If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Age (Melbourne))   Google made a billion dollars in Australia last year, and paid $174,000 tax   (theage.com.au) divider line 68
    More: Scary, digital economy, Malcolm Turnbull, tax bill, transfer pricing, Google, National University of Ireland  
•       •       •

2831 clicks; posted to Geek » on 26 May 2012 at 6:05 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



68 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-05-26 12:26:29 AM
That's $74,176, not $174,000.
 
2012-05-26 12:49:00 AM
They paid more than that. The thing is, the money went into lobbying to make sure they didn't pay what they were supposed to.
 
2012-05-26 12:55:43 AM
Evil incarnate
 
2012-05-26 01:17:18 AM
They're truly a national treasure.
 
2012-05-26 01:21:02 AM
"Google totally made a billion dollars in Australia... from our trillions of Australian advertisers who pay a few pennies per ad-click, and our quadrillions of Australian citizens who clicked thousands of times per advertisement... so pay your taxes, you totally evil corporation!"
 
2012-05-26 01:43:52 AM
They should get a tax cut here since they'll be hurting with all that money they have to pay in Australia
 
2012-05-26 02:32:24 AM
Don't blame me, I use aussievista.
 
2012-05-26 03:34:13 AM
You know, corporations really need to watch themselves. If they undermind a government by not paying- the very protections they enjoy will dissapear, leaving thuggish gangs who would have no compunction blowing them up.
 
2012-05-26 06:13:48 AM

violentsalvation: Don't blame me, I use aussievista.


Ask Bruce is so much better.
 
2012-05-26 06:22:17 AM
software and pharmaceutical companies are major abusers of transfer pricing loopholes related to intellectual property, usually routed through Ireland

the article also names facebook and apple; other abusers include Amazon, Linkedin, Microsoft, and Glaxosmithkline.
 
2012-05-26 06:54:06 AM
It's the American dream*!


(*Dream not available to citizens of America.)
 
2012-05-26 06:55:03 AM
I believe the question is whether or not Google made the $ billions in Australia or from Australia. Also, what the profit margin was on those $ billions.

My understanding of how it works is that if Google has an Australian branch, and Australian advertisers paid the Australian branch for advertising, then the Australian branch pays Australian taxes on its profits.

But if the Australian advertisers paid Google's, say, Indonesian branch for advertising, then the Indonesian branch pays Indonesian taxes on its profits and Australia gets nothing.

You can bet some country, somewhere, is getting its cut from each $ of Google's profits.
 
2012-05-26 07:24:00 AM

Darth_Lukecash: You know, corporations really need to watch themselves. If they undermind a government by not paying- the very protections they enjoy will dissapear, leaving thuggish gangs who would have no compunction blowing them up.


THIS.

The 'free market' is a complete construction of the modern state.

And what these companies are doing is the same as "dumping" in commodities or products.

How many millions of young writers don't have jobs due to Craigslist killing millions of marginal regional newspapers?

How many bookstores - from small to large - were killed by amazon?

How many record stores - from chains to independents - are gone?

And in how many small towns has wal mart come in and turned owner-operator stores (pharmacies, dry goods, hunting, music) into shells, turning pillars of the community into department 'managers', without the town benefiting one bit because they gave a 20 year tax break on the flattening of fifteen acres of forest outside the historic town core, stealing all the regular foot traffic from the source of the rest of their independent businesses - and every town for miles around...

And all those rents not getting paid, all those points of view getting squeezed around the one way of doing things imposed from beyond the boarders - the elimination of millions of middle-class stakeholder jobs into a semigelatinous mass of low-wage consumers. Where we once had to have a couple of hundred persons of quality per thousand folks in every town in the nation, we now can 'get by' with dozens. Depriving ourselves of the autonomy we need. Our children don't have role models and community leaders because we have outsourced the jobs that would keep such people from migrating into distant cities. Those who might prove more troublesome - schoolteachers and clerics - are under systemic attack by political parties for their exigency - not out of any true desire to reform education or support or deny faith.



And this has been going on since the 1970s. This is 40+ years of 'conservative' squeezing, put on steroids by the computer age. This isn't value creation - it's wealth extraction. This isn't making the lives of more people better - it's the undercutting of the middle class in order to 'squeeze out' a better 'standard of living' for the upper class and the working classes. And as the wealth squeezes out through tax loopholes into opaque-banking-system nations, we all lose out, because our ability to have a creative and dynamic economy is ossified by the removal of responsibility from our local governance. As we grow more enraged at our own local impotence, we claw and rend the layers above us who, we are persuaded, have worsened our standard of living and need to 'get out of the way' to allow us to keep more of our money (so that we can give it away to our distant business-owners).
 
2012-05-26 07:30:16 AM

SomeAmerican: I believe the question is whether or not Google made the $ billions in Australia or from Australia. Also, what the profit margin was on those $ billions.

My understanding of how it works is that if Google has an Australian branch, and Australian advertisers paid the Australian branch for advertising, then the Australian branch pays Australian taxes on its profits.

But if the Australian advertisers paid Google's, say, Indonesian branch for advertising, then the Indonesian branch pays Indonesian taxes on its profits and Australia gets nothing.

You can bet some country, somewhere, is getting its cut from each $ of Google's profits.


Their marketing isn't that well targeted - at least here in the Antipodes, I'm in New Zealand and the vast majority of commercials I see on YouTube are for American companies. They lately seem to be dominated by telecommunications companies that aren't in operation in my part of the world. Maybe Google is padding out the audience.
 
2012-05-26 07:32:24 AM

Darth_Lukecash: You know, corporations really need to watch themselves. If they undermind a government by not paying- the very protections they enjoy will dissapear, leaving thuggish gangs who would have no compunction blowing them up.


Oh please. Nobody is better able to use that money against them than the gubmint. If they pay more in tax, then that is just that much more we can pay to reward welfare queens for squirting out an enless stream of career criminals, which is where we get thugs to begin with.

In other news, how DARE Google keep some of what it earned!
 
2012-05-26 07:43:30 AM
Given that this bloke is going to be the next treasurer of the country and will be running the tax department, Google might be wise to pucker up and start giving answers. We know they think they are above the law and governments - will be nice to see Turnbull take them down a peg.
 
2012-05-26 07:46:55 AM

SevenizGud: In other news, how DARE Google keep some of what it earned!


Yes, thinking that companies should pay a reasonable tax rate to pay for the protections they enjoy, such as a strong judicial system to enforce contracts, is exactly the same as being upset that Google made a profit and advocating for a 100% tax. Your ability to frame complex issues succinctly is an inspiration to us all.
 
2012-05-26 08:37:07 AM

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: SevenizGud: In other news, how DARE Google keep some of what it earned!

Yes, thinking that companies should pay a reasonable tax rate to pay for the protections they enjoy, such as a strong judicial system to enforce contracts, is exactly the same as being upset that Google made a profit and advocating for a 100% tax. Your ability to frame complex issues succinctly is an inspiration to us all.


Nowhere does it say how much googles profits were. If they made one million after paying bills and employees and equipment. Then depreciate their assets, 75k seems like a legit number.

/the article doesn't give enough info
 
2012-05-26 09:18:06 AM
Evil corporations my ass. Corporations pay taxes according to the tax laws written by the local, state and federal legislators you elect and the minions they appoint. They cut deals with major employers to attract them to set up shop in cities, counties and states - because in so doing, those evil corporations employ lots of individual taxpayers who do pay taxes and increase tax coffers at all levels.

If you think they should pay more taxes, get the tax laws changed. Then be prepared for the law of unintended consequences to kick in when they pull up stakes and move their business and jobs to a more friendly environment and your local economy loses a bunch of jobs.

In the meantime, quit falling for headlines and sound bites.
 
2012-05-26 09:23:42 AM

BlameBush: If you think they should pay more taxes, get the tax laws changed. Then be prepared for the law of unintended consequences to kick in when they pull up stakes and move their business and jobs to a more friendly environment and your local economy loses a bunch of jobs.


So in other words be like Illinois and give big companies special treatment everytime they extort threaten to move from Illinois every time they ask for a tax break.
 
2012-05-26 09:33:54 AM
I guess it depends if on if you're ready to explain to your community why hundreds of your citizens lost jobs because the company moved - or to your citizens why you had to cut services because of the reduced tax base. It becomes a one sided game of chicken, where the only possible loser is the community. Not saying it's right. Just saying it is how business is done these days.
 
2012-05-26 09:39:55 AM

BlameBush: I guess it depends if on if you're ready to explain to your community why hundreds of your citizens lost jobs because the company moved - or to your citizens why you had to cut services because of the reduced tax base. It becomes a one sided game of chicken, where the only possible loser is the community. Not saying it's right. Just saying it is how business is done these days.


I know. But it's incredibly sad and very unproductive in the long run. And in the end, the only winner is the employer getting the special tax breaks no one else gets.

But it's also time that these tactics get called out as the extortion tactics they are.
 
2012-05-26 09:40:23 AM
Or, in other words since it was legal...

img1.fark.net Australia only collected $174k of taxes from Google's $1B revenue

Change the laws to not allow them to do the things you are complaining about them doing.
 
2012-05-26 09:41:48 AM

Sarcastic Fringehead: Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: SevenizGud: In other news, how DARE Google keep some of what it earned!

Yes, thinking that companies should pay a reasonable tax rate to pay for the protections they enjoy, such as a strong judicial system to enforce contracts, is exactly the same as being upset that Google made a profit and advocating for a 100% tax. Your ability to frame complex issues succinctly is an inspiration to us all.

Nowhere does it say how much googles profits were. If they made one million after paying bills and employees and equipment. Then depreciate their assets, 75k seems like a legit number.

/the article doesn't give enough info


Google has a 33% profit margin before taxes, according to its annual report.

it is possible that Google's Australian ops have only a 0.1% profit margin, but not very likely.

the UK complains about this as well; in 2009 Google paid just $1 million in taxes on $2 billion in revenue.

Link
 
2012-05-26 09:43:21 AM

Fooshards: Or, in other words since it was legal...

[img1.fark.net image 54x11] Australia only collected $174k of taxes from Google's $1B revenue

Change the laws to not allow them to do the things you are complaining about them doing.


you automatically assume they are following the law?

how cute.
 
2012-05-26 09:48:29 AM

BlameBush: I guess it depends if on if you're ready to explain to your community why hundreds of your citizens lost jobs because the company moved - or to your citizens why you had to cut services because of the reduced tax base. It becomes a one sided game of chicken, where the only possible loser is the community. Not saying it's right. Just saying it is how business is done these days.


if certain tax breaks are only for certain employers, that's not a free market. its the state picking the winners and losers, aka an affront to capitalism.
 
2012-05-26 09:51:21 AM

dumbobruni: Fooshards: Or, in other words since it was legal...

[img1.fark.net image 54x11] Australia only collected $174k of taxes from Google's $1B revenue

Change the laws to not allow them to do the things you are complaining about them doing.

you automatically assume they are following the law?

how cute.


Frankly yes. The article states that they were complying with local tax law, and there is no further mention of alleged illegal activity that will be followed up on to collect more tax. They were just whining that their tax law sucks and they want companies to pay more.

Wanna know how to get companies to pay more? By not begging like panhandlers. Legislate it, and come after them if they dont.
 
2012-05-26 09:54:57 AM

Darth_Lukecash: You know, corporations really need to watch themselves. If they undermind a government by not paying- the very protections they enjoy will dissapear, leaving thuggish gangs who would have no compunction blowing them up.


Ha! You think none of those thuggish gangs would be bought and paid for by the corporations themselves?
 
2012-05-26 10:00:57 AM

Fooshards: dumbobruni: Fooshards: Or, in other words since it was legal...

[img1.fark.net image 54x11] Australia only collected $174k of taxes from Google's $1B revenue

Change the laws to not allow them to do the things you are complaining about them doing.

you automatically assume they are following the law?

how cute.

Frankly yes. The article states that they were complying with local tax law, and there is no further mention of alleged illegal activity that will be followed up on to collect more tax. They were just whining that their tax law sucks and they want companies to pay more.

Wanna know how to get companies to pay more? By not begging like panhandlers. Legislate it, and come after them if they dont.


who said Google was in complaince? the news source? the australian government? lets see here......

FTA: Google said it abided by relevant taxation laws.

once again, how cute.

also, from FTA:

Assistant Treasurer David Bradbury said transfer pricing legislation introduced this week to Parliament would ''ensure that multi-national companies pay their fair share of tax'' and would address multi-national companies shifting profits within their companies to avoid paying tax.

instead of whining, they are actually going about changing the law.

cue the whining from fark independents aka "tax cheats"
 
2012-05-26 10:07:25 AM
if certain tax breaks are only for certain employers, that's not a free market. its the state picking the winners and losers, aka an affront to capitalism

Not all corporations are created equal. The more attractive to a municipality .a corporation is, the bigger and better the incentives will be. If you're starting a company with 10 jobs, you're not gonna get near the tax breaks that a company bringing 100 jobs will get. If you grow your company to be a 100 job provider, you are in a position to bargain.
 
2012-05-26 10:10:05 AM

BlameBush: if certain tax breaks are only for certain employers, that's not a free market. its the state picking the winners and losers, aka an affront to capitalism

Not all corporations are created equal. The more attractive to a municipality .a corporation is, the bigger and better the incentives will be. If you're starting a company with 10 jobs, you're not gonna get near the tax breaks that a company bringing 100 jobs will get. If you grow your company to be a 100 job provider, you are in a position to bargain.


But you do realize it's contrary to a free market correct.

It's ok if you want to defend this practice but you have to admit that this goes against everything the free market stands for.
 
2012-05-26 10:15:53 AM
I know. But it's incredibly sad and very unproductive in the long run. And in the end, the only winner is the employer getting the special tax breaks no one else gets.

But it's also time that these tactics get called out as the extortion tactics they are.


Make no mistake: States and municipalities create the tax breaks to attract corporations. They wouldn't do it if they weren't gaining as well. As I said earlier, they are gaining more in property taxes (new jobs mean new residents), state and local income tax, sales taxes, and every other tax they charge. Instead of getting it from the corporation they get it from the employees who live, work and spend their paychecks in the community - and from the extra jobs created by that extra spending. It's a much bigger picture to consider than just what taxes the corporation pays.
 
2012-05-26 10:17:57 AM

Mrtraveler01: BlameBush: If you think they should pay more taxes, get the tax laws changed. Then be prepared for the law of unintended consequences to kick in when they pull up stakes and move their business and jobs to a more friendly environment and your local economy loses a bunch of jobs.

So in other words be like Illinois and give big companies special treatment everytime they extort threaten to move from Illinois every time they ask for a tax break.


Or just not tax everyone so much to begin with.
 
2012-05-26 10:22:28 AM

CujoQuarrel: Mrtraveler01: BlameBush: If you think they should pay more taxes, get the tax laws changed. Then be prepared for the law of unintended consequences to kick in when they pull up stakes and move their business and jobs to a more friendly environment and your local economy loses a bunch of jobs.

So in other words be like Illinois and give big companies special treatment everytime they extort threaten to move from Illinois every time they ask for a tax break.

Or just not tax everyone so much to begin with.


what is a reasonable tax rate then? the answer isn't zero
 
2012-05-26 10:33:33 AM
But you do realize it's contrary to a free market correct.

It's ok if you want to defend this practice but you have to admit that this goes against everything the free market stands for.


I'm not necessarily defending the practice, just trying to bring to light that the corporate tax rate does not tell the whole story. Call it what you will, but it's short sighted and disenguous to say the corporations are to blame for the tax rate they pay. They have something communities and states want. That's why any time you hear of a major business investment, there is always competition between states and cities in states to get that company to set up shop in their domain. It's not just quality of life and the arts that get corporate headquarters to change homes or major employers to move. They are in business to make a profit and tax dollars saved means more $$ for other purposes or for profit. That is capitalism defined - make $$$.

Another thing to consider is that when a major employer comes to a community it often gives to community charities and supports local causes and events. Their presence and dollars make real things that otherwise might be impossible or too expensive to attempt. While this sounds like cheerleading, it's not. It's just a discussion meant to provoke consideration of more than just a headline.
 
2012-05-26 10:33:37 AM
What kind of smart business people oppose putting back into the foundation that enabled them to get so rich, to insure profiting from it's security long term?
 
2012-05-26 11:10:31 AM
thats 1 billion Aus and 975,750,000.00 USD
 
2012-05-26 11:11:44 AM
Bbbbbb...bbbbbbb....uuuuu....tttttt.... corporations are being taxed too much, the job creators need to pay fewer taxes........
 
2012-05-26 11:41:05 AM

CujoQuarrel: Or just not tax everyone so much to begin with.


^This
 
2012-05-26 11:45:04 AM
at least they paid some taxes unlike some other companies.
 
2012-05-26 11:49:23 AM

BlameBush: If you think they should pay more taxes, get the tax laws changed. Then be prepared for the law of unintended consequences to kick in when they pull up stakes and move their business and jobs to a more friendly environment and your local economy loses a bunch of jobs.


You really think they've got something much bigger than a PO box in australia?
 
2012-05-26 12:13:09 PM
I own stock in Google, so I'm getting a kick...
 
2012-05-26 12:13:50 PM

quickdraw: Evil incarnate


Don't forget about those millions of evil people who have Google stock in their 401(k)s.
 
2012-05-26 12:46:33 PM
Do you think Google pays for trolls?
 
2012-05-26 01:14:32 PM

ecmoRandomNumbers: They paid more than that. The thing is, the money went into lobbying to make sure they didn't pay what they were supposed to.


Well, that money was paid to Australian lobbyists, who spent it in Australia, thereby giving the Australian economy a bigger boost than higher taxes would have.

/shoulda been an Australian lobbyist
 
2012-05-26 01:17:24 PM

rubi_con_man: Darth_Lukecash:

How many millions of young writers don't have jobs due to Craigslist killing millions of marginal regional newspapers?.


You say that like it's a bad thing.
 
2012-05-26 01:20:07 PM
Wow! Australia is a bastion of 'freedom'...

/ducks
 
2012-05-26 01:21:55 PM

BlameBush: if certain tax breaks are only for certain employers, that's not a free market. its the state picking the winners and losers, aka an affront to capitalism

Not all corporations are created equal. The more attractive to a municipality .a corporation is, the bigger and better the incentives will be. If you're starting a company with 10 jobs, you're not gonna get near the tax breaks that a company bringing 100 jobs will get. If you grow your company to be a 100 job provider, you are in a position to bargain.


The problem is, companies lie about how many jobs they're "going to bring" and how long those jobs will last. They get tax incentives up front, then don't deliver the jobs long-term.

Make tax incentives like stock options: you have to perform for X years before they can be vested and exercised.
 
2012-05-26 01:22:41 PM
Arse-failia
 
2012-05-26 01:24:57 PM
I love this, FTA:

''It is time ... for Google to go beyond the pathetically defensive, 'we comply with all relevant laws and regulations' and actually state why they believe we should be indifferent to Australia's largest single advertising platform paying little or no tax here.''

Google said it abided by relevant taxation laws.
 
Displayed 50 of 68 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report