Barclays Bank Paid Just £113M In Tax (£11.6Bn Of Profits)

[Rachman]

so, FACT 1 Government has no income of its own, it gets it from tax.

FACT 2. A tax haven is a Government that collects little tax.

QUESTION....what is funding the Government and the population of a Tax Haven?

Is it a Donation by tax foreign tax evaders?

Fact 1 is correct. Fact 2 isn't. A tax haven can easily be a country that collects less tax than elsewhere - maybe because it doesn't need to. Because it doesn't chuck it down the public spending black hole on unaffordable pensions and 5 a day co-ordinators.

We don't need to raise any more tax, we simply need to stop wasting what we do raise.

Then there will be lots to pay for the economically inactive (and far fewer of them)

['Bart']

er, love, if the public sector didn't waste so much money, there would be plenty to go round

I must confess to a certain sympathy with that view.

[Olebrum]

We're all in this together, apart from my old banker chums hey what.

I suppose it's only fair they pay so little, when you take into consideration

all the 'wealth' they create.

[Bloo Loo]

Fact 1 is correct. Fact 2 isn't. A tax haven can easily be a country that collects less tax than elsewhere - maybe because it doesn't need to. Because it doesn't chuck it down the public spending black hole on unaffordable pensions and 5 a day co-ordinators.

We don't need to raise any more tax, we simply need to stop wasting what we do raise.

Then there will be lots to pay for the economically inactive (and far fewer of them)

thank you..FACT 2 was a kite flyer on my part admittedly.

I guess ROI was a "tax Haven" under your definition....They clearly DO need to collect tax now.

[Rachman]

thank you..FACT 2 was a kite flyer on my part admittedly.

I guess ROI was a "tax Haven" under your definition....They clearly DO need to collect tax now.

Absolutely. Their corp tax rate, for non-investment co income is extremely attractive. The thing is, that was 'extra' revenue they attracted in - and they know that if they up the rate, they will lose those companies. There are large areas near the airport that were being prepared for multinationals to move into.

The other problem is that these multinationals have no interest in Ireland and funding Ireland's ridiculous continuing state profligacy..... - yes, the Irish need the money - buy a) there's no way they will ever pay off their debt and until the Irish stop giving money they don't have away to themselves then there'll be no sympathy from me... Ireland is still laughably expensive and wages ludicrously high [a half @rsed assistant cosec wants Euro90K - the UK equivalent is nearer £45K]

[Bloo Loo]

Absolutely. Their corp tax rate, for non-investment co income is extremely attractive. The thing is, that was 'extra' revenue they attracted in - and they know that if they up the rate, they will lose those companies. There are large areas near the airport that were being prepared for multinationals to move into.

The other problem is that these multinationals have no interest in Ireland and funding Ireland's ridiculous continuing state profligacy..... - yes, the Irish need the money - buy a) there's no way they will ever pay off their debt and until the Irish stop giving money they don't have away to themselves then there'll be no sympathy from me... Ireland is still laughably expensive and wages ludicrously high [a half @rsed assistant cosec wants Euro90K - the UK equivalent is nearer £45K]

They are in a pickle.

Having dealt with Bankrupts for a long time, I see the ROI Government and Bankers sounding EXACTLY like bankrupts....its human nature...and that sound is...IF only you could give me more time, and some money, it will work out...I PROMISE you.....the debtor really is clinging to hope and bankruptcy clears this mindset for the benefit of his mental health.

Creditors giving in to this mindset also are in a trap, but really, the best way to handle an impossible situation is NOT to paper over the cracks, but to allow the deal to break. The borrower has his shame, the creditor learns a lesson and all can get on with their business.

The latest thing the ROI banks are doing as UK Sterling MBS are now not accepted as collateral at the ECB ( For Ireland) is to issue bonds to THEMSELVES and have the Government BACK THEM UP with a taxpayer guarantee.

If this isnt a signal of an endgame for the Irish banks then I dont know what is...There must be a serious behind the scenes run on these banks if these are the sort of criminal measures they, and the Governement are undertaking.

[mattyfc]

What's the problem. If they had committed any fraud or done anything illegal, HMRC would jump on them in a flash.

Are people suggesting that Barclays should pay local taxes and then also pay them in the UK as well - that sort of flies against just about any tax treaty in the world.

They have structured their business well - that is what their directors are legally obliged to do - their statutory directors' duties require them to do this.

Why not ask yourself how much tax NRK paid last year.

And as for bailouts - are we still on this nonsense - the only reason the banks got collateral advantage out of QE and the ridiculous guarantee scheme was because it was set up for political capital - not for the UK or the banks - and it has permitted continued government waste (both Coalition and Labour).

£11.6 billion is, by the way, about what we INCREASE our national debt by every single month. Where should your anger be directed ? Pouring water into a leaking bucket springs to mind.

Agree, Barclays are paying UK corporation tax on UK profits. Just like any other business. Bankers are being made scapegoats for the real culprits in the Financial crisis.

The architects of a decade in which private ,and now public debt is rising to record levels. HPI was let rip Banks lent crazy amounts of money and the whole system nearly collapsed.

The FSA, the previous Government and Gordon Brown is where the anger should be directed. The set the system up, did not regulate lending (NR anyone?), house prices rose several hundred percent in a decade. A massive debt ponzi scheme, yet the Bankers get the entire blame for the collapse.

[Bloo Loo]

snip A massive debt ponzi scheme, yet the Bankers get the entire blame for the collapse.

I dont think they get the entire blame...but as the key players, they had the opportunity to say no to criminality.

They didnt.

And they still arent.

And just because there is no Government law doesnt mean an action isnt criminal...that is, doing something which is basically against the 10 commandments.

[@contradevian]

Just about. I have also offshored 2 FTSE members, so now the UK doesn't get any corp tax from them. Why, not because of the tax being collected from them, but because of the risk of what could happen in future. So that's about £100m a year that HMRC (and the UK) is missing out on.

The rules are there - you play by them. If you win, you win, if you lose......

I have just seen some joker on the news - "it is wrong that these companies avoid tax, they should pay more tax to pay for the public sector...." - er, love, if the public sector didn't waste so much money, there would be plenty to go round,.,....

We shall all laugh then the economy all implodes on itself due to your tax dodging scum clients who expect their employee's and customers to take the burden. Thats if you haven't offshored the workforce too.

[Bloo Loo]

We shall all laugh then the economy all implodes on itself due to your tax dodging scum clients who expect their employee's and customers to take the burden. Thats if you haven't offshored the workforce too.

while the result is the collapse of your buying public, the offshoring is not just funds, like bankers, but cheap goods from Chindia are the exact same thing.

[Realistbear]

Till lightening, tax evasion, liar loan racketeering.... Do we really need these parasites in this country?

[@contradevian]

while the result is the collapse of your buying public, the offshoring is not just funds, like bankers, but cheap goods from Chindia are the exact same thing.

I think the penny is slowly starting to drop though. Its slow because none of todays tax dodging protests will get wide media coverage, but like in Egypt the movement is spreading through blogs, facebook and twitter (with no help from the BBC).

Hopefully tax dodging on an industrial scale will become so "bad for business" that it becomes counter productive. If the Government won't act then hopefully the public can sufficiently disrupt their operations.

Also all Chartered Accountants should immediately report for enforced "ethics training." Rather than signing off on anything (just think of the fee income chaps). There has been a complete failure in morality there too.

[Rachman]

We shall all laugh then the economy all implodes on itself due to your tax dodging scum clients who expect their employee's and customers to take the burden. Thats if you haven't offshored the workforce too.

less than 10% of the operations of these global companies was in the UK. They are UK listed - that does not mean they are Arkwrights Corner Shop and Sweatshop.

Notwithstanding their corporate structures, they still contribute tens of millions of pounds via employees' income tax to HMRC - by having a lot of management operations in the UK. It really isn't black and white and if you REALLY think that these companies should be 'charitable' and pay more tax than they need to, I suggest you look at your pension fund statement (though presumably you have an unfunded one you just expect someone else to pay for).

The biggest issue for the UK is not tax revenues, it is what the government (of whatever hue) commit to spend it on. There is loads of money collected. Much of it thrown down the plughole. Every pound not spent by government is about £1.20 not needed to be raised in tax (by not needing to administer it and it not coming with public sector pensions), so in effect that is about a tenner of turnover (Assuming 8%margins) that the productive part of society does not need to do. You sound suspiciously like a tax and spend (though not necessarily in that order) mental case from Kirkcaldy....... [all stats are made up for effect.... ]

BTW, as Bloo Loo says, why is our manufacturing down the pan - oh yes, because we won't pay for it to be made in the UK - we want cheap stuff.... we are all to blame..... look at even M&S and JL - they are full of cheap stuff that is simply too cheap to be produced here - because people won't pay - look at how cheap stuff like pans and whatever can be.... there is no way they could be made in Sheffield for that..... yet, everyone looks to blame someone else.

Here's a question, what was the last British car most of us bought new....... ? Why ? Yes, you have the odd Rover or Jap transplant cars, but we as customers, and in a large way, the unions and management, killed our car industry..... same with everything - we kill the golden goose by short termism and then complain there is nothing left to eat.

Edited February 19, 2011 by Rachman

[Ah-so]

The same story has been reported on the 'Today' Programme this morning, again with the same misreporting of the story. The truth is that Barclays paid £1.2bn in taxes in 2009.

Barclays is a global firm and a significant portion of its profits are generated overseas, where it pays a lot of its tax.

I am not defending the Bank, but simply trying to bring some balance to the story.

[Realistbear]

http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/Barclays-corporation-tax-bill-tele-2505498354.html;_ylt=AmEerYxVhaHFjjX8cuoBVtnSr7FG;_ylu=X3oDMTE4N2NlbnJuBHBvcwMyBHNlYwN5ZmlUb3BTdG9yaWVzBHNsawNiYXJjbGF5c2NvcnA-?x=0

.../

True, financial services remain Britain's biggest wealth creator and are crucial to the nation's recovery. But it's hard not to feel queasy about a system that allows Barclays to offset losses it stupidly made in the US against its tax bill here, in turn

inflating the profits

underpinning those mega-bonuses.

Fraud against the shareholders?

[bumpy]

You want them to employ people and pay taxes on profit.

Radical idea.

So that would be 40% in every country they trade in. So after 2.5 countries they will have nothing left.

[Bloo Loo]

snjip

Notwithstanding their corporate structures, they still contribute tens of millions of pounds via employees' income tax to HMRC - by having a lot of management operations in the UK. It really isn't black and white and if you REALLY think that these companies should be 'charitable' and pay more tax than they need to, I suggest you look at your pension fund statement (though presumably you have an unfunded one you just expect someone else to pay for).

snip

Indeed, the taxpayers want their money back that paid for all these jobs.

I still dont understand why an industry that accounted for 20-30% of our total efforts for years ended up being bust at the hieght of its profit cycle.

This could make a scynic beleive the profits were imaginary, yet to materialise and well, improperly reported yet, the debt, which they couldnt actually afford to pay in 2007, was real.

Edited February 19, 2011 by Bloo Loo

[proprlyst]

I guess it MAIN street doing all the heavy lifting and not the city. Bail them out with our tax contributions and then get us to pay the budget deficit too.

[The Spaniard]

The underlying structural flaw is that the UK economy runs on a means of exchange which must be borrowed at interest from the commercial banking system.

Why give such power to this essentially unproductive sector?

There is an alternative:

http://www.positivemoney.org.uk/

[Rachman]

Indeed, the taxpayers want their money back that paid for all these jobs.

I still dont understand why an industry that accounted for 20-30% of our total efforts for years ended up being bust at the hieght of its profit cycle.

This could make a scynic beleive the profits were imaginary, yet to materialise and well, improperly reported yet, the debt, which they couldnt actually afford to pay in 2007, was real.

the only reason that Barclays are getting any 'subsidy' or support at all is because of how the 'bailout' was structured - which was to try to seize control of the lenders by Labour and by both governments attempts to continue profligate spending. They, for unknown reasons, other than the word Scotland, bailed out RBS rather than letting it be broken up in an orderly fashion....... - they made a total pigs ear out of NRK, the Dunfermline, HBOS etc.

A bank is there for its shareholders, it is not a state charity - it's job is to make money for those shareholders..... if it does that by not being what you see as altruistic.... so be it.

The profits from banking - were mostly real - in that the profits were made on advising - it wasn't cash that was king, it was fees - the banker's first question "how big is my fee?" - the products themselves were not particularly held by banks, they were certainly not rated by banks and it is the underlying assets that have not performed - yet the bankers' profits were not on the underlying products (mostly) - they were in advising on them. Whether they did a good job or not will no doubt be a matter for lots of litigators.

I don't think banks are innocent - some of them are as guilty as hell, but to one extent or another, so are we all, particularly the governments, the regulators and the millions who spent like the jam would last forever and spent far far in excess of their means ...... mostly on either houses or depreciating tat (I'll let you read the word depreciating in that sentence wherever you like....).

I would also say that banks were and are productive - certainly in terms of net money into the UK - tens of billions of foreign money is paid into the UK economy each year, because of our banking industry - that is in effect, a massive export that we do. Irrespective of anything else and the morality of it, or not.... we can't afford to lose that sort of injection of money.....

The problem is, this is the game, obfuscate and divert from the real issue, which is systematic public overspend and a refusal to even acknowledge the real size of our public sector debt - you mention not being able to pay debts in 2007 ---- what about UK plc ? Could it then ? Can it now ? No, it keeps borrowing more...

Edited February 19, 2011 by Rachman

[ralphmalph]

All these complaints about Barclays not paying enough corp tax in the UK are missing the big point and that is the laundering of profits by Microsoft and Google et al through Ireland so they pay ZERO corporate tax in the UK.

At least Barclays pay corporate tax on their UK business.

The government needs to change the corp tax laws so that the Googles and the Microsofts pay corp tax on their profits here.

[mdman]

Bankers were and are guilty of systemic fraud. They overstate asset values for bigger bonuses. True value accounting would have forced them to bolster their capital way before the financial crisis hit (resulting in much smaller bonuses during the boom years).

The reason HMRC, HMG and the BoE never jumped on them was their fraud boosted tax revenues and public sector spend.

Bankers defrauded taxpayers. They are the prime cause

[Bloo Loo]

the only reason that Barclays are getting any 'subsidy' or support at all is because of how the 'bailout' was structured - which was to try to seize control of the lenders by Labour and by both governments attempts to continue profligate spending. They, for unknown reasons, other than the word Scotland, bailed out RBS rather than letting it be broken up in an orderly fashion....... - they made a total pigs ear out of NRK, the Dunfermline, HBOS etc.

A bank is there for its shareholders, it is not a state charity - it's job is to make money for those shareholders..... if it does that by not being what you see as altruistic.... so be it.

The profits from banking - were mostly real - in that the profits were made on advising - it wasn't cash that was king, it was fees - the banker's first question "how big is my fee?" - the products themselves were not particularly held by banks, they were certainly not rated by banks and it is the underlying assets that have not performed - yet the bankers' profits were not on the underlying products (mostly) - they were in advising on them. Whether they did a good job or not will no doubt be a matter for lots of litigators.

I don't think banks are innocent - some of them are as guilty as hell, but to one extent or another, so are we all, particularly the governments, the regulators and the millions who spent like the jam would last forever and spent far far in excess of their means ...... mostly on either houses or depreciating tat (I'll let you read the word depreciating in that sentence wherever you like....).

I would also say that banks were and are productive - certainly in terms of net money into the UK - tens of billions of foreign money is paid into the UK economy each year, because of our banking industry - that is in effect, a massive export that we do. Irrespective of anything else and the morality of it, or not.... we can't afford to lose that sort of injection of money.....

The problem is, this is the game, obfuscate and divert from the real issue, which is systematic public overspend and a refusal to even acknowledge the real size of our public sector debt - you mention not being able to pay debts in 2007 ---- what about UK plc ? Could it then ? Can it now ? No, it keeps borrowing more...

While you make some good points, the banks were insolvent in 2007....how can this be whether they were fee earned or product earned? How can a firm pay dividends if it is bust....course, cash flow is the answer, but regulators and Auditors should have been screaming from the rooftops about these issues...they didnt and again this was the Nulab and US "light touch" regulation that enabled bankers to get away with insolvent trading.

Your points about Government are well made, and its clear that QE is to support Government spend...Zero Hedge reporting that week old Gilts are being bought by the FED.

[Democorruptcy]

Somebody who has social networking accounts on such as Facebook, Myspace and Twitter should start a "Let's do a bank run on Barclays" campaign. Take your money and sell your shares.

They aren't paying enough tax.

Their interest rates are rubbish.

Their mortgage rates are rubbish.

Their return to shareholders was only about the same as what they paid 100 of their staff

http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/Barclays-facing-investor-tele-2760535516.html?x=0

Their bonuses are obscene

For anyone who says they didn't need a bailout, they needed so much The Fed loaned them $47.9bn

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-12-02/fed-may-be-central-bank-of-the-world-after-ubs-barclays-aid.html

I would love to see queues outside their branches next week and their share price tumbling.

[R K]

Banks can only operate under govt. licence (i.e. on approval by the people they 'serve') and with central bank lender of last resort support and govt. taxpayer 'bailout' support.

The simply solution in the case of Barclays is to withdraw their bankstering licence.

No Barclays would be a benefit to all of us. The sacked workers will drive down wages in the bankstering industry via competition for labour ('cause they're so obviously brilliant) and with a bit of luck they'll relocate somewhere else entirely releasing land/capital in the UK and force some other numpties to backstop them. Dubai or somewhere would be excellent.

They serve no useful social purpose in the UK and in fact a drain on our resources.

Shut them down.