The G8 leaders stated their support for the OECD’s work to tackle tax avoidance by multinational companies, and announced that they will draw up a template for global corporations to report to tax authorities where they make their profits and pay taxes around the world.
This will give governments a new tool against tax avoidance by multinationals and will be particularly helpful to the governments of developing countries.
The government has also announced further plans to assist developing countries in strengthening their tax systems - also known as capacity building - in order to help them claim the tax which they are owed and benefit from information exchange.
forgive me if I'm wrong but this doesn't seem very well in keeping with any corporate-governmental complex theory at first sight. Everyone talks about petty-bourgeois on the verge of proletarianization, but they aren't the ones who are hiding enormous assets in different jurisdictions. and aiding developing countries to claw back the tax they are due doesn't gel well with imperialism either. what's going on here? is it all going to amount to nothing as Switzerland and the Cayman Islands still exist?
it's especially just talk because the only way to really do anything about it is by having tough capital controls, which goes against the broad trend towards deregulation. the IMF spent decades making countries drop their capital controls.
littlegreenpills posted:https://www.gov.uk/government/news/g8-2013-action-agreed-on-international-tax-issues
The G8 leaders stated their support for the OECD’s work to tackle tax avoidance by multinational companies, and announced that they will draw up a template for global corporations to report to tax authorities where they make their profits and pay taxes around the world.
This will give governments a new tool against tax avoidance by multinationals and will be particularly helpful to the governments of developing countries.
The government has also announced further plans to assist developing countries in strengthening their tax systems - also known as capacity building - in order to help them claim the tax which they are owed and benefit from information exchange.
forgive me if I'm wrong but this doesn't seem very well in keeping with any corporate-governmental complex theory at first sight. Everyone talks about petty-bourgeois on the verge of proletarianization, but they aren't the ones who are hiding enormous assets in different jurisdictions. and aiding developing countries to claw back the tax they are due doesn't gel well with imperialism either. what's going on here? is it all going to amount to nothing as Switzerland and the Cayman Islands still exist?
it's not necessary to fit every fact about the world into a narrative about bourgeois dominance and imperialism.
littlegreenpills posted:every self employed person i know cheats massively on their taxes so in theory.....
my brother-in-law thought you could claim your rent as a deduction.
I'd guess they want to help developing countries claim taxes from their own nationals, not international capital. Many poor countries have extremely small tax bases, where most locals pay no taxes whatsoever or only pay e.g. sales tax.
That's not what they're doing. Haven enforcement would get in the way of that because tax havens compete down capital taxes in developing countries.
All the OECD and G8 are doing is making sure things stay within the rules they prefer. They never actually go after Hong Kong or Switzerland, these enforcement actions are targeted against developing world havens like Guatemala and Nauru.
Rhizzone has a big problem believing this for some reason but almost everyone clearly idenfitiable as superrich and bourgeois (Gates, Buffet, Soros, etc) support a very specific ideology centered around free trade and the welfare state. The bourgeois are not actually affected by welfare programs because they're funded out of labor and consumption taxes. The only thing they're really worried about is social unrest and antiglobalism which is why extreme laissez faire is actually unsettling to them.
This is why things like the World Social Forum exist and Soros writes books calling for financial regulation and more attention to poverty reduction. The actual bourgeoise prefer regulated stability while unregulated Friedmanite insanity mainly benefits petit bourgeois.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Crisis-Global-Capitalism-Endangered/dp/1891620274
There are good reasons the bourgeois want to keep tax evasion staying within the rules. They don't need havens, they're plenty wealthy already.
mustang: doesnt know any rich people
How is this constructive? Are you the only one privileged to come up with conspiracy theories?
rich people, as I see on my TV, believe
Well, look at tax returns. The bourgeoise don't actually pay for the welfare state. They have no reason to oppose it because the effective tax rate on them is very low.
mustang you're the shittiest poster
You can't just assume someone is a shitty poster because they're the only one who doesn't join your echo chamber.
no mustang, you see, your posts are Shit
They're much better than yours. It might be uncomfortable for you to come to terms with the contradictions of social democracy but whining doesn't change anything.
m99 posted:They're much better than yours.
are you the sort of person who sees people not being able to stand you as "trolling irl"
are you the sort of person who sees people not being able to stand you as "trolling irl"
No, nobody consents to being trolled. I am practicing for when I meet IRL liberals though.
Does anyone actually think the World Social Forum is Marxist? Or that going after tax havens is Marxist?
Lessons posted:as someone who doesn't know anything about anything and just makes shit up as he goes along, here's my opinion on everything:
well go on
The beauty of the welfare state is that it provides palliatives for all the symptoms of capitalism without addressing the underlying cause. There was a reason why the Soviet Union didn't care about tax evasion. It's because the USSR had no income taxes.
The liberal state will only ever tax income already created on a market and possibly redistribute it back. The working class is raped and then told to feel better after receiving a prostitute's wage. Liberalism is not the solution, the only solution is a mass worker's party solely aimed at socializing all productive capital under a democratic and rational plan of production for use.
i thought the Soviet Union was inefficient and inegalitarian and its successes only came about through the most brutal primitive accumulation kyle
Bourgeois slander.
Who would seriously argue that Nazi Germany was more egalitarian than the Soviet Union?
mustang is actually right in a completely idiotic way, in that you do get a "visionary" section of the bourgeoisie who consider long-term systemic stability important. but usually that kind of reform does require a section of the bourgeoisie to be expropriated.
Do you understand why white rural Christian males say "don't tread on me?"
Edited by m99 ()
m99 posted:Bourgeois slander.
name change mods?
cleanhands posted:i think its more that they realise tax arbitrage is stupid and wasteful and it would be better if they harmonise their domestic loopholes to reduce the overheads of such a system and figure out how much money there actually is to go around
its wasteful, but starving governments keeps em Lean and Mean
xipe posted:cleanhands posted:i think its more that they realise tax arbitrage is stupid and wasteful and it would be better if they harmonise their domestic loopholes to reduce the overheads of such a system and figure out how much money there actually is to go around
its wasteful, but starving governments keeps em Lean and Mean
it doesnt because the big boys will raise taxes on income and consumption and then print up the shortfall, pretty much every G8 country is committed to not taxing the largest companies at all so it makes sense to agree not to compete so they can do away with the administrative overhead
it doesnt because the big boys will raise taxes on income and consumption and then print up the shortfall, pretty much every G8 country is committed to not taxing the largest companies at all so it makes sense to agree not to compete so they can do away with the administrative overhead
That's even dumber than my theory though.
Taxation is a form of commodity fetishism. The correct Marxist mode is to not care about tax evasion.
Edited by m99 ()
you didnt read it
I did indeed, I found the part where he talks about feudal exploitation.
If the labourer wants all his time to produce the necessary means of subsistence for himself and his race, he has no time left in which to work gratis for others. Without a certain degree of productiveness in his labour, he has no such superfluous time at his disposal; without such superfluous time, no surplus-labour, and therefore no capitalists, no slave-owners, no feudal lords, in one word, no class of large proprietors.
All that time when you were complaining about me "not understanding Marx"- you were directly contradicting what he said.
m99 posted:you didnt read it
I did indeed, I found the part where he talks about feudal exploitation.
If the labourer wants all his time to produce the necessary means of subsistence for himself and his race, he has no time left in which to work gratis for others. Without a certain degree of productiveness in his labour, he has no such superfluous time at his disposal; without such superfluous time, no surplus-labour, and therefore no capitalists, no slave-owners, no feudal lords, in one word, no class of large proprietors.
All that time when you were complaining about me "not understanding Marx"- you were directly contradicting what he said.
Interesting. And I'm going to be interested to hear the response. I have a really interesting reply that I'm working on as well, but if other interested parties express their interest I might take it in some interesting directions before posting it - you might say I'll have to owe you a more complete response, "with interest"! As always, placeholder.
littlegreenpills posted:orgive me if I'm wrong but this doesn't seem very well in keeping with any corporate-governmental complex theory at first sight. Everyone talks about petty-bourgeois on the verge of proletarianization, but they aren't the ones who are hiding enormous assets in different jurisdictions. and aiding developing countries to claw back the tax they are due doesn't gel well with imperialism either. what's going on here? is it all going to amount to nothing as Switzerland and the Cayman Islands still exist?
no you are very very wrong
this has been the mantra of international capitalist organisations since for like half a decade at least
their have been books and books analyzing it from various perspectives, its faults theoretically and empirically
the sum of it is yes it is still a standard imperialist capitalist narrative just a more complex post post washington consensus one (in terms of both the policy and us hegemony) + an attempt to control the effects of "globalization" and semi-peripheral development