Is it time to nationalize Australia, page-32

You raise an important point/Fact there with ...." As to taxes, without going though the actual books it is hard to know what is actually TAX,..."

It's a big long topic really but i'll try and keep it simplified from how i understand things.

This is why when fake news media outlets like our ABC and MSM run headline narratives something like this....... '.such and such company made a profit of 2 Bn but paid no tax, Australia is getting ripped off by evil capitalist companies ra ra ra ' most people believe it even though it's in general false mis-information or mis-direction, they believe it because they don't understand all the complexities of the subject. I can even give a couple of examples which show even our authorities don't understand it all properly and those are the example of the Muddy Waters guy spending time with ASIC employees to help educate them on how to spot frauds and irregularities that might be red flags for fraud or shifty stuff, plus shorters are always the first to spot con-man type companies and/or operators and the good ones are often years ahead of any regulators be it local or global regulators, an example on the company tax side of things is that when one door closes another one opens and the amounts of excessive levels of tax legislation that can practibly be introduced without major economic harm in any single country is limited to to the globalistic economic nature of economies and trade, one has to remain globally competitive for companies to do business and create jobs and industries for our citizens or we end up a lot poorer, one example of over-regulating and legislating that ended badly for it's citizens is Argentina, the reality is we do not live in a perfect world and with the current global financial/economic system we all operate and depend on for our standard of living we are simply never going to close all the so called loop holes, it's simply impossible for our governments to do it and the thing or attitude that would benefit the citizens of any country the most is to accept ones abilities and limitations and the truths and realities of the world we live in and simply make the most of it by focusing gov policies on and with efficient and productive intentions while balancing and finding the optimal ratios of the social spend policies/ Pro business wealth creation policies, both sides of this ratio can go too far, we can over tax and over regulated and have overly generous social spending and we can have too little regulation, too low taxes and too much economic power and influence in the hands of very few. I guess the optimal ratio is somewhat dictated by the global competitive economic environment, i say dictated because it is because if a country does not remain economically competitive with excessive taxes and regulations, economic growth, investment and activity get reduced and our gov ends up with less tax revenues over time and then wouldn't be able to sustainably deliver it's social spend, the most important thing for a country to focus on is growing economic activity and opportuntiy for business and investors because this is what provides the government tax revenues so it can rightly provide social spending where needed, if a government wants to increase it's social spend then it needs to increase the economic pir that it taxes, the worst thing a government can di is reduce the economic pie or have taxes make up too big a slice of the economic pie.

I think BHP and other Australian headquartered companies are hard to bag and tag as bad or evil capitalistic companies, they are very good for Australians as they create a lot of very high paying jobs, create a lot of tax revenues for our gov and i do think even though some %'s of our companies are owned internationally our gov still does have control of the resource somewhat because when BHP openly shared it was thinking about maybe moving it's headquarters to a more economically competitive country for obvious reasons our ScoMo didn't take very long at all to rightfully decide to pull out the ace card on BHP and tell them if you do that we'll revoke your mining licences and take them off you and thus BHP looked at that comment and thought maybe it's not such a good move for our shareholders to go overseas after all and they stopped thinking about that move and thus Australians still enjoy BHP's economic contribution. An example of a bad outcome for the countries people with something similar to this is that company we all know called Apple, it use to be an American headquartered company in the US for tax purposes which benefitted the American people and gov tax revenues as it should do, however the US gov un-ethically or morally let Apple re-locate it's headquarter's to Ireland that has a lower tax rate of 15% without any penalty to Apple or Ireland that pinched it, if i was in the Whitehouse when the re-location was on the cards i would have told Apple i'll slap a 200% excise on your US phone sales or something like that if you shift to Ireland because your an American made and created company and Americans should benefit from that creation rather than in effect making Americans subsidize the Irish and the EU in stealth mode.

I think theres a global mandatory tax of 15% on big global companies that was created a few years ago by our Corman i think, signed on by 130 odd countries and Oz is one of them, they'll probably be able to raise some money with it but i don't think Australia gets much of a distribution.
You can have a read about it in the link below, they use all sorts of non-binary long winded grey area provision type wording which obviously creates a loot of wiggle room for corporate lawyers just to deem or qualify a corporate entity or group for the tax. Personally i doubt they'll ever raise the tax revenues they were supposedly aiming for in the first place but it gives some pollies and MSM some narratives.
https://rsmus.com/insights/tax-alerts/2022/the-new-corporate-minimum-tax-overview-and-highlights.html
" The corporate alternative minimum tax imposes a 15% tax on the “adjusted financial statement income” of certain corporations and corporate groups that meet a $1 billion average annual adjusted financial statement income test ($100 million in the case of certain U.S. corporations that are members of a foreign-parented multinational group—provided the multinational group also meets the $1 billion threshold). At a basic level, a taxpayer’s adjusted financial statement income is its financial statement income or loss, with certain adjustments. "

I think the reason that those who write the legislation and create the new terminology for taxes do it is to make sure it's hard for the average person to understand, taxes should be called taxes, they shouldn't invent new terms so people don't think of them as extra taxes, your example of ' the contribution towards the economy' if it's in the books should just be called a tax and added on top of the income tax figures as it's all paid out of the companies income, same with Aboriginal company contributions, etc etc. Even things like Stamp duties, drivers license fees, fuel excise etc etc etc etc should all be called taxes or have tax in the name so it's clear for everyone what they are and why do we after passing a driving test have to keep on paying for a licence all our lives every year, we never get tested again, the passing of the driving test we did when younger doesn't ever expire so theres never any need to renew it yet they hit us with what they call renewall of licence fees, they should call it what it is.....Yearly Gov Tax/Fee for driving privilege.

I think the best measure for gov tax revenue is against it's gdp, because companies make and lose money at different times singling out a few single companies in singular years sort of gives us a misrepresentation of the wholelistic picture on the efficiencies of our tax code and at the end of the day what actually matters is gov tax revenue net result and if thats competitive on a global comparison.