[gaius]

Google's elaborate tax-avoidance schemes mean they forfeit the right to an opinion on what the UK government does.

[jessriedel]

If I maintain a free, US-based, ad-supported website which caters to Iranians (and so pay no Iranian taxes), do I forfeit the right to an opinion on filtering by the Iranian government?

[lukeschlather]

Google has datacenters in the UK, so I think that's one fault in your argument. Also, Google sells ads, search services, email, office tools, and other things. Yours and my personal use of the service may cost us nothing, but I'm sure that Google sells millions of dollars worth of services to customers in the UK.

[sparknlaunch12]

Avoidance or evasion?

If a company is compliant then it is up to government to intervene and change laws. However law change should apply to all entities, on or off line.

[jessriedel]

Actually, "Tax evasion" generally denotes something illegal. "Avoidance" is the correct term here.

[gaius]

Indeed. But Eric Schmidt doesn't get to whine about e.g. education in the UK, without ponying up the cash.

[jessriedel]

There's a pretty important distinction between a government-provided service and the government's infringement of a (negative) right, especially when it comes to who gets to complain based on the amount of taxes they pay. The government doesn't pay money to not censor the internet.