hypocrisy of the media

[Stevo 666]

But they aren't doing that. Retch has cut huge numbers of jobs and closed down local papers. The Mail has cut jobs as has News Internationl (Murdoch). Their tax doesn't create jobs because they don't pay it.

The only "wealth" they are creating is their own. Offshore.

Nope. The number of people in employment may go up and down but if he hadn't set up the Daily Mail (however much anyone dislikes the publication) there would be less jobs that there currently are. But in the end, businesses are not charities to pay the workers, as you should know.

Apart from DMGT paying profits tax in the UK, there is all the income and payroll tax from their employees, VAT, business rates etc etc. You have to look see past the 'nasty rich business owner' stereotypes and look at the overall contributions of the businesses that they own in the UK.

 

[Pross]

And who gets to decide what's moral or immoral? Because it's not tax law.

To quote some bloke on the internet "you're missing the point". The original comment was in relation to the flagshagging nature of the paper and it's target audience not what is or isn't legal. If you regularly run editorials about benefit scroungers etc. it is a bit rich avoiding paying taxes to the country.

 

[CXRAndy]

To quote some bloke on the internet "you're missing the point". The original comment was in relation to the flagshagging nature of the paper and it's target audience not what is or isn't legal. If you regularly run editorials about benefit scroungers etc. it is a bit rich avoiding paying taxes to the country.

Not really, why would someone with the option not to pay for benefit scroungers by avoiding tax liabilities, offer to support them.

More fool the benefit scrounger if they buy the paper

 

[icowden]

Not really, why would someone with the option not to pay for benefit scroungers by avoiding tax liabilities, offer to support them.

Because not everyone is an entitled selfish prick.

 

[CXRAndy]

Because not everyone is an entitled selfish prick.

Why waste your money ?

Fool and his money easily parted

 

[Blazing Saddles]

Why waste your money ?

Fool and his money easily parted

So that’s why you have 5 Teslas.

 

[CXRAndy]

So that’s why you have 5 Teslas.

The family has 5. Me and Mrs have one each. They've been fantastic, reliable, ridiculously cheap to run, both are now over 6 years old.

 

[Stevo 666]

To quote some bloke on the internet "you're missing the point". The original comment was in relation to the flagshagging nature of the paper and it's target audience not what is or isn't legal. If you regularly run editorials about benefit scroungers etc. it is a bit rich avoiding paying taxes to the country.

See my post above about how much the company that he controls 100% contributes to the exchequer and maybe reconsider what you said.

 

[Stevo 666]

A quick google brings this up re: DMGT. I've highlighted the relevant part in bold blue text for all those moralising about tax contribution.

"In the financial year ending September 30, 2024, DMGT (Daily Mail and General Trust) reported a pre-tax profit of £6 million, a significant turnaround from a £13 million pre-tax loss the previous year, according to Press Gazette. The company also saw a 11% increase in overall revenue to £1.1 billion during this period. While the company's tax policy emphasizes compliance and transparency with HMRC, the specific total tax contribution figure is not explicitly stated in the Press Gazette article or DMGT's annual report.

Key points about DMGT's tax practices:

• Compliance and Transparency:
  DMGT's tax policy prioritizes legal compliance and maintaining a professional and transparent relationship with HMRC.
  
  
• Risk Management:
  The company actively mitigates tax risks and takes steps to ensure tax controls operate within acceptable tolerance levels, according to the tax policy.
  
  
• Profitability:
  DMGT's shift from a pre-tax loss to a profit indicates a positive financial performance, as reported by Press Gazette.
  
  
• Revenue Growth:
  The company experienced an 11% increase in revenue, reaching £1.1 billion, according to Press Gazette.
  

Note: While the specific total tax contribution figure is not available in the provided search results, the company's commitment to tax compliance and its improved financial performance suggest a significant contribution to public finances. "

 

[Ian H]

Nope. The number of people in employment may go up and down but if he hadn't set up the Daily Mail (however much anyone dislikes the publication) there would be less jobs that there currently are. But in the end, businesses are not charities to pay the workers, as you should know.

Apart from DMGT paying profits tax in the UK, there is all the income and payroll tax from their employees, VAT, business rates etc etc. You have to look see past the 'nasty rich business owner' stereotypes and look at the overall contributions of the businesses that they own in the UK.

Point of order: he inherited the Daily Mail.

 

[icowden]

Note: While the specific total tax contribution figure is not available in the provided search results, the company's commitment to tax compliance and its improved financial performance suggest a significant contribution to public finances. "

And yet they are so farking modest, no-one can find out what that actual contribution is.

 

[Stevo 666]

And yet they are so farking modest, no-one can find out what that actual contribution is.

Safe to say it will be substantial given the level of turnover, profit and employees of the company.

 

[Stevo 666]

Point of order: he inherited the Daily Mail.

Whether it was him or his family, my point still stands.

 

[Ian H]

Whether it was him or his family, my point still stands.

The DM was of course famous in some quarters (not least its staff) for the 'vagina monologues'.