The Australian government wants to tax Google (who paid $100 million in tax in Australia in 2019) $600 million to be passed on to Newscorp and other MSM organisations that have lost readers, audiences and, most importantly, advertisers because of their Leftist propaganda. Ex Liberal Treasurer, Peter Costello, now Chairman of Channel 9 (ABC with advertisements), is in on the act.

At the beginning of this year, the US government asked the Australian government to scrap the idea. Google is an American company, remember. The US regards the move as being "detrimental to two US firms". Australia's "international trade obligations" have been referred to.

It is understood that the new administration is also interested in what is done to one of America's high profile companies.

What was that again that our PM said about the enduring relationship with the US.

What is Google getting for the $100 Million ?

I presume the tax paid by google is on advertising income.
That is a separate matter. Google must pay if they are are using
someone else's intellectual property, ie their writing.
I cannot copy something from the paper and publish it in a local
newsletter or newspaper.
Anyway I don't use google, I switched to Duckduckgo and so far so good.
There are others, Bling for Microsoft slaves.
Yahoo is another.

Bazz,

It would be good if you kept us up to date on duckduckgo's performance. You are second the person in as many days who has moved to it.

The topic is not about Google, but our relationship with the US and the matter of trade. Also, should the government be grabbing money to donate to the MSM, which is owed no favours.

Dear individual,

"Asked by one senator how much tax it pays, Silva said last year it paid about 59 million Australian dollars ($46 million) on revenues of AU$4.8 billion ($3.7 billion)."
http://apnews.com/article/international-news-australia-new-zealand-scott-morrison-bills-06e735a2f7670c35c4000ec8059cdced

Separate issue it may be but these guys are sharks and are not paying their way.

these guys are sharks
SteeleRedux,
What, & you're not ? If the Australian Govt is so concerned about the money being made by something it has no input then why not create an Australian search engine ? With Australia's history of brilliant ideas being exploited overseas, isn't it time to retain things & make them a success here ?

Dear individual,

What do you mean no input?

At the very least the government supports a functioning generally affluent society through the redistribution of wealth and thereby creating a marketplace in which Google thrives.

It should be paying its due. Why do you think it shouldn't?

If indeed the use of a search engine has become an essential service, then it needs to be provided as an Australian public service.
Unless looking particularly for American content, why should anyone have to use the services of American corporations?

Same BTW for E-mail, bank accounts, water, electricity, telephone, fire-fighting and whatever else is deemed to be essential.

In any case, no web content should be searchable without the consent of the owners - and news sites are no exception!

These American bastards have been abusing our privacy left right and center, including by photographing all our streets from every possible direction and even our backyards from the air. Enough is enough!

Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc are amongst the biggest and wealthiest companies in the world based on the advertising revenue they generate. As much of this ad revenue is based on the news harvested from news agencies for which nothing is paid and which results in 1000s of jobs (and tax) being lost in these news organisations there is a strong argument for restitution.

Over and above this they are monopolies that abuse their position and ought to be broken up as was Bell telephones. However, in the interim, I would settle for them paying fair value for what they use.

..... the biggest and wealthiest companies ....
shadowminister,
They become wealthy because average Joe Blows desire the products wether they need them or not. Just look at the utter crap on YouTube, Google etc. If no-one looked at these idiotic things, these companies wouldn't show them for a minute longer.
The internet is clogged with teenie-popper rubbish, advertising for rubbish etc why ? Because people or rather indoctrinated morons demand it.
Start up an Australian search engine & be done with it. A search engine that filters the brain-deadening rubbish !

This article gives a very good insight into this topic:

"The old news business model is broken: making Google and Facebook pay won’t save journalism"

http://theconversation.com/the-old-news-business-model-is-broken-making-google-and-facebook-pay-wont-save-journalism-150357

There is a reference to saving journalism (or journalists) and not the commercial operators themselves. This is a valid point, but if you simply say provide more finance to the ABC for example, you will get a lot of the same as they generally operate the same, year after year. In terms of current affairs and discussion programs for example, I feel the ABC aims to a very similar audience, to avoid offence.

The ABC does though do good programming in other areas, like radio for example.

One also needs to realise with public (Government) funded media it can be controlled by the Government. One only needs to look at China for example and control over society.

Social media is still popular and it is also filled with Government and political propaganda in Australia. A Government Facebook page, a Facebook page of a State/Territory Premier or the Prime Minister will simply aim to drive you down a certain pathway and manipulate your thoughts.

It has been highlighted on another page, the only way to get a more diverse media and to see it keep going, is to see such media run and operated by the community (that is not Government funded), with an aim to provide quality news, (with no advertising) to the public.

Bazz, you can use others' work under 'fair dealing' laws, from TC:

'Australian copyright law sets out five situations where use of copyrighted material without permission may be allowed: research or study, criticism or review, parody or satire, reporting the news and provision of legal advice.'

https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-is-fair-dealing-and-when-can-you-copy-without-permission-80745

Related to taxes paid i.e. $AUD100 million by Google in Oz, how does this compare to NewsCorp in Oz?

'in five years News Corp has paid $8.5 million in tax on more than $680 million in profits and $13 billion in revenue.' (Crikey 11 Dec '20)

According to Michael West Media on NewsCorp, in 'Inside Rupert’s Big Aussie Sale: Murdoch smuggles Foxtel – and its government grants – out of the country' 1 Dec '20, on another major US company:

'Rupert Murdoch has funnelled Foxtel out of News Corp Australia to a mysterious entity in the secrecy jurisdiction of Delaware. Michael West reports on the secret transactions which appear designed to sell News Corp’s Australian media business....

Keeping tabs on this breathtaking chutzpah of the Murdoch clan:

- News Corp wins Pay TV licence for Foxtel.
- Foxtel makes billions in profits.
- Pays almost no tax.
- Is allowed to take over rivals such as Austar to entrench its monopoly.
- Is given government grants without reasonable explanation.
- News Corp then quietly shifts it overseas.'

Rather than holding power to account Australian parties and MPs see their role as serving media power, without constraints.... very Australian?

Andras,

Your assertions are highly filtered to obscure the truth:

1 Foxtel was required to be a restricted access channel to prevent it from competing for ad revenue with other channels and still pays a motza in licensing fees.
2 Subsidies are given for producing indigenous content which makes a loss.
3 Foxtel does not make $bns in profit, in fact, is presently making a loss.
4 Foxtel was formed as cooperation between Fox in the US and Telstra

I wonder how the lefties like the idea of money going from Google to their old enemy, NewsCorp, which, incidentally, is now an American company owned by an American citizen. Oh, the complications and shite storm the Morrison government is bringing down on itself - as if it doesn't have enough problems already.

Here's a thought, not that I care about any of these guys, but, if these media outlets have already been paid for their news content as explained, with money from advertisers, then they have been paid for it.
That's the first point, then moving forward, the news/information has been released to the world and is now FREELY available to all. I have always wondered why anyone would have to pay for second hand news, when it is no longer exclusive to the entity that released it, fully paid for, with their full consent and knowledge.
It is a most incomprehensible and idiotic idea, to expect anyone to pay again, every time another entity uses that same freely available information.
This smacks of the same hypocrisy as the radio stations having to pay some music bank, which allegedly gives the money to the owners of the respective songs.
Yeah, right.
So why must third parties have to pay again and again when the song is sold to the public, and not given for free.
The song has been sold, that's it.
Who plays it and for what reason is irrelevant.
Just because the original model/method of media domination has dwindled into irrelevance, pretty much.
They are floundering and so are clutching at straws or anything else they can get their hands on, just to stop from going under.
But more importantly and more relevant is; who are those behind this unconscionable and egregious money grab.
Let's begin with Murdoch and then move onto his mates at the WEF, and start identifying the scum within, lurking in the shadows, hiding from prying eyes and camera's.
I'll leave you to fill in the rest, but just remember, evil has re-badged itself, and it's new poison is now called; THE GREAT RESET!