[governance] Re: Telecom TV on Google and Taxes

parminder parminder at itforchange.net
Thu Dec 13 11:55:11 EST 2012 

On Thursday 13 December 2012 10:11 PM, Adam Peake wrote:
> Hi Parminder.
>
> *Internet Governance*
>
> Hope that makes things clear.

  I had agreed with you early in this discussion that we can address the 
letter to an appropriate international policy/ norm making governance 
venue/ forum, and asked you which one do you suggest....

And you havent answered the second part of my question, but I take it 
that you would never want IGC to ever get into censuring a private 
company's conduct.... .

parminder








>
> Best,
>
> Adam
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 1:21 AM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:
>>
>> Adam
>>
>> I am not sure in what reference are you quoting the IGC mandate. Can you pl
>> clarify.
>>
>> I read from your interventions, and that of some others here, that IGC
>> should not 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?
>>
>> parminder
>>
>>
>> On Thursday 13 December 2012 07:34 PM, Adam Peake wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 6:35 PM, michael gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Via Google
>>
>> http://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/11/23/0156212/australian-govt-pledges-action-on-google-tax-evasion
>>
>> http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/Google-tax-evasion
>>
>> http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2012/08/09/is-google-avoiding-or-evading-taxes-in-the-uk/
>>
>>
>> "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
>>
>>
>>
>> etc.etc.
>>
>> M
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: apeake at gmail.com [mailto:apeake at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Adam Peake
>> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 10:23 AM
>> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> 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 <gurstein at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> 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: apeake at gmail.com [mailto:apeake at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Adam
>> Peake
>> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 9:59 AM
>> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> 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 <gurstein at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> 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: apeake at gmail.com [mailto:apeake at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Adam
>> Peake
>> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 9:36 AM
>> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> 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
>> <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 5:33 PM, parminder
>> <parminder at itforchange.net>
>> 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:
>> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-10/google-revenues-sheltered-in
>> - no-tax-bermuda-soar-to-10-billion.html
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 4:48 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro
>> <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> 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:
>> http://www.telecomtv.com/comspace_newsDetail.aspx?n=49763&id=e9381817
>> -
>> 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:
>>       governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>       http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>       http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>       http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> 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:
>>       governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>       http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>       http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>       http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>       governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>       http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>       http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>       http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

More information about the Governance mailing list