Hasbeen,
What planet do you think you live on?
I'm quite puzzled because not only did I not advocate government organised farming, but I didn't even mention it in this thread!

Aidan This one is from 2014, there is a more recent one that compares more countries, when I can relocate it.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/19/mining-tax-its-time-for-all-australians-to-realise-they-are-being-ripped-off

The mining boom has resulted in a huge extraction of wealth. Norway has been turning its resource bounty into a fund for future generations, while Australia is dangerously careless with it.

Australians are routinely being told that hefty mining taxes would hinder the country’s largest exports of coal and iron ore. This concern about the competitiveness of the industry has been the basis of the Abbott government’s drive to abolish the mining tax. However, it is hard to reconcile this view (key player Gina Rinehart, for example, claimed that Australia was “too expensive to do export orientated business”) with news this week that mining giant BHP Billiton recently increased its profits by 83% to US$8.1bn.

Within the last year alone, there has been a 20% increase in BHP Billiton’s Western Australian iron ore exports. In spite of this enormous growth, the company only paid US$29m in minerals resource rent tax (MRRT). As it stands, the tax is in no way making BHP uncompetitive – its bumper profits are a testament to that.

While mining companies such as BHP Billiton are making a motza, we need to be reminded that 83% of Australian mining operations are foreign owned. The net income balance – the difference between the profits of Australian investing overseas, and profits made by foreign companies in Australia – has suffered as a result of mining companies extracting greater amounts of Australian mineral wealth for foreign owners.

Unlike Australia, Norway has kept their resource extraction wealth in their control without it fattening up a capitalist exploiting of finite mineral resources. Norway has a 78% tax on oil and gas revenues – unlike Australia, where the effective tax rate is a mere 13%. $60bn from gas sales to continental Europe is annually deposited in the Norwegian sovereign wealth fund. The fund has 5.11 trillion Krone (AU$930bn), or twice Norway’s GDP.

Aidan
Australia is set to become the world's largest exporter of gas, but a new global report has found, the country forfeits billions of dollars in tax to multinational mining giants.

A Senate hearing into the Callaghan review of the petroleum resource rent tax this week heard just how murky our tax data is, with only opaque disclosures from the companies themselves giving us an indication of how much tax they pay.

Australia is set to eclipse Qatar as the largest exporter of gas in the world by 2020 but will receive just a fraction of the revenue, $800 million compared to Qatar's $26.6 billion.

Jessie Cato, the national co-ordinator for Publish What You Pay Australia, a tax transparency network. "We have poor systematic data collection, it is often private, published in a closed data format like PDF, and located across numerous agencies."

Behind Canada, Australia has the second largest number of publicly listed companies operating in the mining sector, but it has no requirement to publish tax payments or more granular levels of production and exports.

**

Just five per cent of oil and gas projects operating in Australia are paying anything towards the Federal Government's royalty-like scheme designed to share the wealth generated by the nation's resources with the public that owns them.

Fairfax Media can reveal that just eight out of 149 resource projects currently generating revenue contributed a cent in PRRT in 2014-15.

ATO data shows the oil and gas industry, which is now dominated by multinational-operated LNG projects off the Western Australian coast and Queensland's coal seam gas sector, had revenues of $25 billion last year.

But the design of the PRRT, which is a rent based on super-profits rather than a flat royalty, allows companies to write off exploration and other capital costs against revenue before being forced to pay any PRRT.

The ATO figures shows the total "carry-forward expenditure" of the industry has risen to $187 billion. Effectively, that means the sector can pocket sales of $187 billion before being forced to pay any PRRT.

Aidan - This one is in support of something you wrote, in business money talks.

GoPro moving production of U.S.-bound action cameras out of China, cites concerns over tariffs

GoPro announced today it will be moving camera production out of China for cameras destined for the U.S. market.

In a press release shared this morning, GoPro stated that while its cameras bound for the international market will continue to be made in China, gear destined for the United States will be moved elsewhere by summer 2019, citing concern over the recent tariffs put in place as a part of the trade war that's been brewing between the U.S. and China.

'Today's geopolitical business environment requires agility, and we're proactively addressing tariff concerns by moving most of our US-bound camera production out of China,' says Brian McGee, executive vice president and CFO of GoPro in the press release. 'We believe this diversified approach to production can benefit our business regardless of tariff implications.'

McGee assured consumers and investors alike the move will have little impact on GoPro's financials, saying 'It’s important to note that we own our own production equipment while our manufacturing partner provides the facilities, so we expect to make this move at a relatively low cost.'

As of writing this article at 10:10am on Monday, December 10th, 2018, GoPro is priced at $4.82 USD per share, down 2.82% on the day on the NASDAQ stock exchange.