Slashdot Mirror


Three European Countries Block Tax On Tech Giants (bloomberg.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Bloomberg: French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire's efforts to rally his European Union colleagues around a new tax on tech giants fell short, as countries skeptical of the plan doubled down on their opposition, and others, including Italy, said they'll push ahead with their own plans. Ministers from Denmark, Ireland and Sweden said they couldn't support the tax in its current form, casting doubt on the proposal's future, since unanimity is required to pass taxes in the EU. The plan on the table would impose a 3 percent levy on the European sales of the likes of Amazon and Facebook. A number of countries are already imposing taxes of their own, increasing the risk of fragmentation in the single market. Finance Minister Giovanni Tria said an Italian tax will kick in next year if there's no broader agreement by then. Spain and the U.K. have already announced their own levies.

56 comments

  1. sounds like the voice of reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By raising taxing the most successful companies, you effectively force them to go elsewhere. There's a reason Einstein came to the US, and Hitler was only half of it.

    1. Re:sounds like the voice of reason by Hognoxious · · Score: 3, Insightful

      By raising taxing the most successful companies, you effectively force them to go elsewhere.

      Let me get this right ... before they were making X and now they'll be making 0.97 X. But they'd rather have 0 X?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    2. Re:sounds like the voice of reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't make much of a difference if they go elsewhere.
      With the exception of Amazon they do not create jobs on Europe anyway. And Amazon jobs are pretty shitty minimum wage jobs.
      So you've got no money passed down to workers that could redistribute it in the local economy means that the local markets don't benefit from it. This also means no income tax from workers means that the governments don't get their cut, which they can put back into the social security systems.
      You shouldn't be surprised that such countries try to tax companies that do business there as globalism isn't always the best thing for domestic industry.
      Trump understands that as well. Although his approach lacks elegance, it aims for a similar thing. Namely bring your assets to my country, create jobs in my country, or fuck off.

    3. Re:sounds like the voice of reason by Koby77 · · Score: 1

      In this case, it's the tax-competitive country losing money. The tax-competitive country currently collects X. The new EU tax will collect 2X no matter where the company is located. The company moves most of its key employees and tech jobs to the United States, leaving behind a skeleton sales crew to collect sales. The sales group moves to another country with warmer weather. The tax-competitive country gets 0 X, the country with warmer weather gets 0.25 X, and the EU kleptocrats are left scratching their heads wondering "Why don't we have enough money or jobs?" UNLESS the tax-competitive country tells the EU to shove off.

    4. Re:sounds like the voice of reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they employ enough people, it should give them the political leverage to stave off any of these extra taxes. All they've got to tell their employees to write their politicians and do some lobby work. Maybe promise those politicians to crate a lot more jobs in the future if they manage to keep taxes low. Then those politicians can tell their constituents that they've helped create jobs and lower unemployment.
      With all the hate speech nonsense in the EU Zuckerberg already promised to create a lot more jobs that should be able help with the screening process. If he follows through, that should keep them in the game.

    5. Re:sounds like the voice of reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The company moves most of its key employees and tech jobs to the United States, leaving behind a skeleton sales crew to collect sales.

      Uhm, that isn't how it works today.
      The skeleton crew is currently located in the tax haven. The workforce is where they can pay the lowest wages which is somewhere else.

      At the moment the skeleton crew is in Ireland since that minimizes taxes while still being in EU.
      Ireland benefits from this since while the taxes are absurdly low they are still paid in Ireland.
      By harmonizing the taxes all over EU there is no real benefit for companies to place their paper HQ on Ireland, but they can't move it out of EU if they want to do business there.

      You idea of what is currently going on doesn't seem to be founded in reality.

    6. Re:sounds like the voice of reason by Cederic · · Score: 2

      If Amazon, Facebook and Apple decide not to operate in the UK then their tax burden in the country will indeed be zero.

      Right now they do operate in the UK, they just don't pay a sensible or reasonable level of tax on the profits they make here. I think pay up or fuck off is a perfectly acceptable demand from the Government.

    7. Re:sounds like the voice of reason by Cederic · · Score: 2

      Where the jobs are has been, is and will continue to be entirely fucking irrelevant.

      Where the revenues are generated and profits made is the key factor and companies are generating a lot of revenue and profit in the UK then using international tax laws to pay pitiful levels of tax there. That's why the UK is stating that this is not an acceptable way to operate and that an additional tax will now be levied.

      Lets face it, Twitter and Facebook don't exactly have high UK employment to start with.

    8. Re:sounds like the voice of reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are not raising tax on successful companies, they are raising tax on companies that systematically dodge paying their fair share of taxes.

    9. Re:sounds like the voice of reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uhm, that isn't how it works today.
      The skeleton crew is currently located in the tax haven. The workforce is where they can pay the lowest wages which is somewhere else.

      At the moment the skeleton crew is in Ireland since that minimizes taxes while still being in EU.

      That would make sense if there was no workforce in Ireland. Ireland is the most globalized economy in the world and has, as a proportion of its workforce, a far larger number of workers for companies like Google & Apple than any other country, including the USA.

    10. Re: sounds like the voice of reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And a single, small building in Delaware is officially home to 17,000+ corporate headquarters. It is all paper bullshit.

      Implement a wealth tax. Even 1-2% is fine. It will encourage investment instead of rent seeking. Throw a million dollar deduction on it and 99% of the world wouldn't even notice it.

      A billionaire's grandkids would still be rich even if they never worked. Three generations is more than enough inherited privilege.

  2. Why were they taxing Einstein? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Were they levying a tax on him for every equation he wrote? That is insane! Do we tax physicists less than other countries? Is that why he came here?

    1. Re:Why were they taxing Einstein? by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      In Europe they tax you on the number of symbols you use in your equations. That is why he came up with e=mc2. It wasn't correct, but cheaper because it was so short.

    2. Re: Why were they taxing Einstein? by TimMD909 · · Score: 1

      My guess is that he wanted to avoid taxes that equal money times the speed of light squared...

    3. Re: Why were they taxing Einstein? by olsmeister · · Score: 1

      Compound interest is the eighth wonder of the world. He who understands it, earns it. He who doesn't, pays it.

    4. Re:Why were they taxing Einstein? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haha, funny. In China, they tax you on how many animal parts went into your product, even if fully synthetic.

  3. What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We can tax sugary drinks, bad habits, and cigarettes but not the tech Giants?

    1. Re:What? by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      This arena never existed before. Politicians don't want to tax it to balance the budget. They want to tax it to have another wad to spend and then apppend the current borrowing on top of it.

      The rhetoric will remain the same, which is that, in spite of times being better than ever before, the dire needs of The People are more severe than ever before.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    2. Re:What? by Koby77 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You already tax the tech giants. If there are tech giant employees in your country, then you likely tax their income. And if product sales occur within your country, then that is also taxed. But this new tax isn't about that. Instead it's about taxing the companies no matter where they are located. High tax countries are upset that large tech companies have avoided them, and so they're barely getting any tax money. Some countries are willing to be tax-competitive, and are rightfully worried that if the EU collects taxes no matter where a company is located, then the companies will probably move to some other country, thereby causing the country to lose a large amount of corporate tax.

    3. Re:What? by PPH · · Score: 1

      Actually, these are all examples of taxing you. Bad habits don't pay taxes. Those that engage in them do. As far as the tech giants, its the owners, workers and customers that are paying the tax. The concept that we call a tech giant, or actually any corporation, can move* at the drop of a hat.

      *Which brings up an interesting question. How does a corporation like Apple move the 'nexus' for business receipts from the USA to Ireland? If I move any sort of money, property or security across the US border (in excess of $10,000 in value), there are forms to fill out and taxes to pay. When the order to relocate business operations moved from the USA to Ireland, probably in the form of a memo, that memo had an imputed present value of billions of dollars. Did they file the appropriate paperwork? Pay the duties?

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    4. Re:What? by TheSunborn · · Score: 1

      "If there are tech giant employees in your country, then you likely tax their income."

      Nope that is exactly the problem this suggestion tries to solve*. The company only pay income tax in the country of origin. So even if a company from Ireland(Google for example) sell stuff in other eu countries, all their income tax is paid in Ireland.

      *It's still a horrible solution, but I do at least understand why the current system is problematic.

    5. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The EU is just trying to shakedown the tech giants because they do not have their own tech giants to levy taxes on. And according to the article individual countries have their own tax plans and do not support the plan coming from Brussels an EU regulations give the states the right to handle taxes in their country without any interference from the EU.

    6. Re:What? by dissy · · Score: 1

      If there are tech giant employees in your country, then you likely tax their income.

      Nope that is exactly the problem this suggestion tries to solve*. The company only pay income tax in the country of origin. So even if a company from Ireland(Google for example) sell stuff in other eu countries, all their income tax is paid in Ireland.

      So if I moved to Germany and worked for Google, I wouldn't have to pay any income tax at all to Germany? It's all paid to Ireland even though I don't live or work there?

      That just sounds *very* different to me.

      Here in the US we have to pay tax to the federal government and to both states, the one you reside in and the one you work in.

      Some states have agreements with others, usually near by intended for people that are close to the borders.
      In those cases you just pay the state you live in the full amount, and the two states figure out their shares between them.
      Otherwise we need to do two state tax returns as well as federal (and sometimes city, but that's residential based)

    7. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The tax system is broken. In theory someone should be paying 17% tax minimum, if you are in one of those countries.
      As some believed in sales/good/income this is the basis of most taxes. Then some fool decided IP and royalties would be treated more favorably, then some countries pulled sweet-heart deals to attract volume. Its broken. A 15% withholding tax is the obvious solution.
      EU should work out what percentage of worldwide revenue comes from the EU and tax/levy that, plus fair adjustments.

    8. Re:What? by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      And if product sales occur within your country, then that is also taxed.

      which is why they book all the sales throug Ireland regardless of where the sale is made in some absolute sense.

      But this new tax isn't about that. Instead it's about taxing the companies no matter where they are located.

      Yep!

      High tax countries are upset that large tech companies have avoided them

      No, this is 100% false. The large tech companies are not avoiding the "high tax" countries at all. They're doing tons of business there and making use of all the benefits of being in a high tax country but are using accounting tricks to avoid taxes.

      Literally no one is trying to tax companies that have avoided the country in question. But that's using the real definition of avoid as in "aviod" not the definition you use which seems to be exceptionally dependent on tax law and accouting intracies.

      Some countries are willing to be tax-competitive,

      That's a bullshit term.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    9. Re: What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. The EU sat out the digital revolution because the gerontocracy in power at the time thought it to be a fad. Now there is no way Europe can ever recover the time lost. Having the US leading them is ideologically unacceptable for those who see themselves as the rightful masters of the whole world (as De Gaulle said). They will fight tooth and nail and ultimately lose.

    10. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We all know that it's the consumer that will end up paying this tax anyways.

    11. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So if I moved to Germany and worked for Google, I wouldn't have to pay any income tax at all to Germany? It's all paid to Ireland even though I don't live or work there?

      That's tax on your income, not Google's.

    12. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As someone going through similar sort of situation you described - it might be so, depends on your actual arrangement and how you do it.

      Long story short, in EU you can choose to pay income tax either in your country of residence or registration country of your company. Social security tax is the one which must be paid in country of residence.

    13. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats not the same thing, that is individual level tax. We are talking about taxes on corporate level profiteering, which the corporations are always trying to dodge paying their fair share instead of the cost of being allowed to do business in said countries. If the corporations don't like paying taxes they are welcome to not serve the countries that expect them to pay what they owe.

    14. Re:What? by dissy · · Score: 1

      That's tax on your income, not Google's.

      Of course, that was the question asked and being answered.

      If there are tech giant employees in your country, then you likely tax their income.

      That's why I questioned the answer given, as it didn't make sense.

    15. Re:What? by dissy · · Score: 1

      Long story short, in EU you can choose to pay income tax either in your country of residence or registration country of your company. Social security tax is the one which must be paid in country of residence.

      Interesting, thank you for that explanation.

      Put that way it doesn't sound all too different from here then, other than the usual location type swaps (fed to eu, state to country)

      I got the impression it was always income tax paid to the country the company is in.
      But of course no government could stand to have taxes be so simple!

    16. Re: What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I live in X and sell, delivered via mail, to Y, I pay no taxes to Y. I use Y's public infrastructure to help to deliver my product. If everyone does what I do, Y goes broke, their people elects Hitler and ad things happen all around.

      My customer in Y might also declare legal residency in X, but just happen to "visit" Y 364 days a year.
      Y isnt getting taxes from my customer either. And that customer's is using a lot of Y's public infrastructure. That's how my assholery becomes "everyone".

  4. Some in the EU understand by AHuxley · · Score: 3, Interesting

    you can't tax something that can move out of the nation and out of the EU.
    Tax needs a captive product/service that has to stay in that nation.
    Low taxation is what attracted US brands to parts of the EU.
    When the EU places new tax the same US brands will just look for better tax rates globally.
    When the only attractive offer to stay in a nation was a low tax rate, don't remove the one thing keeping a brand in your nation.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    1. Re:Some in the EU understand by Hentes · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There are two reasons tech companies won't move out of the EU. One is the educated workforce, and the other is the data that has to stay on EU soil.

    2. Re:Some in the EU understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clearly you haven't yet heard of the joys of outsourcing and globalization (I guess you'd spell it "globalisation.. Hint: You can educate a workforce, and if said workforce does it for cheaper...) Welcome, friend.

    3. Re:Some in the EU understand by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      An educated workforce that needs a wage to keep working. When all the profits are lost to a new EU tax the value in the "educated workforce" is lost.
      Move to another advanced nation with better workers and a tax rate that welcomes investment and jobs.
      How much more tax are an average advanced nations "educated workforce" really worth?
      Some of the profits? Most of the profits? A total loss of all profit in that nation just to keep the "educated workforce" ?
      Would a company seeking low taxes to get the maximum profit now want to change to making a loss under a new EU tax?

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    4. Re:Some in the EU understand by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Block sites and brands a person in the EU wants to use globally to ensure EU taxes get paid?
      Replace non EU services products with EU only services and then force all EU users to enjoy EU taxed services.
      The US brands offer a user account for "free".
      A EU service has to pay to protect the data in the EU and pay a EU service tax? Thats not "free".

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    5. Re:Some in the EU understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It all sounds fine until eventually people elect Donald Trump.

    6. Re:Some in the EU understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      After slogging through your Randroidian posts, I find myself almost in favour of nationalisation.

    7. Re:Some in the EU understand by AHuxley · · Score: 1, Funny

      The German government getting reports of every use of online accounts and sending police out to interview the people who commented on the news?
      That kind of nationalisation AC?

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    8. Re:Some in the EU understand by aybiss · · Score: 1

      "all the profits are lost" :-D

      You really struggled with maths in school didn't you?

      --
      It's OK Bender, there's no such thing as 2.
    9. Re:Some in the EU understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You can't move selling stuff to EU citizens to outside of the EU.

      Sure, you could have your headquarters on the Bahamas or something, but if you want to sell something you pay for that privilege either via import taxes or via taxes of your local branch.

      > When the only attractive offer to stay in a nation was a low tax rate, don't remove the one thing keeping a brand in your nation.

      Bullshit. The only reason you normally don't do that is because companies can then go somewhere else with lower taxes. Good luck doing that if all countries agree to raise taxes at the same time.

    10. Re:Some in the EU understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you can't tax something that can move out of the nation and out of the EU.

      You think they would move out of the worlds largest market?
      Where do you think they get their money from?

      The tax avoidance is just greedy, they will make a hefty profit from EU even if they paid their taxes.
      If they leave the market they will not only get rid of all those profits, they will also open up a very significant market to competitors that can use EU as their base and then target the rest of the world.

      In this case EU has all the power and the companies can either do as they are told or GTFO and see their profits drop as a rock.

    11. Re:Some in the EU understand by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      You'd think that Europe of all places would know the stupidity of blood and soil arguments, and know that the only way to progress is globally. Tying people to the land is not only folly, it leads to genocide. Free movement of people and data is the only way forward in the 21st century.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    12. Re:Some in the EU understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you can't tax something that can move out of the nation and out of the EU.

      You can. That's part of the business environment created by the state. How the companies react to it is their business. This way we all stay free.

    13. Re:Some in the EU understand by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      AC 3 nations already not want the tax. Thats not a very unified EU position re your "either do as they are told or".

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    14. Re: Some in the EU understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The EU thinks it has the power... Until the US says otherwise. They hoped for a tidal wave of Dem votes to cripple Trump's presidency but it did not materialize so bigwigs in Brussels are now worried... And rightly so. :)

    15. Re:Some in the EU understand by Errol+backfiring · · Score: 1

      But the main reason is tax avoidance.

      --
      Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
    16. Re:Some in the EU understand by Cederic · · Score: 1

      I fear the person to whom you replied doesn't even understand the issue, and is thus entirely incapable of comprehending the implications of the European response to it.

      Hopefully your response will educate them.

  5. Follow the money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Irland is running out of money and they agree to pay 2,000,000 euros for EVERY job for 'provided' by Apple.
    This is :
    The worst waste of public money ever
    Or money laundering

    You decide.

    1. Re:Follow the money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Easy to waste or malinvest money when you don't have to work for it and can coerce others to give you more.

  6. France irked by small nimble countries. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Different small countries in Europe have always had to have different ways of making a living or find themselves feeder economies to the bigger countries. The EU has provided them with a fairer playing field or at least opportunities to take advantage of opportunities. The tech giants have exploited the entire world's inability to keep up with their fancy tax minimisation schemes. Some of the smaller countries have exploited the resulting anomalies as opportunities.
    France has long harboured the desire to get more tax from the tech giants and gain economically. They want to do this on an EU basis, however this is largely a self serving zero-sum game of taking from others in the EU. The smaller countries don't want to do this and point out that the problem is world wide - if higher taxes are introduced on FANG and other tech giants only in the EU then likely there will be fewer tech giants basing themselves in the EU and less innovation.

    The OECD is taking a world wide approach to dealing with the issue of fair taxation of tech profits. The OECD intends to report in 2020 on this. Probably this will result in a fairer system assuming that the US would be dictator can be bought off. France wants to change the frame of reference to the EU where they can more easily push their agenda.

    Now there will be a battle of wills. France's position is strengthened by Britain's idiotic exit from the EU.

    1. Re:France irked by small nimble countries. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No there won't. As long as there is revenue and profit they will come. You don't stop making business out of principle because your taxes go up.

  7. Use low tax havens if you wish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But when your London sales office is burgled or your ware house in the UK catches fire call on the Irish police or the Luxembourg fire service for help.

    Don't pay for services - don't get to use them