31-01-2016, 09:52 AM
11
Re: Incompetent Osborne and 'Google' tax liability
Originally Posted by Uncle Joe
->
Thank you Cameron's apologist, now tell me why the 'nasty party' are lobbying the EU???"Treasury ministers have told the European commission that they are “strongly opposed” to proposed sanctions against Bermuda, a favoured shelter for Google’s profits and one of 30 tax jurisdictions in Brussels’s sights".
O of course you are asked a question which you cant answer so you change the subject to somthing else.
Any chance of a link that Google are using Bermuda as a tax heaven.
You do seem to like putting up links before.
05-02-2016, 04:50 PM
13
Re: Incompetent Osborne and 'Google' tax liability
Seems 'nasty party' Osborne wasn't telling the full truth about his claim that Google were to pay £130 million.http://www.theguardian.com/technolog...options-scheme
26-02-2016, 08:44 AM
16
Re: Incompetent Osborne and 'Google' tax liability
At the time Osborne and Cameron claimed it was a great victory that they had managed to screw £130 million out of Google as their tax liability. So how come the French are now claiming more than one billion euros from the same source as French tax liability???http://money.aol.co.uk/2016/02/25/fr...6pLid%3D433612
26-02-2016, 10:18 AM
17
Re: Incompetent Osborne and 'Google' tax liability
Its not how much the French claim, they can claim as much as they want, but how much Google are prepared to pay. The international norm is that companies pay their taxes ij the country where their headquarters are based. Google have no doubt paid the amount of tax required by the Revenue The £130 million is in addition. As someone else posted earlier, how much did the previous Labour government get them to pay.26-02-2016, 10:46 AM
18
Re: Incompetent Osborne and 'Google' tax liability
Just read through this thread and what a train wreck it is.I'm sorry Uncle Joe but for all your fervour and knowledge of politics, you are nevertheless sadly lacking in the field of simple debate.
You have been asked a simple, straightforward question:
"How much tax did Labour extract from Google when they were in power?"
To have ANY credibility in this discussion at all, you MUST answer that simple question and reconcile the picture in the fact of that answer.
Refusing to answer it, attempting to divert and obfuscate simply means you have conceded that you have lost this particular discussion and failed in your attempt to discredit he Conservative party. It's a very poor show I'm afraid.
Just to be clear (once again) I don't support ANY political party so my position here is entirely neutral. I couldn't give a fig about the sharp suited Tories or the ragged bumbling Loonies.
What I look at is the structure of the discussion and I'm afraid, in this particular one, they have run rings around you.
I was always taught to argue from a position of strength. Criticising the party in power when your own favoured party did absolutely nothing when they were in power is arguing from a position of abject weakness. It's somewhat comical.
|
|
