doog, I Just explained it to you. The ships do not go to Singapore,
just the money does.

Forget it, is pointless.

Bazz, in the 1970's I worked for a large manufacturing company whereby raw material mined in Australia by Company 'A' was on sold to Company 'B' in Singapore at $90/ton then Singapore on sold the material back to the manufacturing company in Australia at $300/ton. All were owned by the parent company through a network of shelf companies, of course the material itself never left Australia. All profits were made in low tax Singapore.

Talking of the Australian steel industry, BlueScope (BHP) is looking at shedding 500 jobs minimum at Port Kembla, with a possible total shutdown seeing 5,000 job lost in the Illawarra alone, a very much "employment challenged" region as it is. A total shutdown is a possibility and would be a disaster for both the Illawrra and Australia as a whole.
The problem has much to do with a massive decline in world steel prices as China now producing 50% of the worlds product, 800 million tonnes annually, is engaged in dumping all over the planet, including in Australia. The Abbott government fines itself between a rock and a hard place on this, not wanting to offend China with tariffs, free trade and all that, its policy of no financial assistance leaves very little Abbott can do to retrieve the situation.

So Paul, given BHP are finding our employment conditions unviable, do you still think they should be taxed at 30 cents in the dollar?

Those opposed to profit shifting don't seem to realize the difficulties experienced by multinationals here with our over the top working conditions, not sure if that includes you Paul, but surely people can u deratamd there is a bigger picture here and just wanting more tax may cause a mass pull out from Australia. Then what!

Of cause just like the mining and carbon taxes did, talk of this crackdown can do irreparable damage to business confidence which in turn could see big business look elsewhere.

Personally I'm happy so at least have something and woukd be even happier with a fairer tax system but I think we have to wait until we hit rock bottom first. Perhaps that's what needs to happen and I have no doubt if labor gets back in we will find it this time around.

At least then, once we find rock bottom we can bring out the big stick and start again.

doog, glad to see you now understand what I said.

I once worked for a computer company that imported spare parts which
as I had the job of organising parts stocks I realised that I could
order at a fraction of the cost locally.
However I was ordered, by an embarrassed boss, to order from the
parent company at the much higher price.
This is known as transfer pricing.

The statement that the government does not want to do anything about
this practice is another example of the fanatical Labour supporter
statements as there is a program to introduce legislation after the
embedded accountants report on how it is done.
Also you must have seen that there is an international program to
stop such practices, unless you don't want to know.

No one is saying the ships go to Singapore, Big Joe is waiting to hear how you are going to extract more money out of miners without a big new tax.

It’s a legal scam, should not have happened. Why does not Abbott put them in court to find out why they can do that.
There is no big stick, Coal and iron ore should be nationalized that is the only way you are going to get any remuneration from mining. The big miners have every trick in the book and some not even thought of yet.

Get rid of Abbott would be a good start, this govt; has failed miserably. With 100 billion added to the debt burden in 2 years which is an all-time record and another budget to go, it does not say to much for Hockeys accounting skills.

Turnbull would be a far better pm than Abbott would ever be.

Hockey can only talk about a republic, that is of more importance to Big Joe.

Well *doog* I wouldn't be too hard just yet visa vi Joe's interest in a Republic, as he may well in part be thinking very much about tax. I don't know that he is of course, but he may be.

Reason being of course is that in moving to a Republic we do have the opportunity to fundamentally reform and or do away with the present constitution in its entirety.

And of course, the con does form the back bone of tax ie what states can do and what the comm can do (amongst other things)

Maybe Joe is musing about moving to something for more grand and far more appropriate for our present age in one fell swoop. And even if he is not, a move to a Republic could be far more than just say replacing the current head of state with the guvna general.

There is way too much doubling handling and gross waste and mismanagement in the present system of states and commonwealth, whereas we could move to a far more modern, effective and efficient model.