Sure but my general question remains. Why do we denigrate the actors that are working in their own interests based on the incentives as given, when the denigration is the tax codes, and implicitly the people that create the tax codes that are the problems?
I'm not arguing that paying more tax isn't inherently beneficial towards the state(s), but if the incentive is to avoid the tax, and it is legal, I fail to see the problem at all from the viewpoint of the corporation.
> I fail to see the problem at all from the viewpoint of the corporation.
You're right, as long as the corporation doesn't mind if the public see it as a bunch of greedy, grasping, evil corporate bastards.
In Google's case, its "selling point" is "Don't be evil" and its business depends on trust. It's rapidly losing that trust.
For the record, Google's UK turnover in 2011 was £2.7bn, and based on its profitability, it's making about £676m and should be paying more than £180m in tax in that one year. In fact, it has paid a total of £10 million between 2006 and 2011 on revenues of £11.9bn.
If Google was a moral, ethical company then it would pay taxes that cover the cost of doing business in the UK, where it benefits from UK government expenditure on maintaining the country as a good place to do business (roads, schools, health services, police etc).
Essentially, Google is using fancy international book-keeping to defraud the British public.
I'm not arguing that paying more tax isn't inherently beneficial towards the state(s), but if the incentive is to avoid the tax, and it is legal, I fail to see the problem at all from the viewpoint of the corporation.