Report: Global Publisher Killed UK Tax Breaks

June 25, 2010 -

Develop is reporting that “one of the biggest game companies in the world" used strong arm tactics to help kill tax breaks for UK videogame developers.

The unnamed company in question reportedly “spoke to well-placed parliament allies to dissuade any legislative measures.” Why would one company lobby so tirelessly against a measure that would help the industry as a whole? Develop wrote:

This company had apparently viewed game tax relief as a measure that would have given the UK an unfair advantage over other nations.

An unfair advantage? That phrase doesn’t make much sense considering the UK has fallen into fourth place (by some accounts) in terms of number of game developers, trailing Japan, the U.S. and Canada.

Scandalous! Before we all start guessing who it is, consider that “Bobby Kotick” himself commented on the Develop story saying, “Lol, don’t look at me!”
 

Thanks NovaBlack and beemoh!


Comments

Re: Report: Global Publisher Killed UK Tax Breaks

Surely more countries offering tax breaks adds to more competition in driving down the costs?

Could the lobbying have also been backed by foreign governments (say the Canadian government)?

Re: Report: Global Publisher Killed UK Tax Breaks

Before we all start guessing who it is, consider that “Bobby Kotick” himself commented on the Develop story saying, “Lol, don’t look at me!”

So who can we look with relentless eyes full of evil for making the UK drop the tax break? 

http://www.magicinkgaming.com/

Re: Report: Global Publisher Killed UK Tax Breaks

I honestly don't know and I find it shameful to think that any game company would want to sabatoge the games industry in any nation.

But I guess you really need to look at who has been taking advantage of tax incentives in other nations. A few companies come to mind.

E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma

Re: Report: Global Publisher Killed UK Tax Breaks

But why would they do that? Surely another country offering tax breaks alongside all the other ones is somewhere they can start another studio alongside all their other ones to make even more money at?

If they are already active in the UK, where is the incentive for them to stop such a scheme, and if they aren't, where is the incentive for our government to turn down business that isn't even in the country anyway?

Unless it's a UK-based company enjoying foreign tax breaks that's had those threatened by said foreign government, but that's far too much like a conspiracy theory for me.

/b

Re: Report: Global Publisher Killed UK Tax Breaks

Never said it makes sense.

TIGA has been complaining for a while that the UK talent pool has been moving to Canada for jobs. I would think a company there would not like to have that steady stream of talent slow or stop all together. Plus it would be expensive to set up yet another studio in yet another country just to get the tax incentive.

E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma

Re: Report: Global Publisher Killed UK Tax Breaks

It makes sense to me in one case.  If the company in question has no assets in the UK.  Then it's in their best interest to want it to cost more to run a games company in places where they aren't doing so.  In the end it keeps them in a better position by not allowing the playing field to get levelled.

Also higher labour costs means lower salaries, means the best people tend to stay away since they can get paid better elsewhere.

It's shameful behaviour to be sure, but it does make sense.

===============

Chris Kimberley

===============

Chris Kimberley

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Is King right? Should all games adopt the free-to-play model?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
PHX Corphttp://www.msnbc.com/ronan-farrow/watch/video-games-continue-to-break-the-mold-229561923638 Ronan Farrow Daily on Video games04/17/2014 - 2:13pm
NeenekoAh yes, because by building something nice they were just asking for people to come push them out. Consequences are protested all the time when other people are implementing them.04/17/2014 - 2:06pm
Matthew Wilsonok than they should not protest when the consequences of that choice occur.04/17/2014 - 1:06pm
NeenekoIf people want tall buildings, plenty of other cities with them. Part of freedom and markets is communities deciding what they do and do not want built in their collective space.04/17/2014 - 12:55pm
Sora-ChanI realize that they have ways getting around it, but one reason might be due to earthquakes.04/17/2014 - 4:42am
Matthew WilsonSF is a tech/ economic/ trade center it should be mostly tail building. this whole problem is because of the lack of tail buildings. How would having tail apartment buildings destroy SF? having tail buildings has not runed other cities around the US/world04/16/2014 - 10:51pm
Matthew WilsonAgain the issue is you can not build upwards anywhere in SF at the moment, and no you would not. You would bring prices to where they should have been before the market distortion. those prices are not economic or socially healthy.04/16/2014 - 10:46pm
ZippyDSMleeYou still wind up pushing people out of the non high rise aeras but tis least damage you can do all things considered.04/16/2014 - 10:26pm
ZippyDSMleeANd by mindlessly building upward you make it like every place else hurting property prices,ect,ect. You'll have to slowly segment the region into aeras where you will never build upward then alow some aeras to build upward.04/16/2014 - 10:25pm
Matthew WilsonSF have to build upwards they have natural growth limits. they can not grow outwards. ps growing outwards is terable just look at Orlando or Austin for that.04/16/2014 - 4:15pm
ZippyDSMleeIf they built upward then it would becoem like every other place making it worthless, if they don't build upward they will price people out making it worthless, what they need to do is a mix of things not just one exstreme or another.04/16/2014 - 4:00pm
Matthew Wilsonyou know the problem in SF was not the free market going wrong right? it was government distortion. by not allowing tall buildings to be build they limited supply. that is not free market.04/16/2014 - 3:48pm
ZippyDSMleeOh gaaa the free market is a lie as its currently leading them to no one living there becuse they can not afford it makign it worthless.04/16/2014 - 3:24pm
Matthew WilsonIf you have not read http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/04/introducing-steam-gauge-ars-reveals-steams-most-popular-games/ you should. It is a bit stats heavy, but worth the read.04/16/2014 - 2:04pm
Matthew Wilsonthe issue is when is doesn't work it can screw over millions in new york city's case. more often than not it is better to let the free market run its course without market distortion.04/16/2014 - 9:36am
NeenekoTrue, and overdone stagnation is a problem. It is a tricky balance. It does not help that when it does work, no one notices. Most people here have benifited from rent controls and not even realized it.04/16/2014 - 9:23am
ZippyDSMleehttp://www.afterdawn.com/news/article.cfm/2014/04/15/riaa_files_civil_suit_against_megaupload04/16/2014 - 8:48am
ZippyDSMleeEither way you get stagnation as people can not afford the prices they set.04/16/2014 - 8:47am
Neenekowell, specifically it helps people already living there and hurts people who want to live there instead. As for 'way more hurt', majorities generally need less legal protection. yes it hurt more people then it helped, it was written for a minority04/16/2014 - 8:30am
MaskedPixelantehttp://torrentfreak.com/square-enix-drm-boosts-profits-and-its-here-to-stay-140415/ Square proves how incredibly out of touch they are by saying that DRM is the way of the future, and is here to stay.04/16/2014 - 8:29am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician