Lower corporation tax is a keystone of coalition fiscal policy, with large company rates being reduced to 20%.

You made a bit of a song and dance earlier in the thread about us all being worse off than 30 years ago. That would have been 4 years into Mrs Thatcher's premiership. So, it seems you must be an admirer of her governmemt's economic policy measures? Maybe if you give Osborne the time to get over the inherited mess then we'll all be better off again in a few years time?

Are you on drugs?

No. (Notice the full and concise answer).

Questiion - are "we" better or worse off than 30 years ago?

Your post appears to be based on a quite ridiculous assumption that no company in the world ever pays any corporation tax.

That's not what he's suggested. If a company can domicile their tax affairs in a country where they pay no tax whatsover, why would they domicile in a country where they pay any %?

Perhaps if you were a company currently paying corporation tax here and considering a move maybe a lower tax rate might - and I say might - encourage you stay here for tax purposes. I am not suggesting for one minute that the likes of Google will relocate here on the back of a corporate tax reduction.

If a reduction the corporate tax rate increases revenues then society as a whole will benefit - would you not agree?

Being able to lay out a letter should be a given, being able to type an e-mail in a coherent fashion and being reasonably competent in basic office suite i.e. Word, Excel and Powerpoint. Speaking on a telephone is a life skill that should be taught at school

So parents have no responsibility in developing these "life skills" then?

It isn't based in that at all. How did you come to that daft conclusion?

Any company who can relocate it's HQ for a lower tax rate will do so and plenty have. Why pay 21% instead of 23% when you can pay 0%?

An interesting one is going to be what happens if Scotland decided on independence. The SNP are saying they will reduce the corporation tax rate to 18% undercutting the rest of the UK rate. It might be more feasible for national UK companies who at the moment can't indulge in the tax avoidance the multinationals like Google can to relocate north of the border.

Should we indulge in a race to the bottom in the event this happened or should we just reform the tax laws so this kind of avoidance is no longer legal?



It won't. Companies that can avoid corporation tax will carry on avoiding it. Those that can't avoid it (basically any non-multinational company with its HQ here who can't move) will be paying less tax so revenues will decrease.

Sorry I thought you meant from the point of view of a regular person rather than specifically from a teachers point of view.
I'd agree that's how teachers saw it in the past, but as you yourself acknowledge, the role and duties of a teacher have changed and become a harder job. I would probably apply similar thoughts to nurses, where the role has evolved massively over time and become a much more demanding job.


I don't quite know whether behavioural standards have dropped but I'd agree there is less respect and I'd also suggest a more selfish attitude. However, I believe these to be things which can be fairly easily changed if kids are put in the right environment. I see it regularly with the kids I coach. Fortunately I'm in the position where I can concentrate on fewer kids. Around 1:15 instead of 1:30 in schools.

But as someone said, most companies that make profits here do pay corporation tax.

How do you define a company "that can't move" as this seems central to your idea?

PS Just heard the number one reason why Scotland will vote against independence on The One Show. Apparently the major supermarkets say they will put prices up significantly oin Scotland if it becomes independent. Currently Scottish prices are effectively subsidised by the rest of the UK. If independent Scotland would be treated as 'international' by the supermarkets and so have separate pricing to the rest of the UK. can't see the average Scottish punter voting for that whatever the CT rate!

Probably the 90% plus of companies who are not global corporations, can't recall the exact stat but when we used to do our marketing we were always told that the sector of employees who employ less than 500 bodies represent 90+% of the total number of businesses.

Why is every multi national not domiciled in a tax haven then? BP is a multi national corporation every opportunity to relocate where it likes and pay no tax - yet it chooses to domicile here - so your point of why pay 30% when you can pay nothing doesn't ring true?

Your last point doesn't ring true either - lower corporation tax actually increases take, why would that be?

Nearly all FTSE 100 companies are global. A big chunk earn a big part of their revenues outside the UK. Why do they stay HQ'd here? What about all the multinationals based in Japan, USA, France, etc?