Slashdot Mirror


France Considers Raising Taxes on Internet Giants (reuters.com)

France's Finance Minister has drafted a new law to tax internet giants, reports Reuters: A three percent tax on the French revenue of large internet companies could yield 500 million euros [$568 million U.S. dollars or £429 million] per year, French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire said on Sunday. Le Maire told Le Parisien newspaper the tax is aimed at companies with worldwide digital revenue of at least 750 million and French revenue of more than 25 million euros.

He said the tax would target some 30 companies, mostly American, but also Chinese, German, Spanish and British, as well as one French firm and several firms with French origins that have been bought by foreign companies. The paper listed Google, Amazon, Facebook and Apple (the four so-called "GAFA" companies) but also Uber, Airbnb, Booking and French online advertising specialist Criteo as targets. "A taxation system for the 21st century has to built on what has value today, and that is data," Le Maire said. He added it is also a matter of fiscal justice, as the digital giants pay some 14 percentage points less tax than European small-and-medium sized companies.

The draft law will be presented to the cabinet on Wednesday, and then presented to France's parliament, Reuters reports.

"The tax would also target the sales of personal data for advertising purposes."

25 of 302 comments (clear)

  1. All needed to be known by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    "He added it is also a matter of fiscal justice, as the digital giants pay some 14 percentage points less tax than European small-and-medium sized companies."

  2. Magic free money by Papaspud · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm sure they won't just add that 3 % back to the costs of their services in France, nope that money will just magically appear.

    --
    Everything above is my opinion....YMMV
    1. Re:Magic free money by Mr.+Dollar+Ton · · Score: 4, Informative

      They won't because they can't. Here's an explainer, with TL;DR section.

      https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~ref/ec...

    2. Re:Magic free money by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm sure they won't just add that 3 % back to the costs of their services in France

      So.....advertisers will pay more? Tell me, where is the drawback again?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re: Magic free money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If they could raise prices 3% with no consequences, they would have already done it. That's a given. So no, they will not simply raise prices. It may change the optimal price/volume point, and so indirectly change prices (which could be up or down, if they want to claw back profits by volume, they may reduce prices).

    4. Re:Magic free money by Mr.+Dollar+Ton · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You fail to consider the market for FB services. It is not what the users are *paying*, it is what advertisers are. It is business oriented, so the elasticity of demand and the power to negotiate is significantly better than what a consumer has. So, believe me, nothing close to full passing of the tax is even close to happening. And since the amount is not even all that big, it ain't getting passed on the consumer at all.

      Not to mention that if a service is a monopoly, then regulation should not be optional, but mandatory. Monopolies are always bad.

    5. Re:Magic free money by Hognoxious · · Score: 3, Funny

      Because if adverts cost more then companies will be able to afford less, of course.

      Hang on ...

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  3. You jealous? by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The French have fast trains. The US does not.
    The French have access to health insurance regardless of means -- if you lose your job and get sick, you won't end up deep in medical debt.
    French universities are covered by the government, no need to save $200,000 in school funds starting when your kid is born.

    What does the US have? Endless war, mass incarceration -- the money is used to do violence instead of helping fellow Americans.

    1. Re: You jealous? by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, the US can blow up any country in the world while leaving its own citizens in the lurch (or in prison, or addicted to opiates, or dying of cancer from breathing the fumes from military burn pits). YAY AMERICA!

    2. Re:You jealous? by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 4, Informative

      France is a nuclear weapons state of its own right -- I doubt it will have a problem defending itself against external attack.

    3. Re: You jealous? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 3, Funny

      The US has fast aircraft carriers. Any world government that is not concerned about us must be utter fools.

      Some countries are inland, you know. ;-p

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    4. Re:You jealous? by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The US pisses away a lot of money upholding petty, terrorist-sponsoring dictatorships and apartheid states in the Middle East -- this has nothing to do with the security of Europe. If the US wanted to, they could slash defense spending by 50% and still be safe.

    5. Re:You jealous? by Richard_at_work · · Score: 5, Informative

      The US wouldnt exist if it werent for the support of the French during your war of independence.

      I think France has done more than enough for the US, you ungrateful prick.

    6. Re:You jealous? by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The last war France won on its own, it still had a king. We bailed you out of your last 3 (including one in which you were completely occupied). I think we're even...

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    7. Re:You jealous? by HiThere · · Score: 4, Informative

      FWIW, the US was isolationist and largely pro-German during WWII until the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Then we quickly changed our minds. France had little or nothing to do with our participation. Even Britain was a secondary consideration, and much of the populace was anti-British. (Much, not only those with Irish ancestors.) This was apparently because the Germans were openly racist, and the British much less so.

      That said, there were prominent pro-British spokesmen (including FDR) as well as pro-Nazi (including Charles Lindberg). So isolationism was dominant. Until it wasn't practical any more.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  4. Re:Cant innovate, lets tax by xlsior · · Score: 5, Insightful

    France defaults to extra big taxation. Invest in France and enjoy that extra big tax. Who in France is getting all the new tax spending?

    People who need healthcare, people who enjoy decent public transportation and high-speed trains, people who work to live and not live to work?

  5. Re:Build that wall, sir. by jpaine619 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    We do not want to become like the EU. Mr. President, you have the nation's support.

    Yeah.. uh.. I'm a conservative, but I'd like to know why you think you get to make a blatant statement like that? There are a few people in this country who get the privilege of speaking for the nation.. President, Vice President, Speaker of the House, President Pro Tempore of the Senate (Congress is a coequal branch), and maybe Chief Justice of the Supreme Court (again, another coequal branch).

    You get to speak for yourself and maybe your family.. If you're the Mayor of some city, I suppose you could speak for your city... But what the hell? How offensive would you find it if some liberal said "On Behalf of the US, I'd like to say we all love socialism".. Yeah... the level of ego to elevate yourself to that position..... I didn't vote for you.. nobody did... Do you get to speak from royal birthright?

  6. Re:Cant innovate, lets tax by xlsior · · Score: 4, Informative

    Why the sudden need for more tax?
    What services suddenly need extra tax money?

    The French government deficit is projected to be 3.4% of GDP -- (By comparison, the US is projected to be 4.7% in 2019)
    Most countries recognize that having ever climbing deficits is a bad thing. They can either cut expenses, or raise taxes to make up for the shortfall. The French government is choosing the latter, aimed specifically at huge corporations that historically haven't been paying their fair share. Note that it's only targeting a percentage of their profits realized within France. If Apple, Google, Facebook and the others don't like it, they can always choose not to do business in France.

  7. Not dramatically fast .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Sure on my weekly trip to our HQ to Paris from Bordeaux (around 580km road distance), It takes 2 hours to get me at the center of Paris. "not dramatically fast compared to most other countries " you said ? Sure, let's see : Going from NYC to Pittsburgh that is around the same road distance of a Bordeaux-Paris, it will take you around 9 hours by train. Enjoy ! London to Glasgow, it's about 4 hours by train for around the same distance... Even with countries with fast trains you still get a major difference, Milano to Roma (573km) you will need around 3 hours ! 50% more .... sorry but I don't know in which planet (oops, country) you live in. If you wanted to bash TGV you could have gone for the comfort or the lack of connectivity on some east lines. But for the speed, the reliability or the price, no serriously get a clue.

    Same thing about strike, lately train had more to suffer from impact of update of rail switches to full automatic that caused multiple black out at major paris station thant from any strikes. When there are major strikes, you know why trains are still ok in France ? Because, people will take the train to go to paris to have a huge demonstration ;-)

    Nice French bashing and cliché combo attempt ;-)

  8. Re:Europeans are poverty stuck, blind, & in de by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Riddle me this... the places in the US that pride themselves on "light regulations" also tend to have the highest incarceration rates. Whereas incarceration rates in Europe tend to be 1/3 to 1/4 of the US average with similar or lower violent crime rates. If the US puts so many people in prison (proportional to population), is it really so lightly regulated?

    The difference is that Europe is somewhat more economically regulated than the US, but those regulations generally affect larger corporations, not the average citizen. The US is home of Draconian social regulations that put people in prison, ruin their lives with arrest records, etc and so forth.

  9. Fair, but... by bradley13 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In all fairness, this should have nothing to do with the Internet giants. Given the massive degree of internationalization today, *all* companies should be taxed where they generate their revenue, rather than allowing stupid games with tax havens.

    That said, what France is doing is borderline corrupt: targetting specific companies that (they think) represent untapped sources of sweet, sweet tax money. France is basically broke, attempts to further tax the populace led to the yellow-vests, and cutting bureaucracy or public services is politically impossible. They need more bread and circuses to stave off the collapse...

    --
    Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
    1. Re:Fair, but... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Nothing corrupt about noticing that a bunch of companies are all pulling the same tax-dodge and trying to do something about it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  10. Re:Yup. by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 4, Informative

    The problem is not only in tax rates, but in the fact that tax laws have loopholes that allow profits to be shifted to countries where that profit is only lightly taxed. In it's simplest form a company will shift all of its IP to a tax haven, then charge all of its national subsidiaries a license fee for the use of that IP, in order to reduce their profits close to zero. Many, many companies do this.

    --
    If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
  11. revenue taxing - finally by Tom · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The key word is not "3%" nor is it "Internet giants" - the key word is revenue.

    This is what should've happened a decade ago. Taxing revenue instead of profits puts a clean shot right between the eyes of the majority of tax evasion schemes. It's a step long overdue.

    And before the typical neo-conservative trolls shout it down: Remember that everyone BUT corporations is taxed by revenue, not profits. My income tax is based on my income, not on what's left at the end of the month. And so is yours. If we can survive that type of taxation, so can multinational corporations.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  12. Re:Build that wall, sir. by prefec2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So you do not want that big companies pay taxes? Strange.