Company G, in the year 2013, found itself attacked by politicians on Country E. They revealed that this company adopted strategies to avoid paying company income tax. According to the data from 2011, Company G did not pay its corporate income tax, amounting to $2 billion out of $9.8 billion income. This amount was transferred to Company S in Country B, where there is no corporate income tax. In 2011, Company G paid $6 million tax out of $2.5 billion income in Country UKG stating that Company G has not done anything wrong, and was following the rule written by politicians. The company follows the strategy DI to reduce tax liability. This strategy is the main advantage for the company. Company G has followed another strategy, DS; in this strategy, the products move between Union E members so Country I does not charge tax on these products. Country N charges some amount as fees to transfer from this country’s branch office to Country B’s branch office. All these activities are said to be legal because they follow different tax rules in different countries. The company uses the strategy of different tax rules in different countries to reduce its tax. Characters in the case: Company G, Company S, Country E, Country B, Country UKG, Union E, Country I, Country N. To determine: Whether it is ethical for Company G to use Company S to avoid paying taxes in countries where tax is higher and whether this practice is made for the interest of the shareholders and customers of the company. Introduction: Tax is a compulsory payment that should be made by a company or an individual, to the government, for various public expenditure purposes.

Question

Want to see the full answer?

Answer 1

Question

Chapter 20, Problem 1CDQ

Summary Introduction

Case summary:

Company G, in the year 2013, found itself attacked by politicians on Country E. They revealed that this company adopted strategies to avoid paying company income tax. According to the data from 2011, Company G did not pay its corporate income tax, amounting to $2 billion out of $9.8 billion income. This amount was transferred to Company S in Country B, where there is no corporate income tax.

In 2011, Company G paid $6 million tax out of $2.5 billion income in Country UKG stating that Company G has not done anything wrong, and was following the rule written by politicians. The company follows the strategy DI to reduce tax liability. This strategy is the main advantage for the company.

Company G has followed another strategy, DS; in this strategy, the products move between Union E members so Country I does not charge tax on these products. Country N charges some amount as fees to transfer from this country’s branch office to Country B’s branch office.

All these activities are said to be legal because they follow different tax rules in different countries. The company uses the strategy of different tax rules in different countries to reduce its tax.

Characters in the case:

Company G,

Company S,

Country E,

Country B,

Country UKG,

Union E,

Country I,

Country N.

To determine: Whether it is ethical for Company G to use Company S to avoid paying taxes in countries where tax is higher and whether this practice is made for the interest of the shareholders and customers of the company.

Introduction:

Tax is a compulsory payment that should be made by a company or an individual, to the government, for various public expenditure purposes.

Expert Solution & Answer

Want to see the full answer?

Check out a sample textbook solution

See solution

Students have asked these similar questions

Did the standards result in safer and more effective firefighting crews, or were they inadvertently keeping women out of a traditionally male job? The standards were designed to ensure that all firefighters, regardless of gender, could perform the physically demanding tasks required in firefighting. However, the fact that a significantly lower percentage of women were able to pass the test suggests that the standards may have inadvertently acted as a barrier to women entering the profession. Was this a BFOQ? The ministry was challenged on the basis of sex discrimination. What did the Supreme Court rule, and what was its reasoning? A Bona Fide Occupational Qualification (BFOQ) is a quality or attribute that employers are allowed to consider when making decisions on the hiring and retention of employees. In this case, the physical fitness test could be considered a BFOQ as it directly relates to the job's requirements. However, if it disproportionately excludes women and cannot be…

General Accounting question

Please help with this question