List of companies in Australia that paid no tax.

[Lotz-A-Landies]

Did you wonder why we're doing it tough lately? Zero tax: Data reveals how much tax major Australian corporations pay - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-17/tax-transparency-report/7036708)

[Ferret]

With some companies earning billions but having essentially no taxable income the mantra that lowering corporate tax rates will boost employment is shown to be the lie that it is.

[DiscoMick]

Interersting list alright. Next time some News talking head is bleating on about how business is overtaxed in Australia, just refer to this list and point out that News Australia paid nil tax.

Sent from my GT-P5210 using AULRO mobile app

[Lotz-A-Landies]

Its all about tax loopholes and profit shifting.

[Eevo]

holy crap!

i had no idea it was that bad.

im shocked

[Lotz-A-Landies]

Interersting list alright. Next time some News talking head is bleating on about how business is overtaxed in Australia, just refer to this list and point out that News Australia paid nil tax.

Sent from my GT-P5210 using AULRO mobile appYou also noted Foxtel, a News Ltd joint venture with Telstra. (At least the latter paid tax)

Name ____________________________| Total income ($) | Taxable income ($) | Tax payable ($) | Tax payable as percentage of total income (%)
FOXTEL CABLE TELEVISION PTY LIMITED | _1,973,515,953 | - __________ | - ___________ | -
TELSTRA CORPORATION LTD _________ | 26,091,425,244 | 5,962,883,755 | 1,741,846,820 | ?

[jonesfam]

I think the problem is that the Tax system is overly complicated.


If you are a corporation & you earn $X or less then you pay $Y tax.
If you earn over $X then you pay $Z.
No deductions, no offsets, no matter where the money is now. Net earnings in Australia is taxed as Y or Z no questions asked.


Simples, until the accountants & lawyers look at it anyway.


Jonesfam

[incisor]

so we the people effectively spend more money supporting news corp than we do supporting the abc and sbs

and they still complain...


:Rolling:

[steane]

That's high level data. The real story will be in the data that sits below the headline figures.

It's entirely possible for a business to have a billion dollar plus income but not have a taxable income.

I wonder how many millions/billions of dollars in tax are being paid by the employees of the businesses listed?

One of my favourite videos. It's relevant from 2:15 onwards.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WTfoT_y-BQ

[Brett1066]

Holy ****. The company I work for is listed on there as having paid no tax. And we are a big, BIG, multinational. Interestingly, a few of our clients are on there - some paid tax, some didn't.
And everytime I ask the boss for a new piece of equipment to replace something thats broken or not suitable, I get told we are in a spending freeze, and there's no money.
Bastards.:wallbash:

[Landybitz]

If your super rich, you should never pay tax, in the UK these kind of people use a loop hole and have a good accountant to avoid paying tax.

[steane]

Holy ****. The company I work for is listed on there as having paid no tax. And we are a big, BIG, multinational. Interestingly, a few of our clients are on there - some paid tax, some didn't.
And everytime I ask the boss for a new piece of equipment to replace something thats broken or not suitable, I get told we are in a spending freeze, and there's no money.
Bastards.:wallbash:

Spending freeze suggests low or no profit which = no tax

Are the bastards forcing you to work for payment? :eek: :p

[JDNSW]

This list is not particularly useful.

Income tax is payable by a company on the amount of profit they make, not their income. The fact that a company has no taxable income in most cases will simply mean that it is not operating at a profit. In some cases this may reflect past losses carried forward. In a few cases it may indicate that they have arranged their affairs so that they do not make a profit in Australia, but I suggest that this applies to very few - and the ATO does chase them up.

If looking for anomalies, it is worth noting that the big miners are among the highest payers of tax, much higher than the big banks, but again, this difference is meaningless, since income before costs has no fixed relation to profit.

Some of the "no taxable income" ones are obvious - Qantas, for example, has been making major losses for a number of years, and has only just climbed into the black. It would be surprising if businesses such as News Ltd were making much, if any, real profit, as they have a lot of expensive units such as newspapers and TV stations that are losing money.

But to repeat - this list provides no information to gauge whether or not a company is paying their fair share of tax.

John

[D2lee]

as with pretty much every rort, company scam, price fixing scam etc etc, which involves any large business or organisation in this country, they'll spend millions of the tax dollars that us hardworking people pay investigating, but absolutely nothing what-so-ever will be done about it.


But when the overtaxed hardworking population try to get something cheaper overseas because we are RIPPED OFF here big time, they will stamp down on that straight away to protect these non-tax paying companies profits by taxing us further to stop us trying to get a better deal.

[mikehzz]

Don't people realize that the only ones who pay over the top tax in Australia are those on a wage? The tax system is legally rorted by just about everyone else. The wage earners have to pay their tax before they get their money. Think of it as the price you pay for income stability. Anyone not on a wage doesn't know what income they will make next week and that includes big companies. Those not on a wage get to legally move their income around to minimize the tax. Everyone here would do it if they could.

[frantic]

With some companies earning billions but having essentially no taxable income the mantra that lowering corporate tax rates will boost employment is shown to be the lie that it is.

Actually the truth is more like, " if we lowered the corporate tax rate AND got them all to pay it there would be a massive boost to govt tax collection and the ability to do numerous things properly ".
Your looking at hundreds of billions in lost tax through schemes. If we had that instead, you could correctly maintain roads, fund schools, increase infrastructure like trains, upgrade our medical facilities, reduce uni fees and increase places. For a start.

[B.S.F.]

No nation has ever taxed itself into prosperity.?
― Rush Limbaugh (http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/19794.Rush_Limbaugh)

Quotes About Taxes (128 quotes) (http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/taxes)

[Cobber]

Not that it's right but all that list really serves to demonstrate who has the best accountants :angel:

You have to ask, if these companies were made to pay mega amounts of tax (ie. an amount relating to their income) how many people would be jobless tomorrow? ;)

[frantic]

No nation has ever taxed itself into prosperity.?
― Rush Limbaugh (http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/19794.Rush_Limbaugh)

Quotes About Taxes (128 quotes) (http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/taxes)

Wow quotes from a talk back radio host.
That theory ONLY works if the profits that avoid tax are spent elsewhere in the same countries economy.
When it's shifted overseas any and all benefits are lost.

Interesting second link.

Ha-Joon Chang
“Once you realize that trickle-down economics does not work, you will see the excessive tax cuts for the rich as what they are -- a simple upward redistribution of income, rather than a way to make all of us richer, as we were told.”
― Ha-Joon Chang, 23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism
tags: economics, economy, recession, social-justice, tax-cuts, taxation, taxes 68 likes

Naomi Klein
“In Venezuela Chavez has made the co-ops a top political priority, giving them first refusal on government contracts and offering them economic incentives to trade with one another. By 2006, there were roughly 100,000 co-operatives in the country, employing more than 700,000 workers. Many are pieces of state infrastructure – toll booths, highway maintenance, health clinics – handed over to the communities to run. It’s a reverse of the logic of government outsourcing – rather than auctioning off pieces of the state to large corporations and losing democratic control, the people who use the resources are given the power to manage them, creating, at least in theory, both jobs and more responsive public services. Chavez’s many critics have derided these initiatives as handouts and unfair subsidies, of course. Yet in an era when Halliburton treats the U.S. government as its personal ATM for six years, withdraws upward of $20 billion in Iraq contracts alone, refuses to hire local workers either on the Gulf coast or in Iraq, then expresses its gratitude to U.S. taxpayers by moving its corporate headquarters to Dubai (with all the attendant tax and legal benefits), Chavez’s direct subsidies to regular people look significantly less radical.”
― Naomi Klein
tags: ch'vez, leftism, political, subsidies, taxes, usa, venezuela 24 likes Like


This one is good
“These are tough times for state governments. Huge deficits loom almost everywhere, from California to New York, from New Jersey to Texas.

Wait—Texas? Wasn't Texas supposed to be thriving even as the rest of America suffered? Didn't its governor declare, during his re-election campaign, that 'we have billions in surplus'? Yes, it was, and yes, he did. But reality has now intruded, in the form of a deficit expected to run as high as $25 billion over the next two years.

And that reality has implications for the nation as a whole. For Texas is where the modern conservative theory of budgeting—the belief that you should never raise taxes under any circumstances, that you can always balance the budget by cutting wasteful spending—has been implemented most completely. If the theory can't make it there, it can't make it anywhere.”
― Paul Krugman

[bob10]

Company tax data: Labor says Liberals never wanted public to see ATO list showing major corporations pay no tax - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-17/leigh-says-liberals-never-wanted-public-to-see-tax-data/7037958)

[Mick_Marsh]

You have to ask, if these companies were made to pay mega amounts of tax (ie. an amount relating to their income) how many people would be jobless tomorrow? ;)
Interesting you should say. Some of the companies I have worked for are in that list. There have been several rounds of retrenchments over the last three years.
I hold shares in some of them. Dividends and share values are way down.
Qantas operated at a loss for that year, therefore, no profit to tax.
I didn't see Apple in that list. Is it there? They must be raking it in from the iPhone sales.

[Ausfree]

I see my favourite camera manufacturer ( Nikon Australia) is on that list. I couldn't find Pentax or Cannon there though, unless they trade under a different name in Australia.

[Pickles2]

This list is not particularly useful.

Income tax is payable by a company on the amount of profit they make, not their income. The fact that a company has no taxable income in most cases will simply mean that it is not operating at a profit. In some cases this may reflect past losses carried forward. In a few cases it may indicate that they have arranged their affairs so that they do not make a profit in Australia, but I suggest that this applies to very few - and the ATO does chase them up.

If looking for anomalies, it is worth noting that the big miners are among the highest payers of tax, much higher than the big banks, but again, this difference is meaningless, since income before costs has no fixed relation to profit.

Some of the "no taxable income" ones are obvious - Qantas, for example, has been making major losses for a number of years, and has only just climbed into the black. It would be surprising if businesses such as News Ltd were making much, if any, real profit, as they have a lot of expensive units such as newspapers and TV stations that are losing money.

But to repeat - this list provides no information to gauge whether or not a company is paying their fair share of tax.

John
Exactly. Thank goodness there is a voice of reality here.
As far as "Reality" goes, and I have said this before, NOBODY pays any more tax than they have to,...NOBODY,....I utilise a very good accountant to minimize mine, in my retirement.
And, also, as I've said several times before, it ain't just the BIG companies, that use "loopholes"/deductions/aloowances,....ALL SORTS OF DEDUCTIONS,...it's "the norm" by small companies, single operators, small businesses etc etc,....you group all this smaller stuff together collectively and see what that is costing this Country,...it would involve EVERY "business" in this country & DWARF the amounts supposedly not being paid/avoided by the "targeted by some" BIG companies.
The major statement of truth in this thread mentions "wage earners", quite correctly,...they are the ones that cannot do any of this stuff.
BUT, ask any company,partnership,business large or small, how would they feel if they could "claim" only what the wage earner does.
Not saying any of this is illegal,....I don't run no company, never have, always been a wage earner, but I've seen (by nature of my job) what compnies (even VERY small ones can claim, so that they make NO profit,..even carry forwardable losses),....it's a joke, but guys, you are delusional if you think it's just the big guys,....IMHO of course.
Pickles.

[cjc_td5]

This list is not particularly useful.

Income tax is payable by a company on the amount of profit they make, not their income. The fact that a company has no taxable income in most cases will simply mean that it is not operating at a profit. In some cases this may reflect past losses carried forward. In a few cases it may indicate that they have arranged their affairs so that they do not make a profit in Australia, but I suggest that this applies to very few - and the ATO does chase them up.

If looking for anomalies, it is worth noting that the big miners are among the highest payers of tax, much higher than the big banks, but again, this difference is meaningless, since income before costs has no fixed relation to profit.

Some of the "no taxable income" ones are obvious - Qantas, for example, has been making major losses for a number of years, and has only just climbed into the black. It would be surprising if businesses such as News Ltd were making much, if any, real profit, as they have a lot of expensive units such as newspapers and TV stations that are losing money.

But to repeat - this list provides no information to gauge whether or not a company is paying their fair share of tax.

John

Thanks John.
Of course these companies are still paying Payroll tax, land taxes, collecting GST, making Super contributions etc, it is just that they are not making a profit so not paying much company tax. Isn't bringing losses forward just a cash flow mechanism to defer taking a tax credit on a loss and brought forward to offset a future tax bill? There is no tax avoidance, just using a credit to pay a future debt.

Chris

[Chenz]

And if they were forced, legislated or made to pay more tax, where do you think they would get the $$? By passing it on i.e. the regular Joe Q Average taxpaying consumer.

Nobody wants to pay tax and as Kerry Packer told the Senate inquiry:

Packer was called to appear before the Australian Federal Parliament "Print Media Inquiry" (chairman Michael Lee) in November 1991. The various serves he gave the senators prompted many supportive calls to talkback radio and letters to newpapers the following day.

Kerry Francis Bullmore Packer. Reluctantly.
When asked to state his full name and the capacity in which he appeared.
I am not evading tax in any way, shape or form. Now of course I am minimizing my tax and if anybody in this country doesn't minimize their tax they want their heads read because as a government I can tell you you're not spending it that well that we should be donating extra.
Transcribed from the in-memoriam 2006 television show The Big Fella: The Extraodinary Life of Kerry Packer
I've already given you the answer on this subject, I have told you that I pay whatever tax I am required to pay under the law, not a penny more, not a penny less, and the suggestion that I am trying to evade tax, which is what you're putting forward, I find highly offensive and I don't intend to cooperate with you in the blackening of my character.

[bob10]

And if they were forced, legislated or made to pay more tax, where do you think they would get the $$? By passing it on i.e. the regular Joe Q Average taxpaying consumer.

Nobody wants to pay tax and as Kerry Packer told the Senate inquiry:

Packer was called to appear before the Australian Federal Parliament "Print Media Inquiry" (chairman Michael Lee) in November 1991. The various serves he gave the senators prompted many supportive calls to talkback radio and letters to newpapers the following day.

Kerry Francis Bullmore Packer. Reluctantly.
When asked to state his full name and the capacity in which he appeared.
I am not evading tax in any way, shape or form. Now of course I am minimizing my tax and if anybody in this country doesn't minimize their tax they want their heads read because as a government I can tell you you're not spending it that well that we should be donating extra.
Transcribed from the in-memoriam 2006 television show The Big Fella: The Extraodinary Life of Kerry Packer
I've already given you the answer on this subject, I have told you that I pay whatever tax I am required to pay under the law, not a penny more, not a penny less, and the suggestion that I am trying to evade tax, which is what you're putting forward, I find highly offensive and I don't intend to cooperate with you in the blackening of my character.

Curious. Whom, exactly, are you talking to. Or, are you looking in a mirror, Just curious.

[weeds]

I would say most of these companies are operating within the law........

A mate runs a small company but pay a **** load to find every loop pol possible.......imagine the number of small companies v big company finding loopholes?????

I think we have the government to blame not the companies.

[rar110]

As weeds say, they are operating within the law. The report may indicate a need for a tax reform review like the one done by Ken Henry a few years ago.

Also, people need to be aware taxable income and profit is not the same and these figures are calculated for a different audience with different objectives. Taxable income is calculated in compliance with legislation, tax rulings and judicial decisions to satisfy the ATO. Naturally the objective is to minimise taxable income (incl to defer taxable income) to reduce tax payable for a particular year. Profit is reported to shareholders and potential investors according to a different set of rules or accounting standards. The objective is generally to not defer income but to maximise the amount of reportable profit as much as possible within the rules for a particular year. Eg in the past corporations have included income from sales to calculate profit although no money had changed hands and may not change hands until a later year or maybe never.

[JDNSW]

"corporate mates rip off the system" is almost certainly not the case. The rules that international companies operate under are not new, and have been pretty much unchanged under governments of all persuasions.

These rules, by and large, are established by a long list of agreements and treaties which were introduced over decades, almost always to improve the Australian economy in various ways. Some of these rules have unintended or adverse consequences, but this does not mean that on balance they don't advantage Australia and Australians. Either way, it is almost impossible to make unilateral changes to them.

Transfer pricing at unrealistic prices has been illegal for decades. The problem is proving it to the satisfaction of a court.

John

[frantic]

Chenz actually if they where forced to pay a fair amount of tax, (on profits made here) there would be more competition from local companies who where priced out by international companies shifting profits offshore. This could both improve employment and maintain the price.
Sorry jdnsw, but the ripping is getting worse. Chevron paying double going interest, to itself, apple/google/others shifting transactions from here to Singapore or Ireland, Murdoch shifting cash inside his company creating a 880 million tax return. It may be legal,(or in Murdoch's case the govt is to scared to appeal)but it's still immoral and a ripoff.

[JDNSW]

Countries such as Singapore and Ireland attract companies to their jurisdiction by offering incentives such as low tax rates, reckoning that the flow on effects are greater than the loss of taxes.

All countries do this, some by offering lower tax rates, some by other incentives such as the direct bribe paid by Labor to get GM to start car manufacturing in Australia, some by offering protection to industries, something that is becoming less popular as more and more people realise that protected industries are invariably inefficient and backward. And most forms of protection are outlawed by many international agreements. Eventually, I expect many governments will unite to try and stop the use of favourable tax treatment to attract business - but don't hold your breath; even within Australia the practice is alive and well to persuade various businesses to set up or move to particular states.

John

[Chenz]

Curious. Whom, exactly, are you talking to. Or, are you looking in a mirror, Just curious.
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/12/360.jpg

It was a quote I got off the internet regarding Packer's comment on tax evasion

[bob10]

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2015/12/360.jpg

It was a quote I got off the internet regarding Packer's comment on tax evasion


Thanks mate, threw me for a minute, Cheers.

[Tank]

Did you wonder why we're doing it tough lately? Zero tax: Data reveals how much tax major Australian corporations pay - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-17/tax-transparency-report/7036708)
We wouldn't need a GST if these Bastards paid their fair share, like the people that actually EARN/CREATE the money that these Bastards avoid paying taxes on.
It seems you get the Government you deserve and the big end of town certainly got what they wanted, their Boys in Canberra are certainly keeping their bosses happy, Regards Frank.

[tact]

This list is not particularly useful.

Income tax is payable by a company on the amount of profit they make, not their income. The fact that a company has no taxable income in most cases will simply mean that it is not operating at a profit. In some cases this may reflect past losses carried forward. In a few cases it may indicate that they have arranged their affairs so that they do not make a profit in Australia, but I suggest that this applies to very few - and the ATO does chase them up.

If looking for anomalies, it is worth noting that the big miners are among the highest payers of tax, much higher than the big banks, but again, this difference is meaningless, since income before costs has no fixed relation to profit.

Some of the "no taxable income" ones are obvious - Qantas, for example, has been making major losses for a number of years, and has only just climbed into the black. It would be surprising if businesses such as News Ltd were making much, if any, real profit, as they have a lot of expensive units such as newspapers and TV stations that are losing money.

But to repeat - this list provides no information to gauge whether or not a company is paying their fair share of tax.

John

Companies are taxed on profits. What's left after paying all the bills and feeding the mouths of dependants (staff salaries). Not taxed on their income.

Individuals are taxed on their income. Not what's left over after paying all the bills and feeding mouths. Yes some (very few) expenses are allowed as deductions. But a vastly different situation to companies being taxed on profit.

[scarry]

Don't people realize that the only ones who pay over the top tax in Australia are those on a wage? The tax system is legally rorted by just about everyone else. The wage earners have to pay their tax before they get their money. Think of it as the price you pay for income stability. Anyone not on a wage doesn't know what income they will make next week and that includes big companies. Those not on a wage get to legally move their income around to minimize the tax. Everyone here would do it if they could.

Wrong there,actually,in real terms,almost half the wage earners pay no tax at all,due to government handouts.This issue has been in the media recently as the number of people in this situation is increasing.

I am self employed and we pay a lot of company tax.Sure we minimise it,who wouldn't.

But there is no way we would be able to pay none.

I also pay a lot of land tax,one of the unfairest taxes of all.

[d2dave]

The one thing not mentioned here is, how much tax do all the employees of these companies pay.

If the companies are not paying tax they are not making a profit, but are still employing a poo load of people who pay a poo load of tax.

[Tombie]

Wrong there,actually,in real terms,almost half the wage earners pay no tax at all,due to government handouts.This issue has been in the media recently as the number of people in this situation is increasing.

I am self employed and we pay a lot of company tax.Sure we minimise it,who wouldn't.

But there is no way we would be able to pay none.

I also pay a lot of land tax,one of the unfairest taxes of all.


If you made no profit. You'd pay no tax on your earnings (the entire topic & reports name is deceptive and misleading)

No profit, essentially no "profits" tax..

They still pay Payroll taxs etc.

[bob10]

I keep reading where government says there will not be a change to the tax system if it leaves people worse off. How could it not? And what cohort are they talking about?

[Tank]

The one thing not mentioned here is, how much tax do all the employees of these companies pay.

If the companies are not paying tax they are not making a profit, but are still employing a poo load of people who pay a poo load of tax.
Yes, but the growing trend is that those employees are not Australians in Australia, the number of originally Australian Companies now based overseas is growing.
With the excuse that they can provide cheaper product to the Australian consumers.
Trouble is the cost savings are not Passed onto Australians, the prices are now higher than when they were manufacturing here.
The savings in costs by paying Coolie wages overseas goes straight to the companies owners, ****ing LEECHES, Regards Frank.

[d2dave]

Yes, but the growing trend is that those employees are not Australians in Australia, the number of originally Australian Companies now based overseas is growing.
With the excuse that they can provide cheaper product to the Australian consumers.
Trouble is the cost savings are not Passed onto Australians, the prices are now higher than when they were manufacturing here.
The savings in costs by paying Coolie wages overseas goes straight to the companies owners, ****ing LEECHES, Regards Frank.

I am certainly no expert here but I would have thought regardless of where the companies are based, employee tax would be paid to the country of where the employee works.

If a company decides to set up elsewhere and can employ and run the operation off shore, why would they do it here, in this overtaxed country.

[ramblingboy42]

Well I must be one of those "bastards" as I have been avoiding and using every legal trick possible for the last 20 yrs.

I have only been a wage earner but have had a couple of very astute financial advisers over that time , which has seen me enter retirement very happily.

I think some people here know very little about taxation or they wouldn't be saying the things they are.

These companies are doing nothing wrong , breaking no laws , but are continuing to add value to most of your lives.....just as I have done for myself.

[Tank]

Wrong there,actually,in real terms,almost half the wage earners pay no tax at all,due to government handouts.This issue has been in the media recently as the number of people in this situation is increasing.

I am self employed and we pay a lot of company tax.Sure we minimise it,who wouldn't.

But there is no way we would be able to pay none.

I also pay a lot of land tax,one of the unfairest taxes of all.
Well if you were as rich as Packer and his cronies and could afford to OWN a Government and the shonkiest lawyers and accountants you would be paying no TAX.
These Leeches on society live like Kings, they have Mansions, Yachts, Planes, Luxury cars, ridiculously expensive clothes, etc., and THEY DON'T MAKE A PROFIT TO PAY TAX ON.
So all this over the top lifestyle is a TAX Deduction, not to mention the $millions Packer gambles.
So this Bastard pays no TAXES because he earns no Profit from his Companies, I'm really starting to feel sorry for this bit of SCUM of the earth and I also feel sorry for those on here that support, believe and condone these "within the law" tax avoidance schemes (remember the Bottom of the Harbour scheme). No wonder the Country has gone to ****, the Rich (aka scum tax avoiders) get richer and the Poor (known as the working class that ACTUALLY EARN the money) get Poorer and that's exactly what Packer and HIS Government want.
Australia under Packer is turning into a 2nd rate country, with NO (or very little) Manufacturing industries. We will become a MINING and Agricultural country with no Industry, we will export Cash crops and unprocessed Mineral ores and IMPORT everything we used to manufacture or VALUE ADD here.
Unions will be non-existent, employment and wages and social services under the control of the BIG BOSSES and their Government.
Packer has HIS Money and his Government and he pays no TAXES, Hail Packer, Regards Frank.

[Tombie]

Now you're talking Personal Tax vs Company tax...

50 "Rich bastards" income tax hardly makes a dent in the total pool...

And unions are one of the primary reasons nothing is made in Australia now... That and your Superannuation- which is invested heavily in these big companies you hate so much.. So when they make shareholder returns YOU reap the rewards...

Hypocrisy is rife when people don't understand how the system works.

[scarry]

Now you're talking Personal Tax vs Company tax...

50 "Rich bastards" income tax hardly makes a dent in the total pool...

And unions are one of the primary reasons nothing is made in Australia now... That and your Superannuation- which is invested heavily in these big companies you hate so much.. So when they make shareholder returns YOU reap the rewards...

Hypocrisy is rife when people don't understand how the system works.

Well said;)

Good to see your back………....

[Tank]

Now you're talking Personal Tax vs Company tax...

50 "Rich bastards" income tax hardly makes a dent in the total pool...

And unions are one of the primary reasons nothing is made in Australia now... That and your Superannuation- which is invested heavily in these big companies you hate so much.. So when they make shareholder returns YOU reap the rewards...

Hypocrisy is rife when people don't understand how the system works.
And you have shown you know little to nothing, open your eyes, if not your mind, Regards Frank.

[d2dave]

This thread reminded me of an old joke, although I don't view it as a joke, but more reality.

The tenth man in this is one of the "leeches" who, I will point out, employs thousands of people, probably lots of people on this forum.
If we did not have these leeches, there would only be government jobs
and we would end up like Greece.

Probably a tad off topic but here it is anyway

Let's put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand.

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do.

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the
arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20." Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes, so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men, the paying customers?
How would they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted
that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28% savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before and the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
"I only got a $ out of the $20, "declared the sixth man. He pointed
to the tenth man, "but he got $10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a $,
too.
It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!"
"That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get
anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They only had enough money between all of them for half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

[Tombie]

And you have shown you know little to nothing, open your eyes, if not your mind, Regards Frank.


Both are very open thanks for the suggestion.

I have been a business owner, a wages earner and a member of corporate Staff (current).

I work my arse off to ensure that Blue Collar workers - the ones who do the work and keep companies alive - yes, the true assets of a business - still have a place to come and earn their money.

I work my arse off, to try and keep a business making Cashflow, which is even more critical than Profit, so these people can pay their mortgages, feed their families, hopefully make a decent living.

I work my arse off, challenging members of the Executive board to propose ideas that may, MAY, just keep the business viable - so that the board doesn't decide to close down major segments resulting in lay offs.

I took a Salary cut, along with others, to help with cash flow and cost saving initiatives- whilst the business passed on Pay increases **to its labour force**.


So, good Sir, may I recommend a little self education. Remove your Union blinkers, set aside your "oh the poor workers, always getting screwed" brain washing... And sit back, open your mind, do the research and you may come to an understanding...

No CEO is worth what they're paid... But those contracts are usually performance based - make the stock holders a good return and rewarded in kind.
Big business; like it or not keeps the wheels turning - big business = jobs..
Public listed companies exist because of Share holder investment - and they need to return on that investment - or you won't get Superannuation worth a damn.
They need to continue to invest phenomenal amounts at times - often for very little return on investment..

And YOU - could be wealthy too - wealth is usually created by people willing to take enormous risks (many of us won't - safety and security in our lives often inhibit us taking the chance).

If YOU want to make a difference - learn how economics works - it's incredibly complex how mankind has made it...
A product of many wanting just "that little bit more"...

The reality is - there are thousands of people just like YOU deciding the very fate of everyone who works in the business I'm contracted to... They are the people who have super funds, which own the shares, which give the funds (stock holders) the rights to demand actions of the board - which often in these times - with the result of job losses.

So every time YOU buy something not produced here, not value added here, or even not handled by a local distributor/agent... Then YOU are contributing to the very situation that YOU are protesting about.

And example even on this site... You can buy parts/accessories/services from several Aussie vendors all of which import some of their products.. Or you can buy them direct from the UK just that bit cheaper...
And then those locals don't eat, their kids don't get to go on that school excursion... THEY don't get to live the great Aussie dream that they are working their arses off to provide their families....

Does this post seem aggressive? Probably.
Is it meant to be? Yes, a little.

Think of it this way... Those "fat cats" have paid you a wage that fed you, clothed you, and in later years will see you with some money coming in when you are no longer working.

When you have a firm understanding of CashFlow, EBITDA, PAYG, Superannuation investment etc you may well see things just a little bit differently - or you may not.

Envy doesn't look good on anyone.

[Tombie]

And one last comment.

Whilst all the wages guys are paid an hourly rate (with loadings and penalties etc) for every hour they work...

Perhaps spare a thought for those of us just a little up the ladder - on Salary - yes, our hourly rates look much more appealing - right up until you open your eyes and see:

That I and many other "Staffy *******" (a colloquial name for Staff around here) - are pulling 14-16 hour days, covering multiple facets of work, on call all weekend, attempting to build sustainable business plans...

Take our hourly rates and divide them into that 80+ hour working week, all done at FIXED income levels...

And you may just find that my fellow Staff members hourly rates work out to be a LOT less than many..

[Mick_Marsh]

Well if you were as rich as Packer and his cronies and could afford to OWN a Government and the shonkiest lawyers and accountants you would be paying no TAX.
These Leeches on society live like Kings, they have Mansions, Yachts, Planes, Luxury cars, ridiculously expensive clothes, etc., and THEY DON'T MAKE A PROFIT TO PAY TAX ON.
So all this over the top lifestyle is a TAX Deduction, not to mention the $millions Packer gambles.
So this Bastard pays no TAXES because he earns no Profit from his Companies, I'm really starting to feel sorry for this bit of SCUM of the earth and I also feel sorry for those on here that support, believe and condone these "within the law" tax avoidance schemes (remember the Bottom of the Harbour scheme). No wonder the Country has gone to ****, the Rich (aka scum tax avoiders) get richer and the Poor (known as the working class that ACTUALLY EARN the money) get Poorer and that's exactly what Packer and HIS Government want.
Australia under Packer is turning into a 2nd rate country, with NO (or very little) Manufacturing industries. We will become a MINING and Agricultural country with no Industry, we will export Cash crops and unprocessed Mineral ores and IMPORT everything we used to manufacture or VALUE ADD here.
Unions will be non-existent, employment and wages and social services under the control of the BIG BOSSES and their Government.
Packer has HIS Money and his Government and he pays no TAXES, Hail Packer, Regards Frank.
Errr, Frank.
You know the "Packer" referred to in this thread, Kerry, is dead, and (I am reliably informed) has been for several years.

[d2dave]

I work my arse off to ensure that Blue Collar workers
I work my arse off, to try and keep a business making Cashflow,

I work my arse off, challenging members of the Executive board to propose



Jeez, you must have a sore arse.:Rolling::Rolling::Rolling::Rolling:
Typed after a few (lots) beers.

[Pickles2]

Well I must be one of those "bastards" as I have been avoiding and using every legal trick possible for the last 20 yrs.

I have only been a wage earner but have had a couple of very astute financial advisers over that time , which has seen me enter retirement very happily.

I think some people here know very little about taxation or they wouldn't be saying the things they are.

These companies are doing nothing wrong , breaking no laws , but are continuing to add value to most of your lives.....just as I have done for myself.
Same here.
We agree!!...Can you believe it?!
Pickles.

[incisor]

Same here.
We agree!!...Can you believe it?!
Pickles.

Lucky I was already sitting down!

[steane]

Errr, Frank.
You know the "Packer" referred to in this thread, Kerry, is dead, and (I am reliably informed) has been for several years.

Could be why he's paying no tax?

[Tank]

Errr, Frank.
You know the "Packer" referred to in this thread, Kerry, is dead, and (I am reliably informed) has been for several years.
I was wondering what that stink was, thanks, Regards Frank.

[Ferret]

...I work my arse off, challenging members of the Executive board to propose ideas that may, MAY, just keep the business viable - so that the board doesn't decide to close down major segments resulting in lay offs.

I'll let the wife know your working your arse off to keep the joint running. In return she might come up with some ideas to assist. ;)

[Tank]

Gee Tombie, Imagine having to work 80 hours, must be hard.
Most of my working life as an employee and self employed I worked an average of 84+ hours/week. And those hours were productive hours, actually out there earning the CASH FLOW you talk about.
You blame the unions for Australia's troubles, more Packer/Murdoch bull**** that you seem to have been Brainwashed with.
Quote: "oh the poor workers, always getting screwed" brain washing"
Without the ****ing "workers" you would be on the Dole.
You people up in your Ivory Towers think your sweat earns your company money, no it is those workers you seem to think are beneath you that actually bring in the cash, they earn money you drain it.
This will be a third world country with attitudes like yours and others on here.
No unions, no manufacturing industry, no value added goods exported, foreign owned Agriculture and mining with foreign workers, a larger immigrant intake with less jobs for Australians.
This is Australia NOW, a foreign workforce to make Australian workers more compliant, Agricultural land bought up for mining and ownership of export crops and minerals and Tombie crowing what a good thing that he doesn't have to pay his share of the Taxes.
Most of my working life I paid more than half of every penny I earned in taxes, why because I didn't have a corporate structure to hide behind, I didn't have whole firms of accountants and lawyers moving money and company assets offshore to avoid paying tax.
I had to pay taxes on my Gross earnings, like the majority of Australians, because Governments knew their big business bosses wouldn't be forking over their share, someone has to pay for Government.
Those people that bash unions, I have noticed over the years are always first in line to accept union fought for wages and awards, and also the first to whinge about having to join a union and pay union fees, ****ing Hypocrites!
Regards Frank.

[Tombie]

...

Did I not recognise the workers? I believe I did...

And, I pay a lot of tax - I minimise by leasing etc. but I still throw a sizeable chunk into the coffers.

You are sounding like the stereotypical "whinging worker"...

Workers make things, but you wouldn't be making **** without a plan or direction.
You wouldn't be operating machinery without a maintenance program, investment, projects.

Completely different to the fantasy world you claim. Work force is a primary area of company cost - it comes from wages.

A $375mil project 8 years ago was over $230mil in wages alone.

And if those big companies didn't keep investing / chasing profit. You wouldn't have a bloody job...

Do you forget BHP was the "syndicate of 7" when they started out.

Keep dreaming.

[Tombie]

Those people that bash unions, I have noticed over the years are always first in line to accept union fought for wages and awards, and also the first to whinge about having to join a union and pay union fees, ****ing Hypocrites!




Typical attempt at logic.

That's like claiming those who claim freedom but never went and fought for it are hypocrites...


Right up there with those who spend all their time complaining about being a poor worker and do nothing to improve their position..

[Mick_Marsh]

A word of advice, chaps, if you want to pass political comment, take it to CA.

If you don't know what CA (Current Affairs) is, PM me.

[ramblingboy42]

Lucky I was already sitting down!

now listen here!!!!

Pickles and I have agreed on at least 3 occasions....at least 3.

Den.

...jeez....it might even be 4.

[DiscoMick]

I think we all know that companies hire the best advisors to minimize their tax and that's just exploring what's possible under the rules which is normal. I think most people would think companies paying 20-25% of their profits in tax would be reasonable. It would not be reasonable for a company such as Apple to make huge profits in Australia and yet pay nil tax. That just shifts the tax that the company avoided onto other taxpayers.
What people also object to is when politicians allow companies which donate to their party to avoid paying a fair tax and to hide the fact that they're sponging on the rest of us.
Governments have to get a reasonable level of tax in to pay for the many services which the public demands governments provide.
If companies are allowed to get a free ride on the country then governments only have limited options:

Run deficits and accumulate debts which future taxpayers have to fund.
Slash spending which is hard because cutting government services hurts people who react by sacking governments.
Raise taxes such as the current push to raise the GST to 15%.

So, those who defend big companies who avoid paying a fair share are actually saying that governments should borrow more, slash support for those who most need it or raise taxes on all of us.
Which option do you favour?

Sent from my SM-G900I using AULRO mobile app

[V8Ian]

It would be interesting to see how many names on that list, treat their contractors and employees with the same contempt, as they do their moral tax obligation.

[Ferret]

It would not be reasonable for a company such as Apple to make huge profits in Australia and yet pay nil tax.

Apple has paid virtually no tax in any country it operates in.

Apple Operations International (AOI) receives ~30% of Apple profits world wide. It has no employees nor even a physical presence in any country. Hence pays no tax to any nation.

Apple Sales International (ASI) is the repository for all of Apple's offshore intellectual property rights. Like AOI, ASI has no employees, has no physical presence so claims to be a tax resident of nowhere. Hence pays no tax to any nation.

Apple's own financial statements show it pays less than 0.1% tax on profits globally.

I don't blame Apple but I do blame governments.

Business Insider:- Apple Avoids Paying $17 Million In Taxes Every Day Through A Tax Avoidance Scheme (http://www.businessinsider.com.au/how-apple-reduces-what-it-pays-in-taxes-2013-5?r=US&IR=T)

[Tombie]

I'll let the wife know your working your arse off to keep the joint running. In return she might come up with some ideas to assist. ;)

Anything anyone can value add is on the cards from my perspective..

PM me - intrigued who your wife is ;)

[Lionel]

I couldn't find ... Cannon there though, unless they trade under a different name in Australia.

Yeah, they do - "Canon" :D :wasntme: !

Cheers, & have a great Christmas & New Year.

Lionel

[Tank]

Merry Christmas and a Happy and Prosperous New Year to all, Regards Frank.

[DiscoMick]

Yes and let's all wish for our country to get the gift of a revised and fairer tax regime in 2016 in which all companies pay modest but fair taxes to repay the country for the privilege of being allowed the opportunity to do business and make profits in our country.

Sent from my SM-G900I using AULRO mobile app

[Pickles2]

Yes and let's all wish for our country to get the gift of a revised and fairer tax regime in 2016 in which all companies pay modest but fair taxes to repay the country for the privilege of being allowed the opportunity to do business and make profits in our country.

Sent from my SM-G900I using AULRO mobile app
Yes "ALL" companies,....big & SMALL,......EVERY COMPANY,......and I'm with you.
Pickles.

[scarry]

Yes "ALL" companies,....big & SMALL,......EVERY COMPANY,......and I'm with you.
Pickles.

Mine does and always has,so looks like it will be same same.....:D

I like to sleep well at night

Have a merry christmas all