In the future companies should pay their tax....

nexus · Post by **nexus** » 22 Mar 2013, 09:31

Online petition here http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/a ... n_week_one

for DODGY TAX AVOIDERS to pay corporation tax:

But what’s even worse is that DODGY TAX AVOIDERS, despite making sales of £2.9 BILLION in the UK last year, does not pay any UK corporation tax on the profits from those sales. In my book, that is not a level playing field and leaves independent retailers like us struggling to compete just because we do the right thing.

All DODGY TAX AVOIDERS UK book and toy sales are routed through its Luxembourg subsidiary. So when the British public buy goods from DODGY TAX AVOIDERS, they are in fact paying a Luxembourg company. This means DODGY TAX AVOIDERS can avoid paying British corporation tax on the profits it makes. Experts say if DODGY TAX AVOIDERS's total UK sales profits were not funnelled to Luxembourg, it could be paying as much as £100m a year in British corporation tax.

As Independent booksellers, we are happy with competition in the market but it must be on level terms and by dodging corporation tax in this way, DODGY TAX AVOIDERS start with an unfair advantage.

RenewableCandy · Post by **RenewableCandy** » 22 Mar 2013, 12:49

Signed.

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 22 Mar 2013, 17:43

Signed

A sales tax on top of VAT for retailers instead of corporation tax would ensure that everyone paid their fare shares.

JavaScriptDonkey · Post by **JavaScriptDonkey** » 22 Mar 2013, 20:00

If DODGY TAX AVOIDERS have to pay UK corporation tax then their prices will go up.

DODGY TAX AVOIDERS won't pay the tax....you will.

The collected £216m for the treasury in VAT in 2011.

Snail · Post by **Snail** » 22 Mar 2013, 21:17

If DODGY TAX AVOIDERS puts up their prices too much...a competitor will step in with lower prices...putting competitive pressure on DODGY TAX AVOIDERS to reduce theirs.

But no matter. Kind DODGY TAX AVOIDERS and all that VAT.

JohnB · Post by **JohnB** » 22 Mar 2013, 21:18

JavaScriptDonkey wrote:If DODGY TAX AVOIDERS have to pay UK corporation tax then their prices will go up.

Most of what I buy from DODGY TAX AVOIDERS is DVDs at 1p plus postage. I'd be prepared to pay as much as, well maybe even 2p!

featherstick · Post by **featherstick** » 22 Mar 2013, 21:41

JavaScriptDonkey wrote:If DODGY TAX AVOIDERS have to pay UK corporation tax then their prices will go up.

DODGY TAX AVOIDERS won't pay the tax....you will.

The collected £216m for the treasury in VAT in 2011.

And so there'll be a level playing field with other outlets.

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 23 Mar 2013, 02:15

JavaScriptDonkey wrote:If DODGY TAX AVOIDERS have to pay UK corporation tax then their prices will go up.

DODGY TAX AVOIDERS won't pay the tax....you will.

The collected £216m for the treasury in VAT in 2011.

We pay anyway in a tax levied elsewhere. The government has an income requirement and it makes sure that it gets it, a shortfall in one area being made up for in another.

As others have said, it makes for a level playing field for other retailers who may employ more people in the UK and benefit the economy even more.

I've stopped using DODGY TAX AVOIDERS and buy from sellers who I think are UK based.

Totally_Baffled · Post by **Totally_Baffled** » 23 Mar 2013, 09:07

kenneal - lagger wrote:
JavaScriptDonkey wrote:If DODGY TAX AVOIDERS have to pay UK corporation tax then their prices will go up.

DODGY TAX AVOIDERS won't pay the tax....you will.

The collected £216m for the treasury in VAT in 2011.
We pay anyway in a tax levied elsewhere. The government has an income requirement and it makes sure that it gets it, a shortfall in one area being made up for in another.

As others have said, it makes for a level playing field for other retailers who may employ more people in the UK and benefit the economy even more.

I've stopped using DODGY TAX AVOIDERS and buy from sellers who I think are UK based.

+1 and petition signed

Even worse, eventually if UK companies go bust because they cannot compete then you are only left with those that dodge tax and then what....?

JavaScriptDonkey · Post by **JavaScriptDonkey** » 23 Mar 2013, 14:56

If we all stopped buying online then how many warehouse and delivery jobs in the UK would be lost?

Do you remember the utter rip off many shops were before the likes of DODGY TAX AVOIDERS?

I think there is more to this problem that a typical left wing approach of 'make somebody else pay for everything'. We need to bring retailers costs down by attacking business rates and rents rather than targeting those that have found a more efficient business model.

nexus · Post by **nexus** » 23 Mar 2013, 17:13

'More efficient business model' my arse.

THEY ARE AVOIDING TAX. END OF.

Plus all that crap about losing jobs- tell that to all the small businesses that have closed down because there is no longer a level playing field.

Mind you we'll know who to blame when we only have a choice of the one online retailer, and then THEY put their prices up.

WalMart anyone?

RenewableCandy · Post by **RenewableCandy** » 23 Mar 2013, 17:28

JavaScriptDonkey wrote: I think there is more to this problem that a typical left wing approach of 'make somebody else pay for everything'. We need to bring retailers costs down by attacking business rates and rents

too damn right! The rents in the centre of York are astronomical...I wonder how the heck any of the shops make a living at all. And what's more, there is (so I've heard) some kind of daft arrangement whereby rents can only be raised, not lowered. That is unbelievably inappropriate for times like these.

Business rates I don't know about the levels, but I do know that all of it goes to HMG Central. It'd be a lot better to keep the loot in the local economy, with HMG using other tax revenue for helping to even-out the appalling wealth gaps e.g. between where I am and, say, Rotherham.

I still think that companies who profit from UK punters and/or workers, should pay their taxes here, mind.

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 24 Mar 2013, 01:43

JavaScriptDonkey wrote:If we all stopped buying online then how many warehouse and delivery jobs in the UK would be lost?

I thought DODGY TAX AVOIDERS shipped all their sales in from a warehouse outside the UK.

Do you remember the utter rip off many shops were before the likes of DODGY TAX AVOIDERS?

No! I do remember that there were a lot of small shops which had higher overheads and couldn't demand bulk discounts. These small local shops have gone, losing jobs, to be replaced by chain stores which could demand a bulk discount from publishers. These chain stores are now going, losing jobs, to be replaced by DODGY TAX AVOIDERS, who can demand even bigger discounts and can also undercut the chains because they don't pay any tax.

Meanwhile those people who don't buy many books are losing out because they have to pay the tax that DODGY TAX AVOIDERS isn't. Where's the justice in that?

I think there is more to this problem that a typical left wing approach of 'make somebody else pay for everything'.

I'm not left wing.

We need to bring retailers costs down by attacking business rates and rents rather than targeting those that have found a more efficient business model.

At last something sensible. But again if business rates go down someone else will have to pay more tax. Increasing business rates is easy for governments because it is not a tax that the average voter sees so there are no votes to be lost there.

Rents is another matter. The government should look into the setting of rents as they should be plummeting at the moment as business takings go down in the recession. A tax on empty properties would be a good thing as that would encourage the setting of sensible rent levels.

Do landowners pay business rates on empty properties? I don't know. If they don't they should and at a higher level. That would see rents dropping quickly especially in areas with a lot of empty shops.

JavaScriptDonkey · Post by **JavaScriptDonkey** » 24 Mar 2013, 11:59

But then why just target corporate profits?

This tax is just a way of transferring money from the rich to the Govt so that they can buy the votes of the poor.

So why not widen corporation tax to be an annual tax on all assets and bank accounts? Then those people sitting in very valuable houses will be given a prompt to sell and we might discourage constant improvement works.

Progressive and fair from where I stand.

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 24 Mar 2013, 12:51

RenewableCandy wrote:
JavaScriptDonkey wrote: I think there is more to this problem that a typical left wing approach of 'make somebody else pay for everything'. We need to bring retailers costs down by attacking business rates and rents
too damn right! The rents in the centre of York are astronomical...I wonder how the heck any of the shops make a living at all. And what's more, there is (so I've heard) some kind of daft arrangement whereby rents can only be raised, not lowered. That is unbelievably inappropriate for times like these.

Business rates I don't know about the levels, but I do know that all of it goes to HMG Central. It'd be a lot better to keep the loot in the local economy, with HMG using other tax revenue for helping to even-out the appalling wealth gaps e.g. between where I am and, say, Rotherham.

I still think that companies who profit from UK punters and/or workers, should pay their taxes here, mind.

Narrowing the appalling wealth gap between the richest and poorest in York wouldn't go amiss either. It's a funny old place is York RC. The ridiculous level of income of a small percentage of the York population drags the average income up and so we don't attract any urban deprivation money from central government unlike places like Rotherham and yet we have a huge number of people in this city getting by on earning the bare minimum wage. All of which wouldn't matter that much except for the astronomical level of rents and house prices.