Google met fin à son double sandwich fiscal irlandais/néerlandais (Reuters) – « Tax war » – Google en Belgique – Google va devoir payer plus de 2 milliards d’euros à la Commission européenne – Les mesures de rétorsion US devant les poursuites des sociétés américaines en Europe – Google va payer 3% de ses bénéfices en Grande-Bretagne ! – la réaction à la Commission européenne, en France et en Grande Bretagne !
Google recule et met fin à son double sandwich fiscal (Reuters) :
—————————————————————–
Google et ses négociations en Belgique … avec le contrôle fiscal !
———————————————————————————————–
La Commission réclame plus de deux milliards d’euros pour abus de position dominante – 27 juin 2017
|
2,42 milliards
C’est le montant de l’amende (en euros) que la Commission européenne a infligé mardi à Google, filiale d’Alphabet, un montant record pour abus de position dominante concernant son comparateur de prix. L’exécutif européen reproche au grand groupe américain de la technologie d’avoir profité de sa position dominante sur le marché des moteurs de recherche en conférant un avantage illégal à son comparateur baptisé Google Shopping. Jusqu’ici, l’amende la plus importante, prononcée en 2009, s’élevait à 1,06 milliard d’euros et visait Intel, le géant américain des semi-conducteurs. |
———————————————————————–
La Commission européenne réclame un milliard € à Google d’ici fin août –
pour rappel la capitalisation boursière de Alphabet/Google était de 581 milliards $ au 8 mars 2017 … !
(NYT 17 juin 2017) –
European antitrust officials are preparing to hit Google with a potentially record fine by the end of August over some of the Silicon Valley giant’s search services, according to two people with direct knowledge of the case.
Margrethe Vestager, the European Union’s competition chief, is in the final stages of ruling on the case, said the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk publicly. Any financial penalty is expected to be larger than the fine of 1.06 billion euros, now about $1.2 billion, then about $1.4 billion — at the time the highest ever — that Intel was forced to fork out for antitrust abuses in Europe in 2009.
As well as the fine, European officials could also force Google to alter how it operates in the region, and potentially elsewhere, to give rivals a greater ability to compete.
The case, linked to claims that Google diverted traffic from competitors’ services to favor its own comparison shopping site, is one of three investigations that the European Union’s executive arm has opened against the search giant. The other two involve Android, the company’s mobile software, and some of Google’s advertising products.
European officials claim that the company favored many of its own digital services, including search and online maps, over those of rivals. Google has denied any wrongdoing.
A spokeswoman for the European Union’s executive arm, the European Commission, declined to comment. Representatives for Google were not immediately available for comment.
Here’s what you need to know about Google’s lengthy standoff with European competition authorities:
What are the investigations about?
Google’s rivals have long complained that it has used its dominant position in online search to favor its other services, including restaurant recommendations and online maps.
How Europe Is Going After Apple, Google and Other U.S. Tech Giants
The biggest American tech companies face intensifying scrutiny by European regulators, with — pressure that could potentially curb their sizable profits in the region and affect how they operate around the world.
The European Commission first opened an investigation into Google’s operations in late 2010. The inquiry focused on so-called vertical searches, or web queries around specific topics like online shopping.Official charges were filed against the search giant in 2015.
The same year, European officials opened a separate investigation into whether Google’s Android software hampered digital competition. That led to official charges against the company last year.
The European Union’s third investigation of Google — into whether some of the company’s advertising products had restricted consumer choice — resulted in another charge sheet in July 2016.
What is at stake?
While the investigations are limited to Google’s activities in Europe, the consequences for the company — whose digital search and advertising businesses dominate in much of the world — could be far-reaching.
Along with a hefty fine, the company, whose online search services have a roughly 90 percent market share in Europe, may also face “remedies,” or changes dictated by the European Union’s competition authority on how it operates across the bloc.
—————————————————————————-
La « guerre fiscale » (Tax war) avec l’Union européenne :
Les USA et J.Lew envisagent des mesures de rétorsion fiscales contre les pays (donc ceux de l’Union européenne) qui durciraient leur fiscalité contre des multinationales américaines
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/us-and-eu-clash-over-tax-practice-clampdown-1.2565150
_____________________________________________________
Malgré une audition au parlement britannique les montages fiscaux de Google restent opaques (Prem Sikka):
http://leftfootforward.org/2016/02/despite-a-parliamentary-hearing-googles-tax-deal-remains-opaque/
La réaction irritée de J.Lew (USA) face aux poursuites et aux positions européennes :
160213 L’Europe et les Etats-Unis en conflit sur l’évasion fiscale
https://euobserver.com/economic/132245
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/a12074e0-d0d6-11e5-92a1-c5e23ef99c77.html#axzz40ADsvI6G
_____________________________________________
Les ministres des finances de la zone euro soutiennent une politique ferme à l’égard des STN :
La Commission européenne soutiendrait une CBCR publique:
La France et les critiques de Michel Sapin à propos de Google :
Même en Grande-Bretagne, on semble gêné … !
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/feb/04/google-uk-tax-deal-share-options-scheme
Google tax avoidance: Google boss tells MPs he doesn’t know how much he gets paid The Independent
Google’s tax deal still shrouded in a cloak of confidentiality ITV
Google’s tax affairs: the players and questions they need to answer The Guardian
Italy opens tax probe on Google managers Reuters
un reportage de la BBC sur une « Commune qui veut une juste taxe » :
et le blog d’Alex Cobbham : Tout ce qui n’est pas comptabilisé et qui est à la base des inégalités …
____________________________________________________
la réaction de Prem Sikka (université d’Essex/AABA) :
After revelations of minuscule tax payment by Google, the UK is having an intense debate about the future of corporation tax. The crisis has given the right-wing an opportunity to call from abolition of corporation tax, or replace it a tax based on sales. This article provides a brief reply and is titled “A solution to corporate tax dodging?”. It is available at http://leftfootforward.org/2016/02/a-solution-to-corporate-tax-dodging/ ; You are most welcome to stimulate the debate by adding your comments. This brief radio debate might also interest you.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p03h5zr4
As always, there is more on the AABA website (http://www.aabaglobal.org )
Regards – Prem Sikka – Professor of Accounting -Centre for Global Accountability -Essex Business School -University of Essex – Colchester, Essex CO4 3SQ, UK
Office Tel: +44(0)1206 873773 – Office Fax: +44 (01206) 873429 – Twitter: https://twitter.com/premnsikka ; Facebook:https://www.facebook.com/prem.sikka.1
AABA Website: http://www.aabaglobal.org
________________________________________________________
Un système fiscal créé en 1928 par la Ligue des Nations est en train de s’écrouler (Financial Times)
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/7414a126-c41d-11e5-b3b1-7b2481276e45.html#axzz3yX7HimWg
une étude universitaire suédoise :
http://oru.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A781179&dswid=3334
Pourquoi cet accord est inacceptable : parce qu’après Google ce sera la même capitulation avec d’autres STN (Prem Sikka – Univ. Essex)
If the Google directors, accountants and lawyers can and do shift profits to wherever they choose via self-invoicing, in transactions that are so complex that tax-officers, financial journalists and experts cannot follow the audit trail – what protection is there for shareholders, employees and creditors? How do we know that the Balance Sheets “give a true and fair view” of the company? Given that other countries, such as Italy, are claiming billions of back-taxes, what provisions are the auditors making for these major claims? If major penalties are imposed, which company officers and advisers will be censured and even fined by the company; who has signed the past 10 years’ Balance Sheets and Tax Returns? Are the accounts accurate?
I hope these questions will be raised and answered by governments, The City, Wall Street and the major Stock Exchanges – before Google or any other “complex” multi-national (see GE below) suddenly disintegrates in debt, as did ENRON, despite clean audit certificates by the largest global audit firms. (Noël Hodson)
______________________________________________________
See also Prem’s report Some Questions about Google’s UK Tax Settlement of £130 million, also MPs attack deal to let Google to pay ‘relatively trivial’ £130m back taxes The Guardian, and Google in Talks to Settle European Tax Disputes The Wall Street Journal