We also state that these figures are not definitive, that they are estimated figures. Others are welcome to come up with their own methodology. You are welcome to come up with your own numbers.
-
-
Replying to @taxwatch @DanNeidle and
But rather than do that, you just assert that most profit is declared in the US (facts clearly dispute that) and resort to name calling. SAD!
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @taxwatch @MForstater and
You keep saying that I said most profit is declared in the US. I didn't.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DanNeidle @taxwatch and
I'll ask you again: if a US company makes $100 of sales to a UK customer, how much of that do you think the UK should tax?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DanNeidle @MForstater and
The profit. Now what is the profit? That's a very good question. MNEs answer is that the profit in the UK is negligible. We think that understates the position - based on research of the companies own numbers.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @taxwatch @DanNeidle and
Now you happen to disagree with our estimate of profit - which of course is your right. But rather than engage with the issue, you just assert we don't know what we are talking about. Which is a little silly.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @taxwatch @DanNeidle and
No. This is not about someone happening to disagree on your estimate of profits. It is that the methodology you use to come up with UK 'tax avoidance' estimate fundamentally misunderstands or misrepresents the way the tax system works.pic.twitter.com/Az60FAah2h
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @MForstater @DanNeidle and
Very willing to read your alternative proposal for estimating corporate profits in the UK.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @taxwatch @DanNeidle and
We are talking about your report published today. Claiming to expose tax avoidance. On the front page of a major newspaper. The methodology fundamentally misunderstands and/or misrepresents the basis of international taxation as being linked to location of customers. It isn't.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
The methodology seems to assume that the "correct" non profit shifting result is that design, product development, manufacturing, global mktg, finance etc should all be zero profit activities, as *all* profit must be allocated to customer location. & anything else is "avoidance"?
-
-
Replying to @MForstater @taxwatch and
Quite. And George then justifies that with this, which is just gibberish:pic.twitter.com/jD8SkL1Myz
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.