Let’s call it a living tax campaign!

Murray Goldsworthy at NZ Herald writes:

But what to do about it? My answer is actually what has been calculated above. Tax multinationals based on their stated sales in New Zealand, make them show where the difference in values occurs, instead of allowing them to charge a higher cost price for their items to New Zealand subsidiaries. Make them prove why it is different, why they make substantially more elsewhere for the same items.

Make them pay their fair share of tax on activity in New Zealand. Give us our bite of the Apple. It’s fair, isn’t it?

I agree it is fair. This old fashioned concept of paying tax on profit must be disposed of. We should demand a fair tax system. Let’s calling it a living tax – the level of tax a company should pay so that it no longer feels wretched and is helping fund a civilised society.

I think a 15% tax on revenue would be a fair living tax.  Both the Herald and the Dom Post have repeatedly run stories and editorials comparing tax to turnover, not profit. So we should start the living tax campaign with them. Here’s how it would work:

• APN made revenue of $857 million in 2012. So the fair living tax on them would be $129 million instead of zero
• Fairfax has revenue of $2,045 million in 2013. So the fair living tax on them would be $307 million instead of zero
• Fonterra had revenue of $19.8 billion in 2012. So the fair living tax on them would be $2.97 billion instead of $53 million

I think the living tax campaign should also extend to other organisations that avoid tax such as charities. They should also pay 15% of their revenue as tax.

I look forward to the left championing the living tax campaign as vigorously as they do the living wage campaign.