Posts Tagged ‘corporation tax’

Why Labour should fear the blowback from its war on business

15/04/2014, 11:22:40 AM

by Samuel Dale

During his doomed leadership contest David Miliband said Labour could not afford to go into the 2015 general election with no business support.

One year ahead that election and that is exactly what is happening. Labour is at open war with business with signs it is about to step up the offensive rather than build bridges.

The list of proposed interventions into industry is dizzying with almost every major sector targeted.

I’m told Labour is planning a policy blitz on no fewer than eight sectors ahead of party conference later this year. It is part of an ambitious agenda to significantly boost consumer rights and hand power back to consumers and away from huge corporations. 

Ed Miliband positions himself as US President Teddy Roosevelt breaking up monopolies and boosting competition. His modern incarnation has been called many names from pre-distribution to progressive austerity or socialism with no money. In 21st Century Britain let’s see what Miliband is actually proposing in your crucial industries.

(more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Where is the tax justice in our economy?

10/12/2012, 01:28:03 PM

by Amanda Ramsay

When it comes to the economy, George Osborne has failed this country on all levels. He’s failed on debt reduction, on deficit reduction and failed to bring growth or jobs. The price we pay is cuts to our services, employment rights and employment prospects.

The Autumn financial statement poured more cold water on Keynesian hopes, eager for a “do something government,” not a laissez-faire-do-nothing-but-cut-government. Yet in the morass of commentary and analysis since the chancellor sat down last Wednesday, I am still asking myself: why is it acceptable that tax payers end-up subsidising low wages by means of tax credits, housing benefit and all manner of other fiscal instruments to supplement people on poverty pay?

I ask this not because the recipients don’t deserve the help they need to make ends meet, of course they do, but they are only necessary because employers and companies are not paying adequate salaries and wages in the first place.

Someone who has the gumption to start a company and create jobs should be congratulated and supported but without a mandatory living wage, companies are allowed to let profit win over decency in how they pay their staff.

Low pay is forcing people into the arms of the nanny state; to house, feed, clothe and pay for transport to get themselves to work, let alone heat their homes.

Where’s the fairness in that?

(more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

We need to take action on the tax shirking oligarchs of the internet

07/12/2012, 07:00:20 AM

by Dan McCurry

Rather like in ancient Rome or the end of the Soviet Union, the sudden expansion of the internet has produced a small number of oligarchs controlling a huge amount of industry.

It was only a matter of time before the moral and ethical questions began to pile up. Initially, they destroyed traditional industry with little or no objection from policy makers or the public, as this was a new and super-efficient way to market goods and services, and we must not stand in the way of progress.

But then the abuse allegations began to mount. Google is accused of using its search engine to guide traffic towards its own services rather than that of its rivals. Amazon is accused of using its dominance to bully publishers. Apple dominates downloads of music and other digital content, creating questions on the state of competition.

Then we discovered that Google and Amazon were using their ability to cross borders unchecked as a tool to avoid tax, and therefore have an unfair advantage over the existing competition.

In fairness, the multinationals invented the rules that the internet giants appear to be feasting on. Starbucks claims to make no profit due to the huge amounts of royalties it has to pay to its subsidiary in low-tax Luxembourg. The royalties are for the right to use its own logo.

Maybe Starbucks should drop serving coffees and stick to its core business of charging customers for a napkin with the logo on. The customer can sit down at a table, with their logo embossed napkin and stroke it for 20 minutes before leaving? Their position is so absurd it’s no wonder that after a modicum of public scrutiny they have volunteered to pay more tax.

(more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon