On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 23:14:13 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

Just watch the Nat-bots scramble to avoid discussion on this one:
Look at:
http://insights.nzherald.co.nz/article/nz-multinational-tax-gap
then click the Next button to compare with more data . . .

Not forgotten Rich. It is an international problem where
multinationals arrange for their subsidiaries in the lowest-taxed
countries to earn the majority of their world-wide profits. Do your
research and figure out how this is done and what the NZ Government
can do about it that has not already been tried (both Labour and
National). There is simply little that can be done that cannot be
countered from outside NZ.

Note that the problem is not with revenue (other than GST revenue is
not taxed). The problem is profit (which is taxed). The companies
named in that article pay no tax because they make no profit here. Not >stated, but my guess is that each of those companies has their parent
company as their biggest supplier or creditor. You should be able to
work out from this why they are not as profitable as other companies
with similar revenue levels.

The problem has been around since the Lange-led Labour Governments >progressively dismantled import licencing and foreign-exchange limits
and therefore it is a longstanding and enduring through both National
and Labour governments.

Do you have a solution Rich? If you do don't forget your cites to
back up any fact claims you may make, and think carefully about why
past Labour governments have not implemented them to solve this
longstanding problem.

Fred <dryrot@hotmail.com> wrote:

On 17-Jun-16 3:39 PM, Tony wrote:

Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:

On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 23:14:13 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

Just watch the Nat-bots scramble to avoid discussion on this one:
Look at:
http://insights.nzherald.co.nz/article/nz-multinational-tax-gap
then click the Next button to compare with more data . . .

Not forgotten Rich. It is an international problem where
multinationals arrange for their subsidiaries in the lowest-taxed
countries to earn the majority of their world-wide profits. Do your
research and figure out how this is done and what the NZ Government
can do about it that has not already been tried (both Labour and
National). There is simply little that can be done that cannot be
countered from outside NZ.

Note that the problem is not with revenue (other than GST revenue is
not taxed). The problem is profit (which is taxed). The companies
named in that article pay no tax because they make no profit here. Not >>>> stated, but my guess is that each of those companies has their parent
company as their biggest supplier or creditor. You should be able to
work out from this why they are not as profitable as other companies
with similar revenue levels.

The problem has been around since the Lange-led Labour Governments
progressively dismantled import licencing and foreign-exchange limits
and therefore it is a longstanding and enduring through both National
and Labour governments.

Do you have a solution Rich? If you do don't forget your cites to
back up any fact claims you may make, and think carefully about why
past Labour governments have not implemented them to solve this
longstanding problem.


--
Crash McBash

Crash
Spot on - my experience working for large multinational exposed me to this >>>very
isuue. It is the reason why American companies have departments (usually >>>called
Treasury) whose charter is to minimise corporate tax and do so without >>>breaking
US or other countries tax laws (it is a tricky balancing act but completely >>> legal). It is also the reason why many New Zealand subsidiaries run two sets
of
books, one for the local tax requirements (for obvious reasons) and one for >>>the
company head office which shows the actual profit delivered to the >>>corporation
because local profit will look much worse than it actually would be were it >>>not
for US tax requirements - this is caused every bit as much by US tax laws as
it
is by ours.
By the way Rich has had this explained to him before!
Tony

Some companies would exit the country if they cannot transfer pricing, >>leaving minimal staff in the host country further reducing the tax paid. >>It's not just a simple tweak. Best thing NZ can do is reduce company tax >>rates - make them attractive to companies.

In principle I agree, it raises other issues unfortunately. But anything that >makes the economy strong and generates jobs is worth looking at.
Tony

Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:

On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 23:14:13 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

Just watch the Nat-bots scramble to avoid discussion on this one:
Look at:
http://insights.nzherald.co.nz/article/nz-multinational-tax-gap
then click the Next button to compare with more data . . .

Not forgotten Rich. It is an international problem where
multinationals arrange for their subsidiaries in the lowest-taxed
countries to earn the majority of their world-wide profits. Do your >>research and figure out how this is done and what the NZ Government
can do about it that has not already been tried (both Labour and
National). There is simply little that can be done that cannot be >>countered from outside NZ.

Note that the problem is not with revenue (other than GST revenue is
not taxed). The problem is profit (which is taxed). The companies
named in that article pay no tax because they make no profit here. Not >>stated, but my guess is that each of those companies has their parent >>company as their biggest supplier or creditor. You should be able to
work out from this why they are not as profitable as other companies
with similar revenue levels.

The problem has been around since the Lange-led Labour Governments >>progressively dismantled import licencing and foreign-exchange limits
and therefore it is a longstanding and enduring through both National
and Labour governments.

Do you have a solution Rich? If you do don't forget your cites to
back up any fact claims you may make, and think carefully about why
past Labour governments have not implemented them to solve this >>longstanding problem.


--
Crash McBash

Crash
Spot on - my experience working for large multinational exposed me to this very
isuue. It is the reason why American companies have departments (usually called
Treasury) whose charter is to minimise corporate tax and do so without breaking
US or other countries tax laws (it is a tricky balancing act but completely >legal). It is also the reason why many New Zealand subsidiaries run two sets of
books, one for the local tax requirements (for obvious reasons) and one for the
company head office which shows the actual profit delivered to the corporation >because local profit will look much worse than it actually would be were it not
for US tax requirements - this is caused every bit as much by US tax laws as it
is by ours.
By the way Rich has had this explained to him before!
Tony

On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 09:49:42 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:

On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 23:14:13 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

Just watch the Nat-bots scramble to avoid discussion on this one:
Look at:
http://insights.nzherald.co.nz/article/nz-multinational-tax-gap
then click the Next button to compare with more data . . .

Not forgotten Rich. It is an international problem where
multinationals arrange for their subsidiaries in the lowest-taxed
countries to earn the majority of their world-wide profits. Do your >>research and figure out how this is done and what the NZ Government
can do about it that has not already been tried (both Labour and
National). There is simply little that can be done that cannot be >>countered from outside NZ.

Note that the problem is not with revenue (other than GST revenue is
not taxed). The problem is profit (which is taxed). The companies
named in that article pay no tax because they make no profit here. Not >>stated, but my guess is that each of those companies has their parent >>company as their biggest supplier or creditor. You should be able to
work out from this why they are not as profitable as other companies
with similar revenue levels.

The problem has been around since the Lange-led Labour Governments >>progressively dismantled import licencing and foreign-exchange limits
and therefore it is a longstanding and enduring through both National
and Labour governments.

Do you have a solution Rich? If you do don't forget your cites to
back up any fact claims you may make, and think carefully about why
past Labour governments have not implemented them to solve this >>longstanding problem.

Some large companies in fiercely competitive markets make very little
profit.

A company can survive on no profit at all as long as there is enough
turnover to pay all the bills. The good news is that everyone employed
by the comany still gets paid, and tax is still payable on all the
wages and salaries. What a company cannot to for long of course is to
run at a loss.

Every time a company goes bankrupt or is forced offshore, the
government loses out even if the company itself pays little or no tax.

Private businesses, both large and small, are essential to any civil
society and all governments should be trying very hard not to annoy
them.

I worked for a multinational for around 20 years - in NZ, the US and
the UK. My experience is that they have little tolerance of poor profitability in any one country unless:

- tax rates on profits are low
- transfer pricing is possible to subsidiaries in other countries with
high tax rates
- If neither of the above are true they will pull out in favour of licencing/franchising a local company for their products and/or
services

Every time a company goes bankrupt or is forced offshore, the
government loses out even if the company itself pays little or no tax.

Private businesses, both large and small, are essential to any civil
society and all governments should be trying very hard not to annoy
them.

Correct.

--
Crash McBash

On 17/06/2016 9:26 p.m., Crash wrote:

I worked for a multinational for around 20 years - in NZ, the US and
the UK. My experience is that they have little tolerance of poor
profitability in any one country unless:

- tax rates on profits are low
- transfer pricing is possible to subsidiaries in other countries with
high tax rates
- If neither of the above are true they will pull out in favour of
licencing/franchising a local company for their products and/or
services

Every time a company goes bankrupt or is forced offshore, the
government loses out even if the company itself pays little or no tax.

Private businesses, both large and small, are essential to any civil
society and all governments should be trying very hard not to annoy
them.

Correct.



--
Crash McBash

Fuck multinationals, they are the bastards responsible for the gardening
ban !

https://www.reddit.com/r/newzealand/comments/4or2o3/my_garden_was_seized_today_fuck_you_rnz_you/?limit=500

On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 13:29:33 +1200, victor <user1@example.net> wrote:

On 17/06/2016 9:26 p.m., Crash wrote:

I worked for a multinational for around 20 years - in NZ, the US and
the UK. My experience is that they have little tolerance of poor
profitability in any one country unless:

- tax rates on profits are low
- transfer pricing is possible to subsidiaries in other countries with
high tax rates
- If neither of the above are true they will pull out in favour of
licencing/franchising a local company for their products and/or
services

Every time a company goes bankrupt or is forced offshore, the
government loses out even if the company itself pays little or no tax. >>>>
Private businesses, both large and small, are essential to any civil
society and all governments should be trying very hard not to annoy
them.

Correct.



--
Crash McBash

Fuck multinationals, they are the bastards responsible for the gardening
ban !

https://www.reddit.com/r/newzealand/comments/4or2o3/my_garden_was_seized_today_fuck_you_rnz_you/?limit=500

If this isn't complete bullshit, it was a government department that
sent people in to rip out the plants, not some multinational.

Bill.

If this isn't complete bullshit, it was a government department that
sent people in to rip out the plants, not some multinational.

Bill.

More like a council did it.
They're pretty good at being draconian without law