You pay tax so they don't have to

[tarrant]

The loop holes could all be pluged if someone had the guts to propose a more straight forward methid of tax for companies.

For employees the situation is relatively simple. They earn a certain amount of money. They pay a basic tax based upon that amount. The can claim reductions on, for example, their children. Most other deductions have been abolished.

For companies the situation is more complicated.

Compmpanies have a certain income. Some of that income is profit, some has to be ploughed back into the company to make it operate. Utility bills, insurance, wages, equipment and so on.

But the calculations are so utterly complicated for how these are deducted from gross income that only the most expensive accountants can figure them out.

Hence, some companies can claim for so much there is practically nothing left for tax.

[Libby]

I don't object to paying tax, it's the amount of tax i have to pay that's the problem. I think most taxpayers feel the same.
I understand what you're saying yord, but i think these large companies should pay tax. Their accountants take this into account, big companies know all the tax dodges anyway!
(hides in a cupboard waiting for backlash! lol! )

[yord]

Then scream at the fecking government , not the companies or me . Neither are taxing you into the ground

[Libby]

It feels like they are sometimes! If i work harder and more shifts, the more tax i pay, hardly an incentive!

[yord]

Both Companies and Government dont really give a feck anyhow , its you that pay it in the end regardless

[tarrant]

Sadly, people have been doing that since the begining of governments.

Almost every party competing for government, at an election, promises to simplify the tax system.

Without exception, every time, the consequence is more beurocracy, more forms, more loopholes.

For example. I buy a piece of equipment for my business. It is capital cost not income. So I don't need to pay tax.

Wrong.

Depending upon the equipment, its purpose, its initial cost and a number of other factors, the amount I can deduct varies enormously.

Hence, I need an accountant.

[feral]

The time for not being a sapless git has more or less passed I think ...unless of course someone comes along and says "mmmm we've been very unfair to the sapless gits...let's redistribute all the wealth and start again " I suspect it would still end up almost exactly how it is however as most of the sapless gits would be sapless gits a second time round as well

[flatandy]

I assume the government leaves loopholes in place because they want to leave loopholes in place. They know perfectly well where the loopholes are because most of them are lawyers and accountants.

I guess it's to drive growth or something. Couldn't really understand why. But it's obviously left in for a reason.

As for the banks, I just hope the government does something useful with its 70% of the profits of the banks it owns 70% of. And votes the board out if they start playing with tax avoidance strategies that the government vocally disapproves of.

[yord]

indeed it has and all that will be left is an amorphous, piercing anguish, a longing for something indescribable and simple anger at having missed out

[yord]

"I assume the government leaves loopholes in place because they want to leave loopholes in place. They know perfectly well where the loopholes are because most of them are lawyers and accountants."
OFFS are you suggesting the people that make the laws and rules are making them for themselves

[tarrant]

If he doesn't I will!

[reverend]

trying to equate companies limiting the amount of tax they pay to the government with dolies and single mothers is fatuous at best!

these companies allready pay huge amounts in taxes, by using the tax syatem to thier advantage they hang on to more of thier profits, thereby keeping people employed who then pay taxes!

unlike dolies and single mothers who pay absolutely nothing into the system just take!

[VikingHumpingWitch]

I'm not equating it. I'm curious as to why "being ripped off by someone" irritates to different degrees depending on who is doing the ripping off.

[Libby]

Sorry reverend but you cannot tar all single mums with the same brush. Years ago when i was a single mum (divorced), i worked full-time but was still able to collect my children from after school clubs, still provided for them without any State help, still cooked for them and looked after them properly with no financial support whatsoever or contact from their father. I never claimed any benefits either. I took a pride in providing 100% for my children. Not all women are the same!

[reverend]

I suppose it has to do with the notion of being "ripped off" , noone pays more than they have to including all of us, if the system allows you to use loopholes then the systems at fault not those clever enough to use it!

[reverend]

I wasnt tarring with anything Libby, just arguing against the notion companies who pay huge amounts of tax allready can compare to people who pay nothing!

[Libby]

Fair enough but you cannot generalise

[feral]

Feb 3, 2009 12:51:55 GMT VikingHumpingWitch said:

I'm not equating it. I'm curious as to why "being ripped off by someone" irritates to different degrees depending on who is doing the ripping off.

The irritation is about being ripped off by the government -why should I be angry that a large company avoids being ripped off as much as me ? The only person to be angry at is myself for allowing the governmnet to rip me off so much

[VikingHumpingWitch]

Feb 3, 2009 12:55:22 GMT reverend said:

if the system allows you to use loopholes then the systems at fault not those clever enough to use it!

So why do we get more angry at a dole scrounger getting a few quid a week that they shouldn't get than we do at a bank getting away with bazillions a year that they shouldn't get?

I really am puzzled.

[feral]

...and that's all relative anyway because Im sure what a huge company pays in tax alone would keep me living extremely well for a good few years