Jump to content

Scotland to get full income tax powers...


orlandoblue

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

It's the capacity to vary that income that makes a difference, the proportion of your revenue stream that that represents is irrelevant.

Yes we could vary a few percent either way, but the reality is that it is only what it would be a couple of percent, nothing to write home about. How are you going to change 50% off taxes raised any more than 47%-53% to make any difference?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great. So what would a 50% top band net the Scottish exchequer per year?

Not a lot as, they would be employed by an English subsidiary or Scottish subsidiary depending on tax regimes. You need to keep competitive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think corporation taxation would be an issue for the big guns such as Amazon. Even if they were pressured into paying the tax, there would still be massive profits to be made and it would be stupendous of them to take the huff and up sticks.

I notice that Ireland have publicly stated that tax avoidance will not be tolerated at any level. I'd like to see more countries follow that example and i'd like us to be one of them. The more countries that do, the less places for these corporations to hide.

I know it seems like a bad idea initially. But all it takes is for a few countries to stand up against tax avoidance to encourage other countries to do the same.

You're principle in theory is ideal.

However in reality this will never work, there will always be someone who will be willing to offer these organisations better regimes in which to trade. Can't a Scotland offer this and gain the benefit rather than someone else?

Edit: Why do you think Amazon set up in Luxembourg in the first place, so yes it is an issue to them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great. So what would a 50% top band net the Scottish exchequer per year?

I have no idea, because I don't know how many taxpayers in Scotland earn over whatever amount such a rate would be imposed at.

Not a lot as, they would be employed by an English subsidiary or Scottish subsidiary depending on tax regimes. You need to keep competitive.

The income tax would be determined by the taxpayer's residence, not the company's.

made a c**t of that multi quote. Sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The income tax would be determined by the taxpayer's residence, not the company's.

made a c**t of that multi quote. Sorry.

How mate, I live in Scotland but work in France I will be paid, less French Taxes, not Scottish or UK?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Gibbons C4 blog is great reading.

Just watched Jim Murphy from last night's Scotland 2014 and, man, does he look rattled. Obviously trying to catch up with Smith Commission, but is catching grief from every angle.

For devolution of income tax, Westminster gets to wash its hands of the most contentious, visible, and difficult tax while leaving space to sit greeting and complaining about Scottish Government trying to mitigate Westminster cuts with inflexible and political instrument.

But, I reckon they've under-estimated the electorate and the logical question to be posed re. control of rest of taxation, which is an issue in the ownership of SNP, who will be quick to point out this amounts to about 30% and therefore very far from The Vow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How mate, I live in Scotland but work in France I will be paid, less French Taxes, not Scottish or UK?

Because if it was dealt with by where the company was registered, rUK employees of Scottish companies would have their taxes go to Scotland, with Scottish employees of companies registered elsewhere in the UK (and there will be a very significant amount of these) seeing their taxes go to the rUK. Even if income tax is fully devolved, Scotland is still part of the UK. British Telecom (for example), doesn't need a separate Scottish subsidiary.

France is a different nation state (and the rules get complex where that sort of thing is involved).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because if it was dealt with by where the company was registered, rUK employees of Scottish companies would have their taxes go to Scotland, with Scottish employees of companies registered elsewhere in the UK (and there will be a very significant amount of these) seeing their taxes go to the rUK. Even if income tax is fully devolved, Scotland is still part of the UK. British Telecom (for example), doesn't need a separate Scottish subsidiary.

France is a different nation state (and the rules get complex where that sort of thing is involved).

OK mate, point taken. I was in case if indy Scotland not part UK.

However, us in the Borders could do a move 20 miles to get better rates, could work the same way as well.

I have a registered English and Scottish businesses, I could pay payroll from either (albeit I pay from Scotland now). Different tax regimes, indicates a different nation state as far as I am concerned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I honestly don't think it would be beneficial in the long run to give these large corps special consideration. Overall it strangles the economy, even although it may look good on the surface with new job oppurtunities. It's making it harder and harder for smaller businesses to establish themselves, as they'll be left to foot the bill when corporation tax inevitably increases due to the defecit caused by larger corporations. This will cost the economy more jobs in the long run, kill off competition and lead to complete corporate dominance by the big few.

I even gave you a greenie for this.

I do not believe in socialist politics, but the one thing you have done is not taken in to the the indy debate, which I applaud you for. I still disagree as a CEO of a company, but at least you have your opinions.

I don't think Scotland is Socialist as such compared to rest of Europe, but slightly more left wing than the UK, but more right than the rest of Europe. (if that makes sense).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I honestly don't think it would be beneficial in the long run to give these large corps special consideration. Overall it strangles the economy, even although it may look good on the surface with new job oppurtunities. It's making it harder and harder for smaller businesses to establish themselves, as they'll be left to foot the bill when corporation tax inevitably increases due to the defecit caused by larger corporations. This will cost the economy more jobs in the long run, kill off competition and lead to complete corporate dominance by the big few.

Bollocks. Corporation Tax brings in the square root of f**k all. Slash it, and get the income tax of the employees, whilst reducing the benefit burden.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bollocks. Corporation Tax brings in the square root of f**k all. Slash it, and get the income tax of the employees, whilst reducing the benefit burden.

someone agrees. :thumsup2

Kill or lower corporation tax and get us all employed paying taxes as companies run to Scotland.

I think every one wants zero unemployment, we are not going to that by taxing potential employers. Lets let that side go, employ a couple of employees, who are now paying taxes, not signing on is that not better?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

someone agrees. :thumsup2

Kill or lower corporation tax and get us all employed paying taxes as companies run to Scotland.

I think every one wants zero unemployment, we are not going to that by taxing potential employers. Lets let that side go, employ a couple of employees, who are now paying taxes, not signing on is that not better?

Only if we don't have to subsidise poverty wages through the welfare system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...