there would be lines of Sheffield Forumers handing cash over to HMRC to.

 

I don't see that line. I do smell a lot of hypocrisy.

 

So why do some pay and others go out of their way not to? Why do companies like Starbucks suddenly decide (not HMRC, Starbucks) to pay more tax? Must be a "moral" albeit other people's.

 

---------- Post added 15-03-2016 at 12:31 ----------

 

Taxation does not exist 'because' or to 'fund the poor': it exists to pay for the State's expenditures, all of them, be they social, infrastructural, security-related, <etc>.

 

In that context, though the redistributive function of taxation may lead to a conclusion that there is a moral component to it, that redistributive function is (i) only one function amongst so many others and (ii) only ever a matter of implementation specifics (how much gets taken from the wealthiest source(s), on a scale from nowt to 100%, and how much of that take does the taxpaying entity benefits directly and indirectly, in terms of safety and mitigation of other risks, facilitated travel/distribution/communications, <etc>).

 

It is the Governement's job to legislate and enforce taxation, it isn't the taxpayer's. Greed (and other arch-fundamental human traits) which motivates the minimisation of one's tax liability, does the rest.

 

And I ask the question again, why do some pay and others don't? I'm short on answers.

 

I pay corporation tax by the way. I don't like it. It's too high. I can't afford an army of accountants to flip the numbers around and around the globe so I don't have to pay. That's the difference.

 

I'd bring it down to a flat 10%, no loopholes but that's just me.

[L00b 441]

So why do some pay and others go out of their way not to? Why do companies like Starbucks suddenly decide (not HMRC, Starbucks) to pay more tax? Must be a "moral" albeit other people's.

Probably because they decide to give in to the "court of public opinion" (I hate that expression, but hey-ho) in the name of favourable PR to pre-empt a hit on turnover.

 

Possibly also because one or more of the loophole(s) they've been using so far is about to be shut.

[tinfoilhat 11]

Taxation does not exist 'because' or to 'fund the poor': it exists to pay for the State's expenditures, all of them, be they social, infrastructural, security-related, <etc>.

 

In that context, though the redistributive function of taxation may lead to a conclusion that there is a moral component to it, that redistributive function is (i) only one function amongst so many others and (ii) only ever a matter of implementation specifics (how much gets taken from the wealthiest source(s), on a scale from nowt to 100%, and how much of that take does the taxpaying entity benefits directly and indirectly, in terms of safety and mitigation of other risks, facilitated travel/distribution/communications, <etc>).

 

It is the Governement's job to legislate and enforce taxation, it isn't the taxpayer's. Greed (and other arch-fundamental human traits) which motivates the minimisation of one's tax liability, does the rest.

What difference does it make?

 

The difference is that there enough schemes in place where, if he had enough money and money to spend on accountants he wouldn't have to pay anything. Ergo, if he is paying corporation tax he's either making a conscious (moral?) decision to pay it or he's not rich enough to not pay it.