Cyprus-Forum.com

[Lordo]

Elizabeth Holmes: Theranos founder convicted of fraud.

If you wait long enough another one comes along. Here is another poor capitalist who was really working to better our lives. She claimed her tests worked while they did not, so they cheated on the results to make them look as though they worked.

She clearly robbed around about 9 billion dollars worth of investment, although a lot of those were from the wealthy folk so thats not so bad but there must be ordinary investers amongst them.

But what about the sick people who were given wrong results.

What an absolute bitch.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-59734254

[Lordo]

It is not just corporations that poisons humanity, US government is no better.

What the hell is the world coming to.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/the-us-military-is-polluting-hawaiis-water-supply-%e2%80%93-and-denying-it/ar-AASpY7a?ocid=entnewsntp

[Pyrpolizer]

Don't be silly, you can't pay millions in VAT to a ghost company and then claim it back.
The company to which you pay VAT has to be registered and provide it's own VAT number.
For large amounts you have to provide their VAT number too and the whole thing is double crossed.

I know very well how VAT works. The only possibility to have a negative net amount due is to be working at loss.

Of course everybody pays VAT, rich, poor, unemployed. It is a tax on consumption. However the poor will mostly buy food, who's VAT is very low, from 0 to 5% (In Cyprus)

You didn't answer my question:
What if the "Lordo tax" is higher than their profit?

If you knew how VAT works you would not have said we already have a system of collecting TAX from corporations through VAT. Never mind.

Here is a report of a VAT scam.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/jul/08/carousel-tax-fraud-mobile-phones

No, what I said was that there's already a tax on sales (the VAT) that actually sucks money from the consumer. You want to impose another tax let's call it TOT (turnover tax) that would suck money from the seller.
However you never thought that the seller would be free to increase his prices by as much as TOT, rolling the cost once again on the consumer. Eventually the consumer would pay both the VAT and the TOT.

I guess that's the reason you never answered my question of what would happen if the profit of the seller was less than the TOT.

As for the VAT scandal the problem was with your HMRC officers, who paid them 107 million in VAT returns, without checking the VAT records of the UK companies they were buying from. Had they done this, they would discover the fraud with the ghost companies immediately. No such thing is possible in Cyprus let aside they would never reimburse such huge amounts so fast...

[Maximus]

Bordos (not Bezos) hasnt even heard of a company that makes less than 20% profit margin before.

Dont expect a good answer about how his turnover tax would work, because it wouldn't, unless you have a different tax system for different companies. Which means it doesnt work.

Amazon turns over about $385 billion with a 5% profit margin.

Mcdonalds turns over about $23 billion with a 30% profit margin.

Jane's makup and lace lingerie turns over $10 million with 50% profit margin.

Let him keep trying to work it out!

[Lordo]

Bordos (not Bezos) hasnt even heard of a company that makes less than 20% profit margin before.

Dont expect a good answer about how his turnover tax would work, because it wouldn't, unless you have a different tax system for different companies. Which means it doesnt work.

Amazon turns over about $385 billion with a 5% profit margin.

Mcdonalds turns over about $23 billion with a 30% profit margin.

Jane's makup and lace lingerie turns over $10 million with 50% profit margin.

Let him keep trying to work it out!

You actually believe that when a corporation declcares 5% profit margin, that is actually accurate. Amazon for the first 10 years of its life declared no profits at all. It must be true right?

You stupid idiot, where is that furquine toilet brush again? Find it and get on with your job.

[Lordo]

[Lordo]

Interesting fact from the above clip is that Greek Civil Service workers outnumber the private sector workers.

How the hell does this work?

Very interesting. What did FDR do in 1933.

[Maximus]

Bordos (not Bezos) hasnt even heard of a company that makes less than 20% profit margin before.

Dont expect a good answer about how his turnover tax would work, because it wouldn't, unless you have a different tax system for different companies. Which means it doesnt work.

Amazon turns over about $385 billion with a 5% profit margin.

Mcdonalds turns over about $23 billion with a 30% profit margin.

Jane's makup and lace lingerie turns over $10 million with 50% profit margin.

Let him keep trying to work it out!

You actually believe that when a corporation declcares 5% profit margin, that is actually accurate. Amazon for the first 10 years of its life declared no profits at all. It must be true right?

You stupid idiot, where is that furquine toilet brush again? Find it and get on with your job.

Why wouldn't I believe it, do you have anything to prove that they have a higher profit margin?

We are talking about retail here, the profit margin is pretty high on cloths but low for pretty much everything else, including food.

Tesco reported profit margins of about 5% as well.

Do you believe that every company has a profit margin greater than 20%? Do you believe a 5% profit margin on high volume or consumable goods is not realistic? Do you believe that all business dont declare their tax?

You have as much business acumen as a wet toilet brush.

Go ahead and tell us how would implement the Bordo turn over tax? what percentage of turnover are you going to use?

Then explain how this is going to work across different industries with different profit margins.

[Lordo]

You still don't get it boy. When a company declares low profit margin or no profit margin you believe them. And yet these organisations are multi national companies with thousands of outlets.

Starbucks' head of finance, Troy Alstead, was forced to portray his company as a perennial commercial flop, in order to account for its peculiar failure to record a taxable profit in the UK for 14 out of the last 15 years.

He was followed by Amazon's Andrew Cecil, who was reduced to stuttering when he was accused of being "pathetic" for his inability to disclose something as basic as how much of his firm's European sales came from the UK last year.

Last up was Google's Matt Brittin. In contrast to his two peers, Mr Brittin did not seek to evade or apologise.

Yes, of course Google minimises its tax bill, by operating in Bermuda and Ireland, he said. Google had a duty to its shareholders to minimise its costs. And besides, the UK still benefited from Google's many free products, not least its search engine, which were engineered by thousands of employees in California.

What have you done with the furquine toilet brush again, there are 20 more toilets to be cleaned yet.

[Maximus]

Listen Bordo, (not Bezos) I am all for companies paying their taxes and I am well aware that they will try to limit their tax liabilities whenever possible.

But you wont answer the question because you havent thought your turn over tax through properly.