Rule of thumb for me is if they approach me, they get nothing....
-
Domain Change - We have moved to https://paste-and-cut.com as our new domain.
If you are using shortcuts or bookmarks for the old paste-and-cut.com.au domain, you need to update these or they will cease working from the 25th January, 2025. Please check the notice post for more details on this change to the forum.
Corporate ethics, taxes and other related issues
- Thread starter tullfan
- Start date
Yep. But how to find out the ones that don’t approach you?
I normally go for stuff by the local church. Where I know the people organising directly or indirectly. But want to spread the love a little
Mark1966
Canberra dwelling Happy Clapping Bean Counter
Staff member
Site Moderator
Grand Society
2016 Sabbatical Fail
2018 Charity Auction Winner
2019 Charity Auction Winner
2020 Charity Auction Winner
LOL - I think that Tim has not a bad rule of thumb - it is those professional collectors which tend to take the most cut. I will, however, give to the kid who comes to my door collecting for Salvos/Red Cross etc as they are volunteers involved in those collections.
Beyond that I look at areas where I want to contribute and investigate the charities involved for alignment with my values and their conduct. There is an increasing number of people looking at and reporting on the later, see, for example The Good Cause Co. You have to, of course, read and understand the analysis.
Agree about the Salvos and Red Cross, my dig was aimed more at the buggers in city railway stations. The ones who try to grab you when you are clearly rushing to catch a train...
Mark1966
Canberra dwelling Happy Clapping Bean Counter
Staff member
Site Moderator
Grand Society
2016 Sabbatical Fail
2018 Charity Auction Winner
2019 Charity Auction Winner
2020 Charity Auction Winner
Agreed entirely - thems the ones to avoid
There is a clean water for Africa charity that seems on the up and up.
Also various environmental charities that buy tracts of land, fence them off and eradicate the introduced vermin before releasing native animals and planting natives.They often work with Scientists and Museums.
"Who gives a crap" sells high quality toilet paper delivered to your door with profits used for composting toilets in the 3rd world.Dan (Todras) put me on to them
Also various environmental charities that buy tracts of land, fence them off and eradicate the introduced vermin before releasing native animals and planting natives.They often work with Scientists and Museums.
"Who gives a crap" sells high quality toilet paper delivered to your door with profits used for composting toilets in the 3rd world.Dan (Todras) put me on to them
Mark1966
Canberra dwelling Happy Clapping Bean Counter
Staff member
Site Moderator
Grand Society
2016 Sabbatical Fail
2018 Charity Auction Winner
2019 Charity Auction Winner
2020 Charity Auction Winner
In a timely article in The Australian -
Facebook’s Australian arm has posted record profits in Australia but the Silicon Valley giant paid $30 million less in tax than it did a year ago.
Documents filed with ASIC and obtained by The Australian show Facebook paid less than $12m in tax in Australia last year on close to $600m of advertising sales.
The social media giant’s Australian arm raked in $579.7m from advertising in 2018 — plus another $696,000 from what it calls “services” — but paid $454.9m in costs to an overseas subsidiary to arrive at a net revenue of figure of $125.5m.
It was a record year for Facebook which paid just $11.8m in tax for a $23.3m profit, compared to a $9.6m loss a year ago.
Its $11.8m tax bill is more than $30m less than what it paid a year earlier.
A Facebook spokesman told The Australian the company complies with applicable tax laws.
“In 2018, the Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB) implemented new account standards for revenue recognition and our accounting has changed to reflect this,” the spokesman said.
Facebook Australia’s accounts show the Australian arm paid more than $450m to a related company overseas for “reseller expenses” — over $70m more than a year earlier — though it was not clear if that was to Facebook’s Irish or Singapore offices, or another company entirely.
In its quarterly results last week, Facebook’s head office set aside $US3bn for an expected fine from the US Federal Trade Commission over privacy issues, cutting into the social media giant’s profits even as its underlying business remained strong.
It comes as tech giant rival Google’s Australian office, following offsets, paid a total of $26m in income tax after posting revenues of over $1bn.
A Google spokeswoman told The Australian the company paid more tax than it did last year.
“In the 2018 calendar year Google Australia made a pre-tax profit of $155m resulting in $49m of corporate income taxes payable, and invested almost $1bn in our Australian operation,” a Google spokeswoman told The Australian.
Facebook and Google are facing increased scrutiny this year with the ACCC cracking down on the tech giants’ market dominance.
The watchdog published a preliminary report late last year which said the digital platforms “favour their own business interests” through market power and that a regulatory authority — either a new or existing one — should probe whether the tech giants are guilty of “discriminatory conduct”.
Facebook said in a response however that people — not regulators — should decide what content is in their news feeds.
“More than 98 per cent of Facebook’s revenue comes from selling ads. Facebook’s financial incentives are therefore aligned with both advertisers and audience network publishers: everyone earns more revenue when people viewing the ads take the advertiser’s desired outcome,” the company said in a statement last month.
“It is also not clear why — even if these concerns existed — a new Ad Regulator is required. The ACCC itself already has substantial powers to investigate and intervene if there is any evidence of a contravention of the Competition and Consumer Act or Australian Competition Law arising from vertical integration or any other issue.”
Facebook’s Australian arm has posted record profits in Australia but the Silicon Valley giant paid $30 million less in tax than it did a year ago.
Documents filed with ASIC and obtained by The Australian show Facebook paid less than $12m in tax in Australia last year on close to $600m of advertising sales.
The social media giant’s Australian arm raked in $579.7m from advertising in 2018 — plus another $696,000 from what it calls “services” — but paid $454.9m in costs to an overseas subsidiary to arrive at a net revenue of figure of $125.5m.
It was a record year for Facebook which paid just $11.8m in tax for a $23.3m profit, compared to a $9.6m loss a year ago.
Its $11.8m tax bill is more than $30m less than what it paid a year earlier.
A Facebook spokesman told The Australian the company complies with applicable tax laws.
“In 2018, the Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB) implemented new account standards for revenue recognition and our accounting has changed to reflect this,” the spokesman said.
Facebook Australia’s accounts show the Australian arm paid more than $450m to a related company overseas for “reseller expenses” — over $70m more than a year earlier — though it was not clear if that was to Facebook’s Irish or Singapore offices, or another company entirely.
In its quarterly results last week, Facebook’s head office set aside $US3bn for an expected fine from the US Federal Trade Commission over privacy issues, cutting into the social media giant’s profits even as its underlying business remained strong.
It comes as tech giant rival Google’s Australian office, following offsets, paid a total of $26m in income tax after posting revenues of over $1bn.
A Google spokeswoman told The Australian the company paid more tax than it did last year.
“In the 2018 calendar year Google Australia made a pre-tax profit of $155m resulting in $49m of corporate income taxes payable, and invested almost $1bn in our Australian operation,” a Google spokeswoman told The Australian.
Facebook and Google are facing increased scrutiny this year with the ACCC cracking down on the tech giants’ market dominance.
The watchdog published a preliminary report late last year which said the digital platforms “favour their own business interests” through market power and that a regulatory authority — either a new or existing one — should probe whether the tech giants are guilty of “discriminatory conduct”.
Facebook said in a response however that people — not regulators — should decide what content is in their news feeds.
“More than 98 per cent of Facebook’s revenue comes from selling ads. Facebook’s financial incentives are therefore aligned with both advertisers and audience network publishers: everyone earns more revenue when people viewing the ads take the advertiser’s desired outcome,” the company said in a statement last month.
“It is also not clear why — even if these concerns existed — a new Ad Regulator is required. The ACCC itself already has substantial powers to investigate and intervene if there is any evidence of a contravention of the Competition and Consumer Act or Australian Competition Law arising from vertical integration or any other issue.”
I detest Chuggers almost as much as the other parasitical professions!
(Charity muggers)
borked
Shave, collect B&M pokemon, vodka, sleep, repeat
Grand Society
Group Buy Associate
Da Menth Heads
2018 Charity Auction Winner
https://www.facebook.com/JeremiahHouse2018/ appears to be a worthy cause.
Those that have visited dvaa.com.au will know the statistics illustrating why we need to invest in shelters for men, particularly those with children (example below).
With 10 females, 9 males and 4 fillicide this year to date, DV can no longer be ignored or treated as a gendered issue, particularly when charities like White Ribbon spend almost everything donated upon themselves!
This is a cause worth supporting. The birth mother of my girls was a very violent and abusive person. I'm tough enough that I could handle myself with her,but it became too much eventually.The hardest thing for me to do was to let my girls leave with her when it came time for her to go,they were only toddlers at that point and I was deeply concerned for their safety. The way the courts are biased toward the mother meant that I had no choice and I had to have faith that eventually the relevant department,D.o.C.S. at that time,would intervene...which they told me they would do but needed to have the right evidence and conditions. It did happen but my children suffered because of bureaucratic red tape.https://www.facebook.com/JeremiahHouse2018/ appears to be a worthy cause.
Those that have visited dvaa.com.au will know the statistics illustrating why we need to invest in shelters for men, particularly those with children (example below).
With 10 females, 9 males and 4 fillicide this year to date, DV can no longer be ignored or treated as a gendered issue, particularly when charities like White Ribbon spend almost everything donated upon themselves!
There are men out there that are not as tough as I am and are suffering due to dominant,abusive partners and they have no idea that there is help available due to the major advertising bias toward anti-violence toward women. I have very rarely seen an ad for anything similar for males,and the only place I did see was the centre where I took one of my girls for post trauma counselling.
Violence is only acceptable when one's life is being threatened,or the life of another. So,as a defence. Violence toward anyone because of anger or to control someone is unacceptable.
Mark1966
Canberra dwelling Happy Clapping Bean Counter
Staff member
Site Moderator
Grand Society
2016 Sabbatical Fail
2018 Charity Auction Winner
2019 Charity Auction Winner
2020 Charity Auction Winner
Tough gig!
+1 a real bloody tough gig!!!