<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<br>
<font face="Verdana">Adam<br>
<br>
I am not sure in what reference are you quoting the IGC mandate.
Can you pl clarify.<br>
<br>
I read from your interventions, and that of some others here, that
IGC should <i>not</i> take up an issue - however damaging it to
be to the public interest - as long as a private company is
within legal boundaries. Do I understand right therefore that if
google, facebook or apple was to change some privacy setting in a
deplorable manner, or make some very significant interference with
users freedom of expression, all the while remaining within legal
boundaries, we will never raise an objection; and that kind of
thing would not be in our mandate?<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
</font>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Thursday 13 December 2012 07:34 PM,
Adam Peake wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAFabd1Kz20vpV-ueB9gstx9GOhBy1xksVOa2HjEOYyOuf_4ygg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 6:35 PM, michael gurstein <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com"><gurstein@gmail.com></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Via Google
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/11/23/0156212/australian-govt-pledges-action-on-google-tax-evasion">http://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/11/23/0156212/australian-govt-pledges-action-on-google-tax-evasion</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/Google-tax-evasion">http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/Google-tax-evasion</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2012/08/09/is-google-avoiding-or-evading-taxes-in-the-uk/">http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2012/08/09/is-google-avoiding-or-evading-taxes-in-the-uk/</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
"There seems to be some confusion over whether Google is dodging,
avoiding or evading corporate taxation in the UK. The first answer is
the most obvious: it’s not evading taxes because that is illegal, by
definition. Thus we would expect to see prosecutions if it were
evading tax. We’re not seeing prosecutions so we might conclude,
fairly, that there is no evasion going on."
good of you to agree.
and:
"The mission of the Internet Governance Caucus (IGC) is to provide a
forum for discussion, advocacy, action, and for representation of
civil society contributions in Internet governance processes. The
caucus intends to provide an open and effective forum for civil
society to share opinion, policy options and expertise on Internet
governance issues, and to provide a mechanism for coordination of
advocacy to enhance the utilization and influence of Civil Society
(CS) and the IGC in relevant policy processes."
Adam
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">etc.etc.
M
-----Original Message-----
From: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:apeake@gmail.com">apeake@gmail.com</a> [<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:apeake@gmail.com">mailto:apeake@gmail.com</a>] On Behalf Of Adam Peake
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 10:23 AM
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>
Subject: Re: [governance] Re: Telecom TV on Google and Taxes
Tax evasion, are you suggesting google evades paying tax be illegal means?
Adam
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 6:13 PM, michael gurstein <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com"><gurstein@gmail.com></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I don`t think we are talking about ``voluntary`` tax... Rather we are talking about the lengths that corporations go to for tax avoidance/evasion... That I would guess is somewhat discretionary i.e. management decisions and not particularly transparent to shareholders.
M
-----Original Message-----
From: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:apeake@gmail.com">apeake@gmail.com</a> [<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:apeake@gmail.com">mailto:apeake@gmail.com</a>] On Behalf Of Adam
Peake
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 9:59 AM
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>
Subject: Re: [governance] Re: Telecom TV on Google and Taxes
Anyone on the list own Google shares?
What would you do if Google paid a few billions of dollars in voluntary tax and the value of your shares dropped?
Adam
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 5:50 PM, michael gurstein <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com"><gurstein@gmail.com></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Adam,
I`m curious why you think this… I would have thought that governments
are pretty much impervious to this kind of `lobbying` (jaded from
experience) while corporations that have as their slogan things like
`don`t be evil` might be extremely sensitive to this kind of public
comment on their behaviour by Civil Society.
M
From: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:apeake@gmail.com">apeake@gmail.com</a> [<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:apeake@gmail.com">mailto:apeake@gmail.com</a>] On Behalf Of Adam
Peake
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 9:36 AM
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>
Subject: Re: [governance] Re: Telecom TV on Google and Taxes
-1
write to politicians. to google would be just posturing.
Adam
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com"><salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com></a> wrote:
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 5:33 PM, parminder
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net"><parminder@itforchange.net></a>
wrote:
Rather shameful that google paid 3 percent tax on its overseas
profit!! It surely leaves it with a lot of money to spend in lobbying
and advocacy efforts to keep global markets free for its unlettered
operations... Like organising campaigns against ITU, German legislature, and so on.
Would IGC write an open letter to Google that its tax evasion policy
is anti people, and it should pays its taxes where it makes its
profit. (Or is it that the IG civil society does not go into such re-distributional questions
) It is not rhetorical but a real question to the list, and its
coordinator.
What does the list think?
+1 if you think the IGC should write a letter to Google
-1 if the IGC should not write a letter to Google
As always the IGC decides
parminder
On Wednesday 12 December 2012 09:37 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
More on Bloomberg:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-10/google-revenues-sheltered-in">http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-10/google-revenues-sheltered-in</a>
- no-tax-bermuda-soar-to-10-billion.html
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 4:48 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com"><salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com></a> wrote:
Somehow it feels that there is a targeted media campaign out against
the likes of Google and other mncs - the timing of the release is
almost impeccable with the WCIT.
Source:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.telecomtv.com/comspace_newsDetail.aspx?n=49763&id=e9381817">http://www.telecomtv.com/comspace_newsDetail.aspx?n=49763&id=e9381817</a>
-
0593-417a-8639-c4c53e2a2a10
Google “can make money without doing evil” (as it evades $2bn in
taxes)
Posted By TelecomTV One , 12 December 2012 | 1 Comments | (0)
Tags: Google corporate tax Finance
As the net closes around the multinationals that avoid paying
corporation taxes, Google is accused of saving $2bn by routing income
through a “Double Irish Dutch Sandwich”, paying tax of just 3.2 per
cent on its overseas profits. Guy Daniels reports.
Three questions. One; where do you stand on the subject of tax
avoidance? We at TelecomTV believe that individuals and corporations
have a duty to pay their fair share of tax. By fair, we mean whatever
respective governments rule to be the legal requirement (after all,
in most countries, we voted the politicians in to office). By all
means try and mitigate the amount of tax you have to pay, using
whatever accepted mechanisms are available. But avoidance? That just
means somebody else (with far less access to expensive and clever advisors) has to contribute to your share as well.
Second question: how do you define evil? The Oxford English
Dictionary defines evil as “profoundly immoral and wicked” or
“something which is harmful or undesirable”. In my book, that means
tax avoidance is evil, simple as that.
Third and final question: Is Google evil? If you believe that
avoiding tax is wrong (especially through aggressive and
mind-boggling complicated avoidance schemes) and if you believe that
depriving society of tax revenues is wrong (and so reducing the level
of available State support for the most
needy) and could be described as an evil act, then surely you must
conclude that Google is acting in an evil manner.
An investigative report by Bloomberg has discovered that Google
avoided about $2 billion in worldwide income taxes in 2011 by
shifting
$9.8 billion in revenues into a Bermuda shell company – almost double
its total from three years ago. The information was disclosed in a
November filing by a Google subsidiary in the Netherlands, which was
discovered by reporters from Bloomberg.
It appears that Google legally routed profits from overseas
subsidiaries into Bermuda, which doesn’t have a corporate income tax,
thereby enabling it to cut its overall tax rate almost in half.
Bloomberg says the amount moved to Bermuda is equivalent to about 80
per cent of Google’s total pretax profit in 2011.
Tax evasion and avoidance costs the European Union a staggering €1
trillion a year. That’s worth dwelling on for a moment longer…. €1
trillion. No wonder politicians are now acting to try and prevent
this financial loss and branding such acts as scandalous and immoral.
Bloomberg has a good quote from a UK-based tax accountant, which
pretty much sums up the feeling in Europe at the moment. According to
Richard Murphy of Tax Research:
“The tax strategy of Google and other multinationals is a deep
embarrassment to governments around Europe. The political awareness
now being created in the UK, and to a lesser degree elsewhere in Europe, is: It’s us or them.
People understand that if Google doesn’t pay, somebody else has to
pay or services get cut.”
Just look what happened to Starbucks. When the public discovered the
US coffee giant paid zero taxes in the UK (yes, absolutely nothing at
all), it started to boycott the chain.
Advertisement
As a result, Starbucks was forced to “volunteer” to pay taxes…
The UK is Google’s second-biggest market, responsible for about 11
per cent of its sales. Of the $4 billion it turned over last year, it
paid UK corporation tax of less than $10 million. Bloomberg says
Google avoids tax by using an Irish subsidiary to collects revenues
from ads sold in the UK, which then pays royalties to another Irish
subsidiary whose legal residence is in Bermuda. Payments are then
sent to yet another subsidiary in the Netherlands (with no employees,
note) before finally reaching the tax haven of Bermuda.
Sounds pretty ‘evil’ to me. And if so, then that’s against the
internet company’s guiding principles. Stated clearly on the “Ten
Things We Know to be True” page on Google’s website is the following:
“You can make money without doing evil.”
I’m sorry, Google, but I don’t see how avoiding tax is anything but
evil. Of course you – and all companies – have a duty to shareholders
to maximise profits. But there are rules. Some of these are merely
ethical, whilst some are legal. There is no indication or suggestion
that Google has acted illegally, but there is every suggestion that it has acted unethically.
And who said you can’t have ‘ethical companies’? Of course you can. I
don’t buy the ‘extreme capitalist’ viewpoint that corporations will
only act in self-interest and never “do the right thing” or pay their
fair share. If their customers start to boycott their services, then
they’ll change. It happened with the sudden emergence of all the
so-called ‘corporate responsibility’ positions that all featured
heavily in annual reports. I don’t see why it can’t happen with fair tax positions.
Other ICT companies reported in the media to be using this
complicated tax evasion (sorry lawyers, of course I mean
‘mitigation’…) structure include Apple, Facebook, Microsoft and
Oracle. Unfortunately, Google – and all the others, who no doubt will
soon be named and shamed – will continue their sharp practices until they are forced to make a change.
If governments can’t do that through the legal process, then it’s up
to customers to vote with their feet and walk away from Google
services. As Richard Murphy said, consumers are beginning to get the
message that it’s “us or them”, and we’re already being squeezed by
the many austerity measures that are in effect to drag us out of recession.
Come on Google, time to step up to the plate and show some leadership.
Pay your fair share. And then the rest of the ICT industry can do
likewise. Or else remove that fatuous and out-dated “don’t do evil”
slogan from your website once and for all.
Further reading: The Pearse Trust blog has a detailed explanation of
the so-called “Double Irish Dutch Sandwich” tax scheme. Please don’t
try and implement it.
--
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
P.O. Box 17862
Suva
Fiji
Twitter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Tel: +679 3544828
Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>
To be removed from the list, visit:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a>
For all other list information and functions, see:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a>
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.igcaucus.org/">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a>
Translate this email: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a>
--
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
P.O. Box 17862
Suva
Fiji
Twitter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Tel: +679 3544828
Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>
To be removed from the list, visit:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a>
For all other list information and functions, see:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a>
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.igcaucus.org/">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a>
Translate this email: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>