Actually, now that you mention it, I seem to remember a figure of £6bn being mentioned. Or maybe I've just made that up.

Rock God X wrote:Actually, now that you mention it, I seem to remember a figure of £6bn being mentioned. Or maybe I've just made that up. News report from the time And a different estimate Truth is that everyone involved will tell you that they don't really know how much was involved - HMRC had a figure in mind and Vodaphone had another, both were adamant that they were right but they settled at a figure probably somewhere in between, which is strange in itself because when HMRC come after individuals they are absolutely sure how much you owe and they won't be told that they are wrong even when they are wrong - its up to you to prove them wrong, its nothing short of an extortion racket sometimes. What is true is that Vodaphone paid absolutely no corporation tax at all last year

Rock God X wrote:Actually, now that you mention it, I seem to remember a figure of £6bn being mentioned. Or maybe I've just made that up. News report from the time And a different estimate Truth is that everyone involved will tell you that they don't really know how much was involved - HMRC had a figure in mind and Vodaphone had another, both were adamant that they were right but they settled at a figure probably somewhere in between, which is strange in itself because when HMRC come after individuals they are absolutely sure how much you owe and they won't be told that they are wrong even when they are wrong - its up to you to prove them wrong, its nothing short of an extortion racket sometimes. What is true is that Vodaphone paid absolutely no corporation tax at all last year

That's because the fault lies with inept politicians and HMRC. It's up to the former to enact legislation that does what they want and the latter to collect it. It's not just me that thinks that - look at the letters page in today's Times.

When did the Vodafone issue arise?

Maybe because a 'problem' that costs the UK economy £2BN (according to the BBC) is still a problem....even if there are in your opinion bigger problems.

I might have got them mixed up with Gary Barlow in this instance.

Presumably pubs, restaurants, corner shops, car parks and all those other trades that do a large percentage of their business in cash are also on the take and evading tax then?

You can tell a lot about ideology from who a government considers a risk. Under Labour, HMRC ran targetted campaigns aimed at professions. Under this lot it's been electricians, plumbers and now it's builders and associated trades.

Just to inform and educate Dally a little...

What the likes of Vodafone and others do is take a very, Uvery extreme interpretation of legislation and case law in order to treat profits earned in the UK from UK customers as being taxable elsewhere. The elsewhere often being somewhere like Luxembourg with lower CT rates.

They are effectively shifting money that should be taxed in theUK overseas, and challenging HMRC to pursue them through the courts for it in the knowledge that they have the cash and lawyers to string it out for years, while HMRC don't.

As a result, HMRC will settle for something as being better than nothing for the public purse. These companies are wilfully evading UK tax, not avoiding it. If successive rounds of public sector cuts hadn't pulled the teeth from HMRC they may not have found it so easy.

Even the Mail has got an opinion piece today, opining that 'what is immoral' is government constantly harping on about tax and morality, while doing nothing to deal with the likes of Google and Vodaphone (the two it mentions) paying next to nowt, and multi-millionaires who live in this country but pay next to no tax.

So there.

Hurrumph.

I don't know if that would include Rothermere and Dacre, but I hope not