Topic: The EU takes 9 more jurisdictions out of the Tax Heaven list (Read 184 times)

I have seen In some poor countries the average worker can earn 5 dollars a day. If the average salary is increased from that price to 200%, the business will go bankrupt due to its inability to pay. If income taxes were raised to 200%, it could destroy the entire economy. that's why recent developments show us the turmoil of the economy. But that's what they're protected by the people they're protecting, it's a symbiotic relationship that helps growth support each other.

I think even higher, 30% seems a lot better to be honest, 15% is nothing compared to what they could be paying and how they avoid it anyway. They would find other loopholes and they would be doing whatever they can to pay as little as possible. Amazon pays some workers literally under starvation wages and they get subsidies from the states to cover the rest.

I read somewhere in one state they pay people 38k dollars per year, which is 2k under starvation of 40k per year, and they literally pay those people 2k from the tax payers money. If amazon is cheap enough that they do not even pay that extra 2k and cost tax payers 2k each then imagine how they would react if they would be asked to pay taxes, they would literally hide that wealth somewhere as soon as it happens.

People "do not care" bout these papers because nothing ever happens. It is like "you know that super powerful person that nobody can touch even if he does something illegal? Well he does something illegal", and that is just discouraging at most.

I'm kinda annoyed that something like "Pandora Papers" appears and suddenly everyone gets really angry and concerned about offshore islands and tax heavens.Well,offshore tax heavens exist for decades,but 99% of the people simply don't care about them.Some scandalous discoveries about offshore companies and corrupt politicians appear out of nowhere and everyone gets angry,but after one week,everyone forgets about it.
The global elite would never dump the tax heavens.It doesn't matter if something like "Pandora Papers" or "Panama Papers" appears into the public space.
The 15% corporate tax minimum sounds like a joke.The corporate tax minimum should be at least 20% or 25%.

Well, I didn't say you were worried. But do you really think that your arguments are rational and logical and what we say is just ideology?

To say that your arguments don't contain ideology is a big lol and a half.

Well, they implemented the 15% minimum ....so big corporations like Google and Amazon and all the big companies with their Headquarters in tax havens has to pay the minimum tax in their countries.... right?

The timing of this legislation is spot on... just after the Pandora's papers has been released and the public are furious over the revelations that was exposed. (It is as if they are saying... "Ok ok.... you caught us... let's just implement this 15% and you can go back to your lives as normal) 

I understand how upset you are, I live in a poor country where the government takes a high rate while it is unable to provide the minimum services and infrastructure that should be provided in any country, in fact they are unable even to provide the basic requirements of any society, so why do they take taxes?
In addition, the government's imposition of taxes on goods and products causes their prices to rise significantly, which causes another problem besides the first problem, the problem of high prices and low wages and salaries.

Question awaiting your answer...



There are so many things that you do not seem to understand. The worst of that is that you will never, because for the man with a hammer in his brain, everything looks like a nail.



I am not particularly worried about being "alone in this thread". I think I have little else to say because it makes sense to discuss things when there is certain listening to the logic and arguments, but I am seeing just a briefing on a certain ideology without any sense of reality.

I just opened a thread about that on the P&S board, when I still frequented it, because it seems a bit paradoxical how many leftists/socialists there are on this Bitcoin forum, being Bitcoin a perfect capitalist asset to escape state control.

Paxmao is left alone against the two of us in this thread, let's see if Cnut237 or suchmoon come and give him a hand.

As it should have been done with it a century ago, it would have saved millions from suffering in poverty and famine.


Exactly, that is why we shouldn't try artificial things, we will endlessly end in the same loop, destroying the economy, making everyone dirt poor, when we finally get ver it and some acquire some wealth the greed of the ones who can't succeed on their won will bring us in again in the same cycle.


Oh yeah, the same military, education, healthcare stuff, but whenever a country became socialist it was forced to make the army service mandatory as everyone run from it. Funny how you bring in this, why would you defended the country, the poor have nothing, are you going to do so in order to protect the richest and their wealth and their assets?
In the European Union we're 20 years away from a century of peace, and if others wouldn't be some imbeciles brainwashed by socialist and communist propaganda we wouldn't need a military at all at this point.


And this is the moment where we should really keep basic education out of the discussion, have you even read what I've written?


I encourage you to run your own business and do the accounting for 20 years, then we might be able to have a meaningful discussion on the subject.
Btw, if your reply is going to be 99% foaming at the mouth against the evil corporation, 0.1% of a second spent on actually trying to understand my post, and 0.9% gibberish, don't bother. This is a discussion forum, not a socialist propaganda mouthpiece where the more hardcore you pose to be the more medals you get.


We really need to start cutting c*** at birth based on length so that everybody should be equal, 5" should be enough!

Poeple are not equal, there will not be equal and don't want to be equal, simple as this.
What they want is for others to don't have more than they do when it's about socialist giving out of their own pocket to the ones having less, then they go nuts, always pointing at others and shouting those have more.

I really don't understand why could anyone with socialistic views even embrace bitcoin and spend time here, bitcoin is the perfect example of pure capitalism, you have capital you can invest, you have more capital you get more, you have zero, there is now ay to get it from others unless you pull a scam or threaten them with a gun.

I dont think the monetary system works in this way? If government starts to print their own money then whats the difference in that act and today's situation of US where they going nuts in printing the money. This has caused seeds of inflation these days and could worsen over the time. Taxation actually solves this issue by circulating the money back to government and then same is used for the development of states, countries, employee salaries etc. I think this keeps the balance of what is being printed and circulated. So I completely believe that tax needs to be paid and it cant be 0%.

Religious books aside, The Capital (the original, Marx's) is the foundational book of an ideology that led to hundreds of millions of deaths. So, no thanks.

I have read things by the author, and he is just that, a neo-Marxist, who divides society into good guys and bad guys, the bad guys being poor victims who can't defend themselves and then the only solution is for the communist politician to come and solve their problems. As a good communist, he will not let them solve their own problems.

He says that the return on capital has increased more than wages, and he is not the only one to say it, I agree, that is what's happened. But he does not say that today more workers than ever are investing. This is not Victorian England where workers were semi-slaved in order to have just enough to eat and could not own financial assets. Today the working "class" (if we can call it that) has mutual funds, owns homes, can share fractional shares for $1, and can buy bitcoin.

Most of us on this forum need our work to live, and have at the very least bitcoin as a financial asset giving us return on capital, others also have mutual funds and stocks etc.

And the tale of equality is another hoax. People are equal in rights and that's it. But throughout the world, socialist politicians are trying to equalize what is not equal, for example, encouraging women to study engineering, which is bullshit. Today there are more women doctors than men, and nothing happens to have a society with 80% female doctors and 90% male engineers.

And with the bullshit of wanting to equalize what is not equal, we have former transgender men, competing against women in sports, such as the UFC:

"UFC's Joe Rogan to Transgender MMA Fighter Fallon Fox: 'You're a F***ing Man'"

You meant economic equality but I am against it too. In an advanced society, people have to have a minimum: a place to sleep, food to cover their nutritional needs, clothes to wear and medical attention.

From that point on, the only equality there has to be is that of opportunity, not that of a politician taking from some and giving to others so that they will vote for him.

Yes, of course they are.  They've crafted their laws specifically to cater to people dodging taxes in their own countries as their way of getting deposits and businesses to domicile within their country.  Most of these tax haven jurisdictions are places that are completely irrelevant but for the tax dodging industries they have created.  It was intentional and by design.

I agree with OP.
I also have the same concern but I stopped to know what are the reasons why the British government have taken these measures protecting these 9 jurisdictions is because they are poor entities where their main resource is tourism and as we know tourism has been hit by the pandemic.
Unless the government created a means to prevent tax havens from being created. But since there is no fiscal regulation, this is difficult to control.

Certainly, far from everyone being equal, equality and redistribution would be flushed down the toilet. Please, kindly read The Capital in the XXI Century - redistribution and equality do not happen naturally.


Corporations are not people, just a legal construct, but the owners are people - unless the AIs have already taken over and we have not noticed yet. Taxing a corporation means taxing the owners on regards of their benefit because they benefit greatly from states - more than most in fact. They get infrastructures of all shorts, a system that educates people so they can have workers, a legal system that protects their right to intellectual property and defends their interests internationally. It is obvious that you cannot take without giving back.

How about not having the means to defend your country from an invasion? How about not having a legal system that supports your right to individual property? How about having a mass of people that cannot afford basic education? How about not having means to respond to an emergency?

As said many times before, if you do not pay taxes, you will not have anyone to defend your right to property, the borders of your country... So, unless you have a marvellous theory on how can you get from a world divided into states to a world without them, you do need taxes.

RE your idea about returning sooner or later, I encourage you to familiarise yourself with the reason why accounts are closed yearly and taxes are paid every year. As a hint, it is not the same to pay today than to pay in 10 years.

Honestly, I find your arguments far too ideologically biased and with little real foundations.


You need to segregate these types of tax concepts to apply different fiscal policies. Again, you seem to ignore how things actually work and you substitute this in your mind for a kingdom of your own invention.

Do you really think that the governments will be satisfied with just 15%? The 15% proposed rate is just a start. In the US, the democrats are moving towards a high tax regime, which would see corporate tax at a rate of 28% or more. So even if the tax heavens increase their rate to 15%, they will be much more attractive than the US or the EU. Gradually, this 15% threshold would be increased, and it will end up at somewhere between 30% and 35%. I also expect the corporate tax rates in the US to go up (2021-24).

With a global 15% tax rate, that would actually prevent companies to try to look for other places, they will flock to 15% one for sure, and still not pay the 20% in their own nation, because that extra 5% is a lot for them, every single dollar matters, hell these are the companies who collectively spend billions every year on trying to keep minimum salaries down all over the world.

So believe me, when I say even 5% would matter a lot for them. However having tax havens is not the way to go neither, as long as we have some minimum that we could go with then it is going to be at least a little bit more reasonable for nations to get taxes, and these super rich hiding their wealth will have a bit more hard time.

I think, stompix, that in general we agree on economic policy and how taxes should be, but I will answer you with nuances.


Okay, we agree, but it has the sense that there are governments that do not stop spending and spending and apart from printing to finance it, as they know it causes inflation, the other thing they do is to raise taxes everywhere. I do not agree with how they act but that is the sense it makes. And besides, the example you give is not the only one.


Here I see that I was correct that you were thinking more about CEOs of large companies that are not sole proprietorships than the other two examples I gave you.


Not deliberately ignoring, I wasn't seeing the whole picture, now I see it.


I don't see anything wrong either but I don't know why, it seems to me that politicians are not going to pay much attention to you. Even those who are more pro-free market and low tax spend more than they should on political spending and end up printing like everyone else and sometimes if we are lucky with some small tax cuts.


I agree.

I've never said zero taxes on everything, I said zero taxes on business.
It makes no sense to tax a business on its profit which is distributed to the investors, who are getting taxed on revenue anyhow.


So how does your money from being a CEO of Pfizer and a shareholder of Nestle end up in an LLC?
 Not by first going through him and he has been taxed on it?

Besides you're ignoring a part of my line:

So what's the problem if I set up an LLC and that LLC buys 100 cars as long as it pays VAT and annual tax on it?
If I'm doing it with money that has been previously taxed as personal revenue, I don't see anything wrong.

This desire to tax the s** out of everything has lead to all this situation where you have thousands of rules and caps, limits, or requirements and despite that, you still have a thousand holes left where money is hemorrhaging out of the country. In the end, what's better, tax the shit out of the ones you catch and let trillions sit in some god-forsaken country or apply just one tax not one hundred, and let all that money pour back into the economy?

You should be disappointed, the only problem is that the people that's involved in the Pandora Papers were all people that's in power and can influence the move, that's why we have a hard time stopping these tax havens, it's because they're protected by the people that they're protecting, it's a symbiotic relationship.

I have read the article and what you say several times because it seems to me that you have made mistakes. I think you were a bit blinded by the Pandora Papers and that made you write like that.

For starters they are not "tax heavens" they are "tax havens". It is a semantic but essential difference.


No. I have read it several times. I understand the article to say that those are still considered tax havens:

"The EU tax-haven list, created in 2017 to clamp down on tax avoidance and tax evasion, now has nine jurisdictions blacklisted as “non-cooperative”: American Samoa, Fiji, Guam, Palau, Panama, Samoa, Trinidad and Tobago, US Virgin Islands, and Vanuatu."


This case you mention would be one of the three that have been removed from the list:

"EU finance ministers have removed Anguilla, Dominica and Seychelles from the bloc’s blacklist of tax havens,"

I don't have much confidence in EU bureaucrats, but tax havens are not just low tax countries. Low tax countries that used to be considered tax havens are no longer on the list because the authorities agreed to cooperate against fraud and money laundering. In other words, to be a tax haven it is not only necessary to have low taxes, it is also necessary to have an opacity of information in the face of financial information requests from other countries.



A flat income tax of 15% should be required also to encourage progress, effort, savings, investment and a long etcetera, but I think we are not going to agree.


In my case, I like low taxes, but not to that extent. A company with 0% corporate tax should have taxes on the other hand even to finance the minimum. Unless you are an ancap like Theymos and think society would work by eliminating government altogether.

I think ancap and 0 taxes can work in small societies, but not in modern societies with mega corporations which after all are centralized entities like states. I think Adam Smith's invisible hand works best in small societies with small businesses.


I'm surprised you say that, the really rich have nothing to their name and the Ferrari, houses and luxuries they put in the name of the LLC or equivalent. As far as I remember I have heard two say that, Kiyosaky and Dave Ramsey and I don't think they are the only ones by a long shot.

I assume you are referring to companies like JNJ or those in the S&P 500 but they are not the only type of companies out there.