In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
> (In reply to Jon Stewart) This is all a bit precious and anti capitalist.
What is? I am not anti-capitalist (unless you'd class everyone from Vince Cable leftwards as "anti-capitalist").
> If your pension fund turns round in 10 years time and says 'sorry we're not going to pay out as much pension to you as you hoped and expected, we felt morally obliged to pay more tax than the law of the land demanded that we do', you'd feel a bit miffed, to say the least.
No. I don't believe that my pension is significantly dependent on tax avoidance (I could I suppose be wrong, but it sounds ridiculous to me). If my pension was a few quid less because the government addressed tax avoidance and that was the impact, I'd accept that no problem. I strongly suspect that your argument that the average person's pension is dependent on tax avoidance is complete nonsense.
This may be an alien concept to you, but I see myself as part of a society where the money I pay in tax doesn't just disappear (to some poor person I don't want to have, perhaps); it is money that I have spent on public services which I value. OK, the system is inefficient, but that is a technical issue.
> The issue of tax isn't a moral issue at all, it's a technical one. How does a government generate revenue from companies while ensuring shareholders have an adequate return to continue investing capital; while encouraging companies to make long term investments in a country; and not disincentivating companies from operating in or investing in the UK as opposed to anywhere else on the planet.
I agree 100%. But I don't think that the optimum technical solution is to let big business rip us off. We're the UK FFS, Starbucks and Google want to do business here. We're not milking them and we should be. The optimum solution gets as much revenue as possible and the best economic output. You seem to be arguing that we've hit that optimum, and any changes to attempt to collect more revenue will be offset by a decrease in economic output. I could be wrong, but it sounds like complete rubbish to me.
> Actually I think there may be grounds for changing the tax basis for companies that are primarily retailers from profit to sales, but I think someone here recently suggested that is happening anyway?
Could be good.