The link in the theregister.co.uk article to the maths is more interesting, as it gives an estimate of the actual % tax paid, i.e basically a bit more than 2%, which is 18% less than what my company pays. So if normal companies had the same deal they would have more to invest and more funds for more employees, especially small companies.
Looks like both Google and the tax authorities will be going to the UK parliament committee to explain themselves, assuming they actually turn up !

Did look like an attempt to influence politicians and gain allies in the event that the EU case against Google goes pear-shaped for Google. With the recent Apple case, Google is probably quite worried and even its FUDbuddies are quiet. The one thing that a lot of the Google FUDbuddies didn't seem to understand was the political element to events. It was funny seeing cluless people waffling on about stuff they didn't understand and not knowing what was happening with the EUC. One of the UK newspapers was leading with a story about 25 UK government politicians who had been in meetings with Google prior to the little tax deal. The Daily Sun said that it was “a kick in the goolies”. It is definitely not going down well in the UK.

Regards...jmcc

It's worth remembering, this is not just Google, and from a political point of view, it's a hot potato right now, in the UK and around Europe.

This is tax going back a number of years.

From a business perspective, there does seem to be something unfair about big business seeming to get away with paying less tax than a smaller business. That's the part that gets to anyone running a small business.

The tax rules laid down are the key factors here. Loopholes need closing.

Not sure how many of you might have seen a really interesting programme on the BBC "The Town That Took on the Taxman - BBC Documentary 2016 "

[youtube.com...]

The fault lies with the governments that have drafted tax regulations which allow this sort of avoidance to happen. Google's taken advantage of it, that's all. Unethical? You decide. Illegal? No.

Loopholes need closing

Never going to happen as long as there are powerful, self serving, lobbying groups.

Marshall

This story is moving forward each day. Once again, the problem is the system permits the moving around of funds. There's no doubt that it can be changed, but whether it will is another thing.

You should watch that youtube video which shows how relatively easy it is for any company.

Things just keep getting worse for Google.
"The European Competition Commissioner says she is willing to investigate Google's tax arrangements should someone complain about them.
Her comments come as the SNP's economy spokesman, Stewart Hosie, says it has sent a letter calling for such a probe.
The development comes as the row over Google's tax affairs in the UK and elsewhere intensifies."

[bbc.com...]

This quote conveys how much worse:
"The EU's Competition Commissioner, Margrethe Vestager, said that, at this stage, she would not be drawn on whether Google's tax settlement with Britain amounted to a so-called sweetheart deal.

But she told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "If we find that there is something to be concerned about if someone writes to us and says, well, this is maybe not as it should be then we will take a look."

The EUC does not, unlike the previous EU commissioner, seem to have been sipping the Google Koolaid.

Regards...jmcc

And worse:
[rte.ie...]

Regards...jmcc

mentioned in detail on bbc question time, following debate in UK parliament where UK Treasury Minister said everything confidential .. but Google is a public company so shareholders need sales and profits by country .. or are shareholders on a 'not need to know basis' ?

Things get funny when a corporation (and there are a few multinationals that fit) generate more revenue than any government (or most) can tax and the gumbermints (sic) aren't willing to kill the golden goose which is greasing their ECONOMY with services, etal the gov would like to take charge of but has too many bureaucrats in the mix. If edited, delete the above, this part should stay:

When billions are involved, and market share that defines a national economy greater than 1%, governments tend to look the other way.