[bko]

Honest question: If I create a website that someone uses to to facilitate commerce in Australia, why is it obvious that I should pay Australian tax? I'm not using the resources of the government and their government services did not facilitate the creation of my website.

Shouldn't taxes be at least marginally linked to services rendered by the government? If my business delivers products and I use public roads, I think its reasonable to contribute to that. Or if I consume a product that has been deemed safe by the regulatory body of that government, that seems reasonable to tax as well. But facilitating commerce through websites seems less obvious.

[ryandamm]

No.

Part of what you're paying for is access to the market; furthermore, without this logic, you have a race to the bottom for low corporate taxes (for any companies that deal in IP, which is eventually most nontrivial ones). The result is the tax base from commerce collapses, and the only means to raise revenue for the state is to tax labor (via payroll and income taxes), real property (disproportionately affecting individuals), or consumption (via sales taxes). Not sustainable, so use whatever logic you need to arrive at a sustainable solution.

Not for nothing, 8% of global wealth has been stashed in tax havens. This is a bad thing for the world.

[gmarx]

Mental exercise: Would any Uber or AirBnB transactions occur if Australia we currently as portrayed in the Mad Max movies? Why not?

[bko]

I'm not sure that governments really have the best track record on securing human rights. But yes, peacefully mutually beneficial voluntary exchange of goods and services can exist without a coercive force.