The Government overturns the rule of law to back the ATO vs multinationals

Senator Leyonhjelm.

The Multinational Tax Avoidance debate is multi-faceted. In this video, I discuss how the ATO is trying to prevent multinationals from having access to the courts for 12 months, which is a gross violation of the rule of law.

This entry was posted in Oppressive government, Rule of law, Taxation. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to The Government overturns the rule of law to back the ATO vs multinationals

  1. Alex Davidson

    The very first principle that the rule of law must respect is property rights. Taxation itself fails that basic test. Secondly, the rule of law must apply equally to all. Again, taxation fails that test too.

    If you or I went around helping ourselves to other people’s money, we would soon end up in jail. We are never going to realise a just society while this glaring double standard applies, whereby those calling themselves ‘the government’ get away with plunder on a scale unequalled by any so-called ‘criminal’ enterprise.

  2. sabena

    There must be grave doubts as to whether this legislation is constitutional.

  3. struth

    I agree.
    However D.L always sounds like he’s reading a bed time story.

    Forget the subject content, his reassuring delivery has me convinced there is nothing to see here, and perhaps I do feel a little tired………………………….

  4. Mark M

    [email protected] says if you don’t give banks a tax cut, you don’t give their shareholders a tax cut.”
    https://twitter.com/SkyNewsAust/status/847202133732503552
    What about the customers aka, weekly wage earning direct deposit workers, whose money it is, and are forced to have their wages deposited there (those lucky enough to have a job)?
    Sure, you might say, “well, go & buy some shares in the bank, and you too can profit from the suckers.”
    Bleeding suckers dry is not sustainable, but, good luck with that.

  5. .

    They are already above the law. The law applying to property is different to tax. They have their own quasi court system, which is fundamentally rigged. They have powers of surveillance way above what most plods can dream of, even with a warrant.

  6. Tel

    The law applying to property is different to tax.

    Well they can hardly follow the same rules… because otherwise there wouldn’t be any tax.

  7. .

    No. Shut up Tel.

    Is it good policy to tax people on the death of a sibling if they (all of them) inherit a pre 1985 purchased house from their parents but as successors they don’t choose joint tenancy, they choose tenancy in common?

    No it ain’t. It just taxes people who are financially illiterate and props up the transaction cost industry.

    Some schlep in govvy. probably gave them bad advice. The mugs at the RMS reckoned I needed to pay stamp duty I inherited (name only) from my father. I eventually gave it to my sister but that is irrelevant.

  8. Tel

    There’s policy, and there’s a completely different matter of rule of law.

    Of course, the law is an automaton… it will follow any policy you feed it.

  9. King Koala

    Taxation itself fails that basic test. Secondly, the rule of law must apply equally to all. Again, taxation fails that test too.

    I agree. Tax is theft….so when are you moving to a country with no income tax and renouncing your Australian citizenship?

  10. .

    I always knew you were a socialist Kenny. Why don’t you fuck off to Cuba?

Comments are closed.