Seriously, why is ANY of this an issue?

So-called 'tax havens' have been known about and used for decades. Why is it suddenly an issue?

Well up until now there hasn't been a paper trail up till now it's all been gossip and whispers .

Black and White makes a whole lot of difference .

I.R.S , ATO here, now want there pound of flesh !!

Public servants can be very thorough when they have a vested interest in the outcome

The public now have proof too ....

---

MM Clyde lets do the Math

I hearing figures of 75 TRILLION as a conservative estimate

Average Tax dodge of 20% on the 75 Trillion

Say America's take and I mean this with no disrespect just as what it looks like 80%

That's approx $ 12 Trillion how much is your government taxing you now .

That much is that , what 9 months GDP

Even for the ATO here it's hundreds of millions possibly billions

---

Remember, businesses do NOT pay taxes... Their customers do.

Which effects the Poor and Lower Middle Class. More than anyone else.

Why would anyone implement Regressive Taxes. IE: Sales, VAT, Cigarette, Business - Passed on to the Consumer, et al. Against those most effected, and least able to afford?

That is 'affects' not 'effects'...

Why would anyone implement Progressive Taxes? Everyone should be taxed at the same rate. Taxing one group at a higher rate than others is discrimination against that group, therefore morally wrong. If the tax rate is unduly burdensome against some people, then the rate is too high... perhaps there might be some solution that treats everyone equally, yet does not unduly burden people on the lower end of things....

What about this... Everyone pays the SAME tax rate, but there are then NO deductions or exemptions... no way to shelter income for what many might term the 'ebul rich'... in fact, perhaps change it from an income tax to a consumption (sales) tax.

Then, to handle your concern about 'ability to pay', give each and every household a refund of say... $5,000.00/person in that household/year?

This way, EVERYONE is treated the SAME, satisfying my concerns, and the poor are somewhat shielded against undue economic burdens imposed by taxation, satisfying your expressed concern. Workable?

Besides, two other points...

1. Consider the savings in spending caused by the elimination of most positions at the IRS, not to mention all the 'tax accountants'...

2. Taxes exist to fund essential government services, not to be an instrument to produce social change.

Remember, businesses do NOT pay taxes... Their customers do.

Major that statement is nonsense unless you believe totally inelastic demand. I can think of no good or service which has totally inelastic demand. When the price is raised some consumption will fall which means lees profit will be generated, therefore the business ends up paying part of the tax.

---

Remember, businesses do NOT pay taxes... Their customers do.

Major that statement is nonsense unless you believe totally inelastic demand. I can think of no good or service which has totally inelastic demand. When the price is raised some consumption will fall which means lees profit will be generated, therefore the business ends up paying part of the tax.

You still do not understand...

Businesses get their money from their customers. Businesses do NOT pay business taxes. Their customers do. Without customers, essentially a business has NO money.

Remember, businesses do NOT pay taxes... Their customers do.

Major that statement is nonsense unless you believe totally inelastic demand. I can think of no good or service which has totally inelastic demand. When the price is raised some consumption will fall which means lees profit will be generated, therefore the business ends up paying part of the tax.

Doesn't matter on the per-sale level if a good or service has 'inelastic' demand. When the accountants estimate how much the tax bill is going to be each quarter, if the tax bill is higher that quarter, then the prices of goods and services go up, or if the market will not bear a price increase, employees lose their jobs. Every dollar taken in by a company must account for the cost of doing business, including the corporate taxes to be paid (at least, if the company is to survive financially). Therefore, as Major Kong correctly states, business do not pay taxes. Their customers do.

What is the Income the Government needs?

And Clyde has asked the multi-trillion dollar question.........ask the Government and the answer becomes a question, 'How much should we allow the people to keep?"

All government is a black hole of spending without oversight. And as has been proven repeatedly through history, by all forms of government, that oversight is corruptible. Too many career politicians in power for too long with their grubby little paws outstretched into everyone's wallet except their own.

The correct question to ask I believe is 'How much income is justified by a corrupt and wasteful government?'. The next unemployment wave should be fueled by the jobs of redundant bureaucrats and ineffective civil service managers.

---

"Sour Grapes make a bitter Whine." <(0)>

Remember, businesses do NOT pay taxes... Their customers do.

Major that statement is nonsense unless you believe totally inelastic demand. I can think of no good or service which has totally inelastic demand. When the price is raised some consumption will fall which means lees profit will be generated, therefore the business ends up paying part of the tax.

You still do not understand...

Businesses get their money from their customers. Businesses do NOT pay business taxes. Their customers do. Without customers, essentially a business has NO money.

And politicians get their money from taxpayers!
Politicians has stashed a lot of money in offshore companies.
Many of them has also written tax legislations!

Remember, businesses do NOT pay taxes... Their customers do.

Major that statement is nonsense unless you believe totally inelastic demand. I can think of no good or service which has totally inelastic demand. When the price is raised some consumption will fall which means lees profit will be generated, therefore the business ends up paying part of the tax.

Doesn't matter on the per-sale level if a good or service has 'inelastic' demand. When the accountants estimate how much the tax bill is going to be each quarter, if the tax bill is higher that quarter, then the prices of goods and services go up, or if the market will not bear a price increase, employees lose their jobs. Every dollar taken in by a company must account for the cost of doing business, including the corporate taxes to be paid (at least, if the company is to survive financially). Therefore, as Major Kong correctly states, business do not pay taxes. Their customers do.

A corporation is noting but a sheet of paper with a government tax paid stamp on it. Try and collect taxes for a sheet of paper. You can't. You can only collect taxes from people.

I do understand in the very short term a tax increase on corporations will result in corporate profits dropping. But in the long term the corporation increases prices, accepts whatever loss that higher price causes, but maintains the same rate of profit. Remember Wall Street bases share price on the increase in rate of profit, so this is the single most important factor to a publicly traded company. And don't forget that a corporate tax rate increase hits all sellers at the same time, which reduces the freedom of the market and will skew things in unexpected ways.

---

The problem is not the taxes themselves .

It the Cross transfer of funds from one country to another .

America may have no choice but to clamp down because other country's will.

Once you do then you can figure out what taxes are just and weather you can afford Universal health care or a good safety net .

You can't just have a GST type of Tax as some have said if the economy goes south then the receipts go down and the government has a problem .

You will also have to look at Royalty's to states and there Taxation law then there are legit tax right off's running costs interest on loans , Capital gain's Tax .

And sacking people at the I.R.S ummm maybe that's part of the problem not enough of them !

Besides don't you lot have Super Computers in Silicon Valley that can handle a lot of the cross checks for taxation I thought they where very aggressive at going after tax dodgers !!!!!

---

The problem is not the taxes themselves .

Taxes are definitely the problem. In a capitalist society, the more you take out of the pockets of people, the less buying power they have. Less buying power means less purchasing, means less money circulating, means less generating profits, means less need to hire, means less people with jobs, means less tax generation, means less buying power... wash, rinse, repeat.

I thought they where very aggressive at going after tax dodgers !!!!!

The problem is that what they are doing isn't dodging (evading) taxes. What they've done is find legal loopholes to put money outside the taxman's grip. If it were dodging, it would be illegal, and they would be under investigation right now.

The problem is not the taxes themselves .

Taxes are definitely the problem. In a capitalist society, the more you take out of the pockets of people, the less buying power they have. Less buying power means less purchasing, means less money circulating, means less generating profits, means less need to hire, means less people with jobs, means less tax generation, means less buying power... wash, rinse, repeat.

Well, the real problem is the interest on the debt, but save that for another time.

I thought they where very aggressive at going after tax dodgers !!!!!

The problem is that what they are doing isn't dodging (evading) taxes. What they've done is find legal loopholes to put money outside the taxman's grip. If it were dodging, it would be illegal, and they would be under investigation right now.

Absolutely 100% legal, morally required by fiduciary duty. If you don't like it then end free trade.

---

Taxes are definitely the problem

Not in the context of the Panama Papers the problem is the loop holes .

weather it's a Just Tax can be for another time at the moment the Tax havens need to be outlawed or any company dealing with them automatically get a impost of 20% .

I see this option as being one that may get wings and grow

---

Taxes are definitely the problem

Not in the context of the Panama Papers the problem is the loop holes .

That isn't a problem, it is a desirable thing. Well, if you are an investor or want to collect a pension.

---

Taxes are definitely the problem

Not in the context of the Panama Papers the problem is the loop holes .

weather it's a Just Tax can be for another time at the moment the Tax havens need to be outlawed or any company dealing with them automatically get a impost of 20% .

I see this option as being one that may get wings and grow

Heh heh heh...

The PROBLEM here is that, in this day and age of globalism and 'free trade', some people are only just now finding out that some nations have a lower tax rate than their nation does, and these people are having a childish temper tantrum about it...


'How DARE Nation X have a lower tax rate than we do?!?!?!?!?'

Business goes where its costs are lower (and therefore its profits are higher). Get used to it.

A nation losing out on business activity because it can't compete very well due to its higher tax rates should consider, well..., lowering its tax rates.

Or do you REALLY want nations taxing business activity in other nations? If you start down that slippery slope, what would then stop a nation such as the USA imposing, for instance, a 100% business transaction tax on the rest of the world?

All your money are belong to US!

I don't think so. You really DON'T want to go there.

The EU are already down that road MK in wanting all EU Nations to have the same tax rate of 21%

The PROBLEM is that many companies hardly pay any tax at all in the country the operate in.
There are few areas where Swedish companies can challenge the US Internet giants. Except when it comes to tax payments. The department store chain Jula paid last year more corporation tax in Sweden than Google, Apple, LinkedIn and Facebook - together.
Apple's Swedish subsidiary has barely visible trace of the profits. Apple had sales last year of 41 million Euros in Sweden. Although the company's products are among those with the highest margins in the industry, the result was still only modest 400,000 Euros, representing an operating margin of just under one per cent.
The strategy is known to accountants as the “double Irish, Dutch Sandwich”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_Irish_arrangement

Europe is struggling to close loopholes on sheltered profits.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-02-18/google-isn-t-paying-the-google-tax

The bottom line: Barring the adoption of new regulations, companies like Google can expect their global tax bills to remain well below the standard.

The EU are already down that road MK in wanting all EU Nations to have the same tax rate of 21%

Sounds like a Union. Oh, wait, it is!

---

Kong Texes will soon be bankrupt as the world uses less oil then there going to think darn we should have made them all pay more taxes.

That is all they have right ,oil and agriculture it doesn't have a Silicon valley yet does it ?

---

Kong Texes will soon be bankrupt as the world uses less oil then there going to think darn we should have made them all pay more taxes.

That is all they have right ,oil and agriculture it doesn't have a Silicon valley yet does it ?

ROFLMAO

You don't know much about Texas, do ya?

Ever hear of Telecom Corridor?


http://www.telecomcorridor.com/existing-business-industry-services/industry-clusters

Richardson, Texas is a suburb north of Dallas.

And 'Telecom Corridor' is but one. There are many other similar areas across the State.

Silicon Valley in California? Amateurs... They are a flash in the pan.

Telecom Corridor has been going since the late 1950s.