screwed yet agin by the coalition

[ongakgak]

george osborne really is the devil

I am so angry about this, is it really true?

It would be great if some tax-savvy women could come onto the thread and comment on this. It is really depressing. And equally depressing is the 'regulatory capture' that Monbiot speaks of -- the handing over of govt regulatory agencies to the businesses that they are supposed to regulate. This is happening in other areas of government too, eg in the regulation of food retail.

This incredibly ideological govt is taking away so much from us with no mandate.

I know, this was not in the manifesto, and I am so shocked that the sweeping changes are happening with no challenge from Nick Clegg or the other coalition MPs. It is disgusting and NOT what I am sure many tory and LibDem voters would be expecting.

It just screams of old boys club, and the "we are all in it together" is clearly meant for the Etonians and their cronies supping champagne and burning fifty pound notes. Bastards the lot of them

I want some wall paper from Osborne &Co, but there is no way I will be lining that fuckers pockets.

I've only read about half of the article, I must admit - but yes, at a time when we are supposedly all in this together - there is surely no excuse for letting businesses which have expanded overseas, get off the hook of paying the tax which has always up to now been due from them.

We keep being told 'the country can't afford this - the country can't afford that - the can't afford to pay to educate its students, must cut help for disabled people, etc etc.

What hypocrisy!

Where are all the MN politicos? A few months ago a thread like this would have generated loads of informative discussion.

There was a big list of recommendations submitted by the CBI yesterday on how to achieve growth in industry and commerce mostly leading to howls of protest from union leaders. The serious point here is that cutting public spending alone won't get the country back on its feet. It has to be matched with generating growth, and giving businesses a leg-up with tax breaks usually encourages expansion. Whether these are the right measures, I'm not qualified to say, but if any government offers incentives to industry I think it's unfair to instantly dismiss it with phrases like 'old boys club' and 'cronies'. Good business means more jobs, more jobs means more tax revenue, more tax revenue means more options with public spending.

The author of this report has disagreed with the coalition from the word go.

"Shaxson shows how the world's tax havens have not, as the OECD claims, been eliminated, but legitimised"

Ever since reading Daniel Dorling's Injustice, I don't believe anything that comes out of the mouth of the OECD. (YOu should read the bullshit behind the OECD education tests: about how the tests are designed to yield a bell-curve in results, no matter how well or poorly a group of children happend to do. The OECD adjusts the children's results to make sure it reveals a bell-curve)

But this is only for big and medium business - one would argue they hardly need a leg up if they are big!! I am amazed that they will be let off tax AND can claim back from our tax for overseas offices.....

Have you read the comments though?

Look at it carefully - if you paid tax in the UK on UK income, and then earned something else overseas and paid local tax on it, why would you expect to pay more on it as it has already been taxed? Same point applies here surely? I would expect to pay x% local rate on income earned abroad and not pay more on it because I happen to be a Brit.

Lowering corporation tax is much like lowering income tax; people work harder because they keep more of their money surely? You only have to see those advocating salary sacrifice to avoid the 40% rate band, or working less hours to avoid it and keep cb to be aware that higher taxes are a disincentive.

If this attracts more business to the UK and creates more jobs, then isn't that a good thing?

no the way it's been written is inflammatory

the reason branch profit taxation is being reformed is to bring the taxation in line with similar rules for taxation on subsidiary companies in foreign jurisdictions

companies with foreign branches have long complained that they were unfairly prejudiced as subsidiaries in foreign companies could remit funds to their head offices in the UK without paying UK corporation tax but foreign branches could not do the same

this is one of the reforms (along with foreign controlled company reforms) that are being discussed and finalised at the moment

it's a drive to bring into line some of the tax laws (with each other) and to try and keep companies headquartered in the UK

foxinsocks that is the kind of explaniation I was looking for, thanks.

And yes, I do have an issue with, what is it 60-odd% percent of the cabinet all being old Etonians? I knew of some old Etonians when I worked in the city, and they are very tightly linked to eacher through matey networks, clubs, families.

I would like to believe that every decision Dave and George and Nick are making are in my best interests, but I am just not seeing much evidence of that in my quality of life or that of my peers.

I get that we need to grow our economy and create more private sector jobs, but I wonder how the big society, public spending cuts, and the big business capitalist machine all work together? How can food companies who are concerned about ultimately their bottom line desire to label their food correctly? Yet the sit on the Food Advisory comm??

I will lose my job pretty soon due to cuts, I have to go out and work, but there are no jobs in my area currently advertised that meet my salary requirements (just a bit more than minimum wage) or match my work experience (master level).

Yes, the OECD is a dubious, I too have read the DD book sakura

hi ongakgak, sorry you are losing your job and hope you find a new one soon.

I think there are always ways to interpret taxation laws that will mean someone takes advantage of them. So you could write an inflammatory piece about lots of tax legislation, including this one tbh.

But the intention behind these reforms wasn't to let people dodge more tax, more to bring different tax rules into line with each other and I seem to remember (though I'd have to look it up) that HMRC didn't believe they would lose out on any revenue with these reforms.

"Big society" simply sets a broad picture of a community working together rather than a collection of individuals selfishly doing their own thing.... and gets us away from the 'buy now, someone else will pick up the tab later' feel of the 00's. Public spending cuts mean the country's debts will increase at a slower rate than before. And 'big business' being incentivised to invest and grow means that people like you are more likely to get a job.

If you go to the draft bill - here - it says (p72) that this will cost a 'steady state' £100m. So we're getting less taxation, and it's costing that much to implement.

On the Economic Impact statement it says "The primary benefit of this proposal will arise in two sectors: banking, which currently makes greatest use of foreign branches and general insurance where we expect use to increase.

UK multinational groups in the banking sector currently favour a branch structure when setting up businesses offshore. Regulatory changes will allow the insurance sector to do the same. This allows groups in these sectors to make most efficient use of capital held in the UK.

The exemption regime will improve alignment in tax treatment of foreign branches and subsidiaries. The largest benefits will fall to UK owned multinational corporate groups in these sectors.

The proposal is also expected to have a marginal (beneficial) economic impact on oil and gas, which is the other sector operating a significant number of foreign branches. "

So Banking and Oil & Gas companies - that have been so seriously affected by the recession will be the gainers?

Chil1234 - do you really believe in 'trickle-down economics'? Cos if you do I've a fantastic investment opportunity for you - prime real estate, water front view on 2 sides, handy for central london...

Sorry, I don't get the joke. Just suggesting that when businesses are doing well enough to expand and recruit that generally means better employment prospects.

But trickle-down economics will only work for the UK if there is a benefit in putting the new jobs etc in the UK. If, as it appears with this proposed tax change, the benefits will only accrue if the UK companies expand their overseas business, how will that create a trickle-down effect for the UK economy? Or will it just lead to more overseas out-sourcing?

What Snorbs said. Plus any new jobs created in the UK are likely to be a. outsourced and b. temporary - as this is the flexible model big business aspires to.

I'm offering you shares in London Bridge at a knock down price btw...

Read this - so depressing. They claim that they have to reform the Forestry Commission as it's "both a regulator and a commercial competitor" (that's the bottom line on why they're flogging the forest - ideological opposition to the Forestry Commission, nothing to do with raising money), but then invite representatives of large corporations advise them on how best to tax large corporations!

PerArdua, 3000 new jobs are to created in Belfast by a Swedish company building wind turbines, almost all the jobs have already been allocated to Lithuanian, Latvian and Polish workers, the whole job application process for these jobs was through an employment agency that is run by foreigners for foreigners but based in Belfast. The foreigners only have to produce an I.D card to get registered with this so called Employment agency but British people have to produce a full birth certificate, a passport or driving licence and something that proves their adress. British citizens have little to no chance of getting the work. The whole system is a joke.

I must admit, at first glance the proposals do seem unfair.

But then I have to ask myself. If I earned £100k abroad and paid income tax at say 10% in the country I earned it in, would I feel it is fair to return to blighty and have to pay the difference here?

And what about the other side of the coin? Lets say I earned said £100k in Denmark and got taxed at 50%, when I return to the UK would the government reimburse me the 10%? What's good enough for the goose is good enough for the gander yes?

But in the current climate I do wonder if the timing is right for such a cut. It does send out all the wrong signals. I'd be more in favour if there was a way to show said money would be encourage UK jobs.

conculainey Unfortunately EU law means we've a level playing field with any EU citizen. As for the ID card versus birth cert thing, I guess this is one advantage with other countries having ID card systems. I'd be in favour of one too. Just not the completely overengineered one which Labour proposed.

smallwhite i am not too sure what you mean by Tory bashing, like it is a bad thing?? And I think Niceguy puts it best, is now the right time for such a measure when it is within so many other cuts that ordinary joes are feeling.

Make no mistake, I am a lefty, and I do no like the ideological stance of the Tory Gov, not now, not ever. I am interested to see how they can reform our Education system with the pupil premium and I am very interested in the super elastic £50million for the free schools project.

I feel that this Gov has nothing to do with me. I also feel like the bleating on about the last Gov and the debt situation is neither here nor there. I had enough when Nick Clegg whined about it on Radio 4.

You are right, I am missing facts and I am interested in the other side of the coin, hence the post. But a bunch of trustafarians telling me we are "in this together"...eh I don't think so.

Just so you know, genuflect I do not.

I don't think the OP wanted to ToryBash; if she had she'd have been better off starting a thread on how Macdonalds and the babykillers Nestle now draw up the UK government Health policies

"fast and processed food giants and alcohol companies, including McDonald's, PepsiCo, Kellogg's, Mars, Unilever and Diageo, had been asked by the health secretary Andrew Lansley to draw up deals with government to tackle obesity and hazardous drinking."

http://seekingalpha.com/news-article/199554-extent-of-corporate-influence-on-health-policy-revealed-fast-food-and-drink-giants-to-help-draft-strategy-reforms-seen-as-test-case-for-wider-coalition-plans Extent of corporate influence on Health policy revealed

Extent of corporate influence on Health policy revealed

Conculainey. As long as we are in the EU, I'm afraid you will have to get used to it!
Eight more countries now are looking for for EU memberhip, including Turkey (pop 72 milllion) all in all, millions more can come and 'take your jobs'. As long as they are 'in' you will be out!