In Australia, Google Pays Just $74k Tax On Claimed Revenues of $200 Million 345
daria42 writes "Looks like Apple isn't the only company with interesting offshore taxation practices. The financial statements for Google's Australian subsidiary show the company told the Australian Government it made just $200 million in revenue in 2011 in Australia, despite local industry estimating it actually brought in closer to $1 billion. The rest was funnelled through Google's Irish subsidiary and not disclosed in Australia. Consequently the company only disclosed taxation costs in Australia of $74,000. Not bad work if you can get it — which Google apparently can."
"Revenue" is a useless measure (Score:5, Informative)
Corporation tax is charged against profit, not revenue.
A successful, well-run company can easily have a profit of $1 on revenues of billions and therefore pay only 25 cents tax.
If a company is making millions and billions in revenue it usually indicates that they are ( 1 ) not paying realistic dividends to holders of preference chares and ( 2 ) they are not investing internally in R&D. Both those are booked against the profit & loss account.
Re:Taxes suck. (Score:5, Informative)
Seriously, http://tech.slashdot.org/story/10/10/21/1627220/how-google-avoided-paying-60-billion-in-taxes [slashdot.org] . Back in 2010.
Google only pays a 2.4% tax rate using money-funneling techniques known as the 'Double Irish' and the 'Dutch Sandwich,' even though the US corporate income tax is 35%. By using Irish loopholes, money is transferred legally between subsidiaries and ends up in island sanctuaries that have no income tax, giving Google the lowest tax rate amongst its technology peers. Facebook is planning to use the same strategy.
Re:1/40th of revenue from 1/300th Population?? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Google isn't the villain here (Score:2, Informative)
There's nothing illegal about what Google is doing, right?
Not the villain. They are using what tools are available to save as much money as they can. To put it another way, is someone a villain if they use coupons when they go shopping? If they go shopping during a sale?
Obviously not. If the laws are in place to allow this behavior, then it follows that this is what the governments want.
Re:I beg to differ (Score:2, Informative)
It doesn't have to be 100%. I'd settle for the old 80-92%
The tax rate for a common man was never higher than 25% [wikipedia.org]. To get taxed above 80% you had to be a billionaire or something.
But don't forget that not only IRS wants to suck your blood. There are state taxes and city taxes and property taxes, not counting sales/use taxes and other fees. When it's all said and done you are losing 1/3 to 1/2 of your income to bureaucrats - who then cheerfully proceed to waste it.
Re:I beg to differ (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, you are mistaken.
The total tax load on the lower income (minimum wage) is about 28%. .5% is about 19%.
The total tax load on the middle income is about 42%.
The total tax load on the upper income is about 23%.
The total tax load on the top
And the total tax load on the wealthiest (.1%) is about 17% and will be until taxes on dividends and income go up or we flat out tax wealth.
Homeless people are dead on average by 47.
Homeless women are dead on average by 43.
In first world countries.
They clean the bodies up quickly.
"Total tax load" is state and local taxes + excise taxes + property tax (which is in your rent too- just hidden). Really have to watch out for the republicans latest "pay no FEDERAL" taxes. Because it really ignores the total tax people pay by income.
There are about 50-70 Excise taxes depending on your state.
Electricity, water, cigarettes, booze, gasoline, car, bicycle, etc. etc.
And total taxes were above 90% on the wealthy in the 1950's.
The peak was 92% on income over $400,000 per year in 1952.
That was too far in one direction. But 17% is too far in the other direction.
The things Google and other companies are going makes me wonder why we allow them to stay in business. Just discorporate them or make their product illegal if they are not benefiting your society. It would be trivial for Australia to basically ban Google in Australia until they payed a fair tax on Australian income.
Re:I beg to differ (Score:4, Informative)
And how'd all that free shit work out for them?
I can clarify that for everyone's education.
Free healthcare was available. However it never guaranteed a successful treatment. Only several hospitals in the country (those that serviced party bosses) were decently equipped with Western tools. The rest was dismal. Can you imagine going to the dentist and having your teeth drilled without local anesthetic and with a drill that did at best 1,000-1,500 rpm? With the power being delivered to the drill bit via a set of rollers and belts? You never saw such a torture tool in your life. But every dental place in USSR had them - and only them. Same applies, of course, to every other medical aspect. As people joked, "the healthcare is free only if you don't care about the results."
A kindergarten was free, maybe. However have you seen them? They were not exactly attractive or educational places. They were practical, though, because the State required every man and every woman to work, and not to sit at home tending to their children.
A common worker was not very likely to even live long enough to see the pensions. But those who did were not living like kings. The pension was only barely sufficient to keep them alive on the most basic food. In latest years of USSR the pension was enough to go to the grocery store... once.
Free education was probably the smartest thing USSR ever did. Mind you, it was not free to everyone. You had to take exams and to prove that you are smart enough to be admitted. Admissions were not infinite either. If you are in then you will be even paid a little stipend if you are doing good. The country needed engineers and scientists and doctors.
USSR fell because it was destined to fall, and now we know exactly why this is so. Most importantly, USSR never had any objective reasons to be stable. Most of the miracles were achieved on the wave of popular enthusiasm - after the Civil War, then during and after the World War II. The Baikal-Amur railway was the last example of that enthusiasm. That could not last; and once it was gone the society fell into the groove of passivity, indifference, cynicism and decay. This is not that dissimilar from the trends in the modern US society; however in USSR it was illegal to not work if you are able-bodied. In the USA it is just fine.