Google tax dodging
Aug. 13th, 2012 02:50 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
More on the tax dodging front. Now Google's getting flak for only paying £6m tax on revenues of £395m, which is 1.5% against a headline tax rate of 24%.
Only, the headline rate is based on profit, not revenue. So that numbers is about as useful as a chocolate teapot. £6m tax implies profit of £25m at 24% - although of course 24% is the current rate, not the one that applied to the year in question; and it's not clear if that's tax paid, or the tax charge in the accounts (which would include deferred tax - basically, the impact of the differences between accounts profit and taxable profit, most of which tend to defer the payment of tax as an incentive to start doing business) so we now seem to have an icecream teacosy.
But let's get our handy gooey and play with those numbers anyway - £25m profit on turnover of £395m is what, 6%? A moderately decent margin - a bit slim for a modern high-tech company, perhaps. But then, what does Google actually *do* in the UK? The odd data centre or something? All the value of the company comes from intellectual property, and I don't think that gets developed here. Data hosting is pretty low risk, so you wouldn't really expect a very high margin.
So, er, sounds like Google's playing fair, based on those numbers.
Now what I'd be interested in is the transfer pricing situation. What does the revenue represent? I suspect that it's just a commission on advertising sales. So maybe the thing to do is question whether the revenue figures are at arm's length - but that sort of enquiry takes HMRC years to finish and no-one publishes the results anyway. I'd be amazed if Google haven't been quite aggressive about their internal pricing, but then I'd also be amazed (having been there and talked to them about similar companies, that is) if HMRC aren't pushing back quite hard so the final position should be reasonable.
So, at the moment once again all we we have is a number labelled "Tax" in a vague way, which is much smaller than another number picked at random, and this makes Tax Avoidance. *Sigh *
Only, the headline rate is based on profit, not revenue. So that numbers is about as useful as a chocolate teapot. £6m tax implies profit of £25m at 24% - although of course 24% is the current rate, not the one that applied to the year in question; and it's not clear if that's tax paid, or the tax charge in the accounts (which would include deferred tax - basically, the impact of the differences between accounts profit and taxable profit, most of which tend to defer the payment of tax as an incentive to start doing business) so we now seem to have an icecream teacosy.
But let's get our handy gooey and play with those numbers anyway - £25m profit on turnover of £395m is what, 6%? A moderately decent margin - a bit slim for a modern high-tech company, perhaps. But then, what does Google actually *do* in the UK? The odd data centre or something? All the value of the company comes from intellectual property, and I don't think that gets developed here. Data hosting is pretty low risk, so you wouldn't really expect a very high margin.
So, er, sounds like Google's playing fair, based on those numbers.
Now what I'd be interested in is the transfer pricing situation. What does the revenue represent? I suspect that it's just a commission on advertising sales. So maybe the thing to do is question whether the revenue figures are at arm's length - but that sort of enquiry takes HMRC years to finish and no-one publishes the results anyway. I'd be amazed if Google haven't been quite aggressive about their internal pricing, but then I'd also be amazed (having been there and talked to them about similar companies, that is) if HMRC aren't pushing back quite hard so the final position should be reasonable.
So, at the moment once again all we we have is a number labelled "Tax" in a vague way, which is much smaller than another number picked at random, and this makes Tax Avoidance. *Sigh *
no subject
Date: 2012-08-13 02:53 pm (UTC)At any rate, if you are running Google Ads in the UK, your agreement is still with Google Ireland Limited, and if you aren't VAT registered, you pay them VAT at the Irish rate. (If you are VAT registered, you self-assess and pay VAT at the local rate)
So I'm guessing they pay most of their tax for UK business in Ireland?
no subject
Date: 2012-08-13 02:59 pm (UTC)I really do wonder how they manage to get £395m out of what they do in the UK.
no subject
Date: 2012-08-13 03:15 pm (UTC)I'm not sure if Google Grants may be relevant? Google has a program where the US Google gives registered charities a 'grant' of $330 per day, to be spend on Google advertising. In theory I could be 'spending' £78211pa on ads, just for one charity, but of course it's not real money. Well, unless a lot more people click on 'sponsor a dog' it's not anyway.
no subject
Date: 2012-08-13 03:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-08-13 04:48 pm (UTC)On a much smaller level (alas!), when I lived in the USA I paid tax there on my income both in the US and in the UK (letting out our house), and told the UK tax authorities what I had done and how much tax I had paid to the Americans. (I think that this was the right thing to do; certainly, nobody complained.
You know how much UK tax I paid for those four years? None!* That's 0% of my UK income! Nobody accused me of tax avoidance, but perhaps 38 Degrees would do so.
*Apart from complications arising due to not moving country exactly at the start of the tax year, and from the two countries having different tax years anyway. Which I'm now revisiting with my Dad...
no subject
Date: 2012-08-13 05:11 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-08-14 01:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-08-23 08:49 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-08-24 12:27 pm (UTC)