Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: sooyeah on 26/09/2007 00:45:08
-
Could you allow government to own shares in a company, as a way of increasing revenue and reducing tax?
Could government act as a share holder?
-
They do, or atleast did own shares in many industries, this did not lower taxation.
-
You could argue that it prevented further or higher taxation, but i am not an economist and could only give a personal responce.
-
As Paul has mentioned, the UK government has in the past owned various companies, although mostly not as a shareholder.
It still owns Network Rail, but that is a not for profit company, and so has no shareholders, and cannot distribute dividends.
The UK Government does own the Royal Mail, which is a PLC, and so can distribute dividends (I don't know if it has distributed dividends, although I do believe it did in the past, at its shareholders insistence, and this has in the past jeapordised investment).
The French Government owned the Renualt car company, but that was privatised in 1999, but the French Government continues to hold 15.7% of the stock.
Where the governments do often make more profit is in the sale of monopoly licences (e.g. the rights to radio spectrum, or the licence to the national lottery).
-
So they do currently, in some situations owns shares in companies.
Well, could that not be made to work for everyone. If the government had a major share in a few companies, could the money gained be used to replace taxation?
The point being that the government is hands off, and the company would work as a normal company.
Why do I just get the feeling that the government would just do both?
-
I think the UK Gov. were the major shareholder in the privatised industries, i also think they have now sold most, if not all of their shares
-
Could you allow government to own shares in a company, as a way of increasing revenue and reducing tax?
Could government act as a share holder?
What have you done! You moron!!!!