Dear God Almighty this man’s a twat

I have already offered a long analysis of Facebook’s accounts. But in that fairly technical analysis I did not say what really irks me about the UK accounts. Three things do.

First, it’s the sheer contempt Facebook show for having to pay their way for the right to trade here. If Facebook was not really profitable in the UK it would not be paying its staff so much. But it seems to want us to subsidise that pay and not make any long-term contribution for actually making money here. That feels like a complete snub.

Paying staff high salaries so that the tax take is 55% or so instead of making a profit so that the tax take is 20% is tax avoidance now?

Second, it’s the contempt of filing a set of accounts saying they’re for Facebook UK when they clearly are not because none of its sales in this country were in them. I know this is going to change, but the annoyance remains.

It’s the accounts for Facebook UK Ltd. Which are indeed true and correct.

And third? It’s that company and tax law says all this is true and fair when it so obviously is not.

Some amount of value is created in California, no? So it is indeed true and fair that some value is assigned there, no?

That lot irks.

Yep, public idiocy is painful.

27 thoughts on “Dear God Almighty this man’s a twat”

  1. I guess that means Facebook isn’t going to get a Fair Tax Mark awarded any time soon then?

    Or unless an impressive large brown envelope makes its way to a certain unimpressive end-terrace in Ely?

  2. Richard Murphy trying to puzzle out Reality is something to behold.

    Any bets on whether he’ll end his days standing a Tesco wearing pajamas, bath robe and slippers ranting about the aliens in his soup?

  3. If Facebook was not really profitable in the UK it would not be paying its staff so much.

    Remember when the Left was all about greedy corporations being profit-focussed and paying the staff peanuts?

  4. This is, of course, (the salary eating up the profits thing) a good one to bamboozle your lefty friends with (you do have lefty friends, don’t you?).

    Seriously, they can’t handle it, they want the company to pay (and don’t even use the word ‘incidence’). They talk about the ‘worker’, but they don’t really want the worker to earn too much either.

    Of course, as is often pointed out round here, too much for a lefty is around 25% more than he or she earns.

  5. BraveFart

    In fact the test for the FTM is I believe simply to explain your results. If there is no taxable profit – and paying your staff well is a very good way of ensuring there is not in the short term – then there will be no CT to pay. And Facebook UK can pick up its Fair Tax Mark, complete with happy endorsement from the good people of FTM.

    Oh the fun!

  6. @ bilbaoboy
    Actually it’s 10% – someone did a survey asking people “how much” and then, after getting the answer, asked them how much they got paid.
    N.B. I wasn’t included in the survey – as far as I am concerned Wladimir Klitschko is welcome to every €uro he earns, which is several 1000% more than I do.

  7. “…for having to pay their way for the right to trade here.”

    What a curious idea Ritchie.

    Forgive me, but weren’t you only yesterday declaring yourself to be a liberal?

  8. Ironman

    Yes indeed, although the FTM seems to be reserved mainly for companies which breach minimum wage rules, so that may disqualify Facebook?

    “But it seems to want us to subsidise that pay”

    Fvck me, you mean I’m paying that Zuckerberg cvnt when I’m not even on Facebook?!

  9. john77

    Then I was righter (as in correct, not politically) than I thought.

    Every so often I go back to Maggie’s last hurrah in parliament and review her take down of socialism.

    Even then, she saw that all this current craze for eequalitiiiii forgets that the important thing is not to have poverty.

    Her ‘you’d rather that the poor were poorer….’ is even more true today.

  10. Ironman – there is an over-ride, apparently, which means that even though you meet the formal criteria the Mark can be denied if they think you shouldn’t get it.

    I think it’s in there. I know it wasn’t at one point, when Murphy was objecting to my demonstration that you could be quite egregious and still get good enough marks, but I have a vague memory that they changed things later.

  11. He’s had a stroke.

    The evil capitalist organisation is paying its workers too much and should cut their pay so the company + workers pay less tax?

    That’s the most stupid thing he’s ever written.

  12. “If Facebook was not really profitable in the UK it would not be paying its staff so much”

    Isn’t this what “Not for profits” do? Pay their staff so much there is no surplus? Does Richie oppose these too?

  13. Anyone else who would be up for crowdfunding a public debate between Worstall and Murphy? Provided it gets put onto Youtube of course.

    Suggested working title:

    Murphy v Worstall

    This time it’s personal, or
    The Rumble in the Jungle (if held in Calais)

  14. “Don’t worry–he’ll top it before too long.”

    True.

    If he topped himself, that would marginally increase the average IQ of the nation.

  15. To be fair, the “eminent” tax barrister, Jolyon (I am a Socialist who owns a windmill and needs public subsidy to restore it) Maugham, was also incensed that mere workers in industry could earn so much money.

  16. Bloke in Costa Rica

    “I have already offered a long analysis of Facebook’s accounts.”
    ‘E’s a card, inne? I mean, what a pompous cunt. I wouldn’t trust him to calculate how much to tip a pizza delivery driver. You’re more likely to find cogent analysis poking through a morning-after curry shit.

  17. BraveFart/Everyone

    Ritchie is on his way down; he has pissed off everyone he needed to keep on side or otherwise exposed himself as an idiot. A year or so ago he had Worstall removed from a conference debate. Very soon he will be trying to challenge Tim Worstall to debate in order to shore up his relevance and profile. Tim shouldn’t indulge him.

  18. Ironman

    I think you’re spot on – despite him still being dangerous in the sense of being so power mad the reality is he has managed to annoy everyone, especially the Labour Party so his relevance is fast fading. That kind of put down is tough for such a vast ego to take, hence him lashing out in stream of consciousness rants…

  19. I’m not sure I’d go along with the analysis here that the Prof is past his best, down at heel and out at the elbows. His voracious ego can probably eke out a megre existence feeding on the krill that make up the loyal claque on TRUK.

    Whether his generously flesh-bound corporation can continue to prosper will depend on his academic stipend.

    When that resource dries up, then the proposed new legislation that targets online hate will ensure him rich pickings from this blog which is why I append my
    s.c. 30:29:28
    a/c 76543210

  20. See he’s getting more subtle in his swipes at accounting standards and the profession with his true and fair comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *