The Turnbull Government

[noco]

I don't and I can't find any relevant quotes from each of them.

Can you line up each's quote, in the context of the current proposal of course?

Tisme, I know you are very lazy at times in doing your own research but it took me just 2 minutes to find out all the information you need on how Labor was keen to reduce business tax rate......Listen to Bill Shorten on a short video in 2011.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/factcheck/2016-06-29/fact-check-labor-on-corporate-tax-cuts/7549754
http://www.skynews.com.au/news/poli.../keating-slams-labor-s-proposed-tax-rate.html

 

[Tisme]

Tisme, I know you are very lazy at times in doing your own research but it took me just 2 minutes to find out all the information you need on how Labor was keen to reduce business tax rate......Listen to Bill Shorten on a short video in 2011.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/factcheck/2016-06-29/fact-check-labor-on-corporate-tax-cuts/7549754
http://www.skynews.com.au/news/poli.../keating-slams-labor-s-proposed-tax-rate.html

Thanks Noco

The first thing I noticed that seems at odds with your assertion is this:

" Labor says it will support the initial cut for small businesses with turnovers less than $2 million, but opposes the rest of the tax cuts, which it describes as a "massive tax cut to big multinationals" and "big end of town winners".

I'm not sure what Keating's blather about top marginal personal income rates have to do with Rumpole's disdain for the $65bn gift to big business? "giving away $65 billion to companies who don't pay their fair share anyway ?" was Rumpole's question and you said the three Labor guys were onboard, that's what I was asking proofs of.

I'm quite capable of using Google too, I just can't find any endorsement for the $65bn plan by the three guys you mentioned as having done so?

 

[noco]

Thanks Noco

The first thing I noticed that seems at odds with your assertion is this:

" Labor says it will support the initial cut for small businesses with turnovers less than $2 million, but opposes the rest of the tax cuts, which it describes as a "massive tax cut to big multinationals" and "big end of town winners".

I'm not sure what Keating's blather about top marginal personal income rates have to do with Rumpole's disdain for the $65bn gift to big business? "giving away $65 billion to companies who don't pay their fair share anyway ?" was Rumpole's question and you said the three Labor guys were onboard, that's what I was asking proofs of.

I'm quite capable of using Google too, I just can't find any endorsement for the $65bn plan by the three guys you mentioned as having done so?

It is obvious you have not read both links in full.

 

[Tisme]

It is obvious you have not read both links in full.

I did actually and it seems you haven't read it with the same objective glasses I use = I am not rusted onto love or hate of political parties.

 

[noco]

I did actually and it seems you haven't read it with the same objective glasses I use = I am not rusted onto love or hate of political parties.

I think you are using Rose Colored glasses.

 

[SirRumpole]

I think you are using Rose Colored glasses.

Have you never changed your mind ?

Surely with the current debt and deficit we can't afford these tax cuts at the moment.

Doesn't mean that are not a good idea at some time when they can be afforded.

 

[noco]

Have you never changed your mind ?

Surely with the current debt and deficit we can't afford these tax cuts at the moment.

Doesn't mean that are not a good idea at some time when they can be afforded.

NEVER or EVER?

Have you ever been in business or are you a typical retired PS?

 

[SirRumpole]

NEVER or EVER?

Have you ever been in business or are you a typical retired PS?

None of your business. There are a lot of people who could do with a tax cut a lot more than businesses who avoid tax by overseas transfers and other dodges.

 

[noco]

None of your business. There are a lot of people who could do with a tax cut a lot more than businesses who avoid tax by overseas transfers and other dodges.

I think you are behind the times Rumpy.

Some of those overseas companies who have avoided tax in the past, have been caught and millions of dollars have been recovered.

Still reckon you are an ex PS without any business knowledge.

http://www.verdict.co.uk/australia-...avoidance-but-what-are-other-countries-doing/

.columns">
Tech giants including Google and Facebook will now pay tax in Australia based on the profits they earn in the country, instead of shifting income abroad.
The new legislation in the country will prevent large global corporations with annual incomes of more than $1bn from dodging their tax obligations.
The Australian government will claw back an estimated $1.5bn in this year alone.
“The Labor Party, when they were in government, did absolutely diddly-squat when it came to the issue of making multinationals pay their fair share of tax,” Scott Morrison, the Australian treasurer said.

Firms who refuse to comply will face a 40 percent tax penalty rate.
When the Multinational Anti-Avoidance Law was first proposed in Australia in early 2015, the government said there were 30 global corporations that paid little or no tax on the profits from their Australian operations.
Two years later, Australian tax authorities are currently conducting 71 audits involving 59 major global corporations, according to Morrison.
George Turner, a director at the Tax Justice Network, an advocacy group specialising in international tax told Verdict that the legislation in Australia has been a long time coming, and other countries should follow in its footsteps.
“Progress has been painfully slow across the world. The legislation in Australia just shows what can be done when governments take action, ” he said.
Timeline for Australia

• 
  
  April 4, 2017
  Brexit: UK’s trading relationships will “deteriorate” says Vince Cable
• 
  
  March 23, 2017
  Apple paid no tax in New Zealand for at least 10 years
• 
  
  February 10, 2017
  This Australian supermarket is battling against self-service checkout fraud

“The fallacy we hear all the time from the corporate lobby is ‘tax us and we will move somewhere else.’ But the reality is that the majority of Facebook customers, for example, are in Australia, the UK, France, Germany, the US and not in the Cayman Islands or any other tax havens they may shift their profits to. If you are looking at how to tax companies, you need to look at where their customers are.”

How about corporation tax in Europe and the UK?
Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook and Google, have their European headquarters in Ireland, which has a 12.5 percent headline rate of corporate income tax – the second-lowest in the EU.
Last month, the European Council agreed to introduce new measures targeting “hybrid mismatches” — differences in national laws that international companies can take advantage of. In other words, companies will be prevented from shifting their profits from high-tax jurisdictions to low-tax jurisdictions.
“Step by step, we are eliminating the channels used by certain companies to escape taxation. I congratulate member states for agreeing on this tangible measure to clamp down on tax abuse and install a fairer tax environment in the EU,” said Pierre Moscovici, commissioner for economic affairs, customs and taxation at the EU executive at the time.

The new EU legislation will come into force from 2020.
A number of large companies, including the owner of Cadbury and popular coffee chain Cafe Nero have avoided paying corporation tax in the UK.
Earlier this month, chancellor Philip Hammond said in his Spring Budget that there would be a “tough” financial penalty for professional enablers of tax avoidance ploys.

Related

• 
  Three things that will change the world today
• 
  Weak pound means UK businesses set to increase prices
• 
  Brexit fears bubble despite Goldman’s denial over hedge fund move

Verdict is using cookies
- See more at: http://www.verdict.co.uk/australia-...e-other-countries-doing/#sthash.XmGiA0GV.dpuf

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...-enough-on-tax-avoidance-20160210-gmqfrc.html

 

[SirRumpole]

Still reckon you are an ex PS without any business knowledge.

If I am then so are the doctors and nurses who will resuscitate you (we hope) after your next heart attack.

 

[moXJO]

If I am then so are the doctors and nurses who will resuscitate you (we hope) after your next heart attack.

You been to a hospital lately?


The reason for lower business tax rates is to get business to invest in Australia. And yes, there are benefits. Big business invest billions.

 

[SirRumpole]

The reason for lower business tax rates is to get business to invest in Australia. And yes, there are benefits. Big business invest billions.

Business can invest what they like but unless you have consumers with money to spend then there is no advantage to those businesses. Business is more interested in replacing workers with machines so the employment benefits are marginal. The governments own figures say there will be a miniscule improvement in GDP in twenty years.

Save the money and invest in infrastructure, much more job creating and beneficial nationally.

 

[moXJO]

Business can invest what they like but unless you have consumers with money to spend then there is no advantage to those businesses. Business is more interested in replacing workers with machines so the employment benefits are marginal. The governments own figures say there will be a miniscule improvement in GDP in twenty years.

They don't just sell into australia. We are the pivot point into asia.

 

[Tisme]

If the tax fraud by a deputy commissioner and son was detected under a Labor Govt, the Newscorp and it's subsidiary, the LNP would be demanding blood from the ALP, passing lumps of coal around the house and blaming the PM for being incompetent.

 

[bellenuit]

But it wouldn't have been detected under a Labor government!

 

[moXJO]

Rudd put us up siht creek. He was wasting so much that his own party gave him the boot. NDIS has only now been funded under the libs. This was one among many.
They have since blocked attempts to scale back and any budget measure savings.
The pill will be very bitter when it comes time and we have run out of choices.

 

[Tisme]

But it wouldn't have been detected under a Labor government!

Only if the deputy commissioner was gay, lesbian, female, muslim, etc. But in this case it looks like it's a male, worse still= fair skinned, an appalling lack of honesty from someone who didn't deserve the job in the first place due to poor oversight by the Human and Equal Rights Mandarins...lucky they caught him when they did otherwise questions would have been asked why a white man was sitting at a PS desk.

 

[Tisme]

Rudd put us up siht creek. He was wasting so much that his own party gave him the boot. NDIS has only now been funded under the libs. This was one among many.
They have since blocked attempts to scale back and any budget measure savings.
The pill will be very bitter when it comes time and we have run out of choices.

I think a more realistic non partisan view would be beneficial to your knowledge base.

I think you are ignoring the knock on effect of the pork barreling of Howard with things like superannuation dollar matching, baby bonuses etc gave the population a taste of self entitlement to the public purse. The public got fed up with him and not only handed govt to Labor, but his seat was lost too.... that punishing in action.

Deny it or not Rudd's victory was a poisoned chalice with the collapse of the world economies and his socialistic guilt drivers. Everyone who knew him expected the same endless slave driving of his staff that he and his QLD razor gang mate Wayne Swan had made an art form. His demise was at the hands of the public service who couldn't get used to working for the luxurious life styles and obscene superannuation only they could afford.

The thing is that Tony Abbott promised fiscal rectitude and he didn't deliver. Instead, by example, an open cheque was handed to his mate Ziggy to employ the archaic Liberal Party retirement home Telstra to mangle the biggest potential public asset ever.

Successive LNP years have not produced anything, but a four year moving line in the sand to surplus. They are patently not the natural born economic managers they thought they were.

Answer = ensconce Paul Keating on a budget, finance and treasury advisory panel IMO

 

[SirRumpole]

Answer = ensconce Paul Keating on a budget, finance and treasury advisory panel IMO

Maybe revisit Ken Henry's tax plan too.

 

[Tisme]