Other UK devs should be furious with Rockstar for taking almost 20% of the money made available to the industry and giving absolutely nothing in return.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Rockstar North has paid no UK corporation tax in 10 years
- Thread starter THANKS
- Start date
While there is no outright obligation to maximize profits but there is a presumption that directors act in a way which promotes the value of the corporation to the benefit of shareholders. Also as pointed out by cdViking BJR does not protect a directors board seats.
For profit business are incentivized towards profit maximization. So for example when the BP oil spill (Deepwater Horizon) occurred BJR was used to protect the directors' decisions, (mismanagement claims) to maximize profits short term vs increased safety risks, against shareholder lawsuits.
Lol no one is disputing that dude. That is obvious. There was a claim in this thread that directors have a legal obligation to maximize profits for shareholders. I was only pointing out that that isn't true. I have no idea how we got off on the tangent of, "Well, shareholders want them to and can still fire them." Yes, clearly. But there is no legal obligation, which was the original and only point. And, frankly, a rampant misconception.
Using "myopic" in this context loooooooooooooooool
Right?
It sure is funny that the type of person that excuses corporate greed is also almost always the type that frets over their personal taxes going to 'freeloaders.'
The real welfare kings and queens are the ones that have enough resources to squirm their way out of paying their fair share, if anything at all. Just remember: You're picking up their slack.
Corporations (in the context of legally maximizing profit to the detriment of public utility) aren't per se good or evil, they just are.
I agree with your conclusion. By minimizing its UK tax liability to zero, Rockstar North is definitely freeloading off of the economic environment that allows it to succeed, including consumption of government-funded public goods (directly, and through employees who consume those goods). It should absolutely pay taxes for its economic activity in accordance with that consumption. But why would it if isn't legally obligated to?
In the given instance, Rockstar North had to apply for the tax relief and demonstrate that it qualitatively satisfied the cultural criteria required by the law to qualify for the credit. That review was performed by the British Film Institute, which accepted the application and granted the credit. Unless misrepresentations had to be made in the application to qualify for the credit (if there was, there should be legal fallout), why wouldn't Rockstar North apply? It might be detrimental to society, but that's a function of the tax incentive program and not a specific motive of Rockstar North. Maybe the cultural criteria should have been more specific, or maybe the benefit decreased, or maybe it was just bad legislation in the first place.
Also worth noting that Amazon UK paid less tax last year than House of Fraser pay to just rent its Oxford Street store.
One of them made £72.3m in profit, too!
One of them made £72.3m in profit, too!
Are you really saying if something is not outlawed, it's ethical? Holy fucking shit this forum sometimes, I swear.
It's neither ethical nor unethical. Corporations are faceless entities whose actions are a function of the regulatory environment they operate in, and sometimes rules and regulations are flawed. The tax credit in this case is especially indicative of this: there was no unforeseen loophole taken advantage of... Rockstar North literally submitted an application that was qualitatively reviewed and affirmatively accepted. Why would you expect anything different from a faceless entity?
But they will make it illegal when they can. The government didn't intentionally make a loophole, the company hired expensive lawyers to find a technical gap to exploit so as to avoid their obligations to society.
Go take an Ethics 101 class before painting my monitor with so much shit, I just cleaned it.
This research on the Canadian games industry gives a really good analysis of tax reliefs and what they actually end up doing for the national economy and the people they're supposed to benefit:
Basically, it's a fucking grift by multinational companies to extract exploited labor out of the country and in to their own pockets.
Basically, it's a fucking grift by multinational companies to extract exploited labor out of the country and in to their own pockets.
I doubt the 650+ employees that make up Rockstar North will be thrilled with the idea of moving out to the middle of nowhere, just so their CEO won't have to pay taxes.
If the system allows you, why wouldn't you? lol
It's not an individual's job to bolster a broken and completely unfair & outdated tax system that *clearly* makes no sense, and allows huge companies with branches in multiple regions (like Rockstar) to qualify for the tax incentives.
If I had kids and there was a daycare subsidy, I would absolutely take it even if I didn't need it. We all should, if you qualify for it. Someone's going to get that money, it might as well be us. The money's already been allocated for that program, it's not going to go unused, or get returned to taxpayers as an unneeded surplus.
Why tech companies easily get away with rotten and scummy things all the time? Is it because politicians are usually older people for whom tech is like rocket science from another galaxy and so they let tech companies go rampant and unchecked? We need more tech savvy people in politics.
Ascribing ethical malevolence to a corporate entity is attacking the symptom of the problem; the entity is a conduit for the interests behind it and is programmatically predictable.
Traditional non tech companies have been doing the same far longer. See GM, Molson Coors, Alaska Air, Chevron, Delta, Halliburton, Honeywell, several utility/energy/oil companies (PSE&G) etc.
If not evil, maybe sociopathic.
It's behavior to be expected, inherent in big business, but not something to be celebrated or approved of.
My issue is seeing so many people defend or even simply accept such practices as just the way things are. Corporations will get away with whatever they can. It's up to regulatory bodies to, you know, regulate and set those limits, ideally for the protection of people and society. So many people, even on a progressive-ish forum, seem to have the perspective that if something is law, it's somehow correct... ethical, right & good, handed down by god... maybe not realizing that regulations change all the time and are subject to heavy influence by the parties they are going to effect...
I don't disagree with anything in your post, I'm just saying that just because something is par-for-the-course doesn't mean people should tolerate it. If people don't express their dissatisfaction with crap like this, if the majority doesn't view these practices in a negative light, then it's never going to get better.
edit: Actually I will disagree with the idea that corporations can neither be ethical or unethical. Collective responsibility is a thing.
Last edited:
And yet GTA VI will contain scathing criticism of corporate America and all its ills. Fuck 'em. And for the record, I don't respect anybody who makes excuses for Rockstar, Starbucks, Jimmy Carr, or anybody else that refuses to pay their way. We're at a point where public services in the UK are tragically underfunded. Schools, hospitals, policing. It doesn't matter whether it's legally "okay", it's morally mud to me. Pay. Your. Damn. Taxes.
I think I did a half-baked job explaining. Corporations are neither intrinsically ethical or unethical, as they are flow-throughs for and extensions of their stakeholders. I agree that people shouldn't tolerate the problems that might exist, but that dissatisfaction should be targeted at corporate stakeholders and the system that dictates how they operate.
The given situation is also one where people are conflating the activities employees of Rockstar North engaged in with respect to GTA 5 vs. the activities of the entire company. The merits of the VGTR credit are definitely questionable, but the bigger issue is what slice of the overall profit pie Rockstar North deserves. Rockstar North was only one of several development studios on the project, and we know nothing about where overall project directors sit, where all of the marketing activities where performed, how much market risk it had to bear, etc. If the functional profile of Rockstar North is that of a company that performs development leveraging IP it doesn't own, based on directions from personnel seated elsewhere, it's not going to be entitled to a huge portion of the profit from the games it develops.
This
Will buy all their games second hand from now on, seeing as they don't make SP DLC anymore anyway
Shit tier company
yeah a huge company exploiting a country for millions of pounds and putting them into tax havens is the exact same as some dude using a VPN to get a game cheaper.
This is bullshit and I'm tired of seeing people use this as some sort of out for these companies. Corporations have no legal obligation to do any such thing. I don't know why so many people keep pretending it's a factual statment.
That's kind of an oxymoron, Grand Theft Auto is mired in UK culture. As in its the British cultural perspective of America, its mired in the cynicism and perspective that only a people from across the water could have. It wouldn't be nearly as popular if it was just a straight American product.
Are people really shocked at this? Everyone (especailly the rich) looks after themselves and does what they can to save money. Those game consoles, where are they made?
So then you agree with the tax break because in your opinion GTA is British culture.
Where I am, I don't know a single company that wouldn't do this (ie avoid paying taxes). And the dirty secret is governments let them. Governments and businesses are out there to screw over common folk and rob them in broad daylight and laugh about it all the way home.
If the government didn't have these loopholes then Rockstar North would pay, this is on the government for not doing their due diligence. What, you want Rockstar to pay more than what the government says it should pay, no company would do that just like that. Complain to your government.
Both sides can be just as bad. You have to pick the lesser of two evils.
The defence force is amazing.
FFS there are plenty wealthy individuals who avoid paying tax via various financial instruments and clever accounting practices and would also argue they do not break tax law.
Is anyone actually supportive of such nonsense?
FFS there are plenty wealthy individuals who avoid paying tax via various financial instruments and clever accounting practices and would also argue they do not break tax law.
Is anyone actually supportive of such nonsense?
Fuck, I guess Nestlé is not evil for the slave stuff because it's a faceless entity as well
You don't know what you're talking about. It's not an 'excuse' for any company, it's just realistic. To expect massive faceless companies to have the ethics/morals of an individual is beyond stupid. The only incentive for these companies to pay the correct amount of tax is good PR. Without government regulation, nothing will ever change. Yep, I've seen the libertarian bullshit about how "it's not a legal obligation to maximise profits for shareholders", but this is semantics, as there is a legal obligation to serve shareholders' best interests, which in practice amounts to the same thing. As I've already said, companies who receive bad PR for this behaviour can legally change their direction and pay tax, but they will not do this without media pressure, and while that pressure may work for some companies who provide consumer goods and services, less public facing organisations are rarely held to account in this way.
This is why we need tight government regulation. Fuck yo libertarianism and neoliberal bullshit. The market will never, ever regulate itself.
I dont see any defense force. Companies will never pay more than what they have to. Especially big ones with "clever" financial advisors and a team of lawyers. The market will never regulate itself and that's just that. Tax evasion is a huge issue not just with rockstar but basically most big corporations. The government needs to patch the loopholes and have tighter regulations. Because companies aren't just suddenly going to start paying taxes when they can avoid doing so. It is by all means unethical, but corporations are not ever known for being ethical.
