SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
El Reg reports
Steve Wozniak has spoken out against Apple's tax affairs, saying all companies ought to pay 50 per cent in taxes.
Speaking to BBC Radio 5 Live he said: "I don't like the idea that Apple might be unfair--not paying taxes the way I do as a person.
"I do a lot of work, I do a lot of travel and I pay over 50 per cent of anything I make in taxes and I believe that's part of life and you should do it."
Asked if Apple should pay that amount, he replied: "Every company in the world should."
According to Woz, money was never a factor when he started the biz with Steve Jobs 40 years ago. He added: "Steve Jobs started Apple Computers for money, that was his big thing and that was extremely important and critical and good."
Europe is currently scrutinising Ireland's tax arrangements with Apple over an alleged sweetheart deal with the company. Some have speculated the probe could lead to Apple paying $8bn in back taxes, even though the case is against the Irish government.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Tuesday April 26 2016, @12:29AM
Train drivers in the U.K. Have way over 60% of their overtime taken in tax, and 10% of the rest goes in vat.
(Score: 2) by Whoever on Tuesday April 26 2016, @03:18AM
Bullllllshit!
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Tuesday April 26 2016, @09:31AM
An trained virgin train driver earns upto £52k [virgintrainscareers.co.uk]. He has 2 children, his wife earns £30k and gets £34.40 a week in child benefit (£1788.80 a year)
He decides to do some overtime - 3 days at time and a half.
Train company spends £1138 on the overtime.
£138 is employers NI contribution
That leaves £1000 wage
40% income tax leaves £600
2% NI leaves £580
£178 is taken from his payslip directly because of child benefit reduction, reducing the net pay to £402.
£402 of the original £1138 spent is 35.3%, or a tax rate of 64.7%.
Now imagine that the same toc spends that £1138 on something from a company. That £1138 goes to the company owned by a millionaire. They then pay it out in dividends, which attracts 20% tax for their owner. The owner takes £910.40 out of that £1138.
Now imagine that extra £1138 was paid as a bonus to a mid-ranking banker earning £300k. His take home pay increases by £530, or a marginal tax of 53.4%
Or that £1138 is paid to someone on £20k, net pay increases by £680, or 40% tax.
The train driver with the family in the £50k-£60k bracket pays the most marginal tax, but even someone on £20k (take home pay £1400 a month) is paying 40% tax on their overtime. If you have business expenses (commuting etc) that comes off after-tax for the workers, and pre-tax for the owners, widening the gap even more.
Making tax bands relative to wealth rather than income would be the fair way to reward economically useful work. Ideally you'd simply tax wealth, but without currency controls that wouldn't work, and currency controls are a major barrier to trade.
(Score: 2) by Whoever on Tuesday April 26 2016, @03:29PM
That's the employer's cost, not the employee's tax.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Tuesday April 26 2016, @04:36PM
No, that's not how it works. It matters not if the tax is hidden or not. As an employer of someone earning £50k, if I want to give them an extra £1000 take home pay, I have to spend an extra £3000.
That is a ridiculous situation.