I'll leave out the personal slagging to save your blood pressure:-
"businesses pay tax on profit
(a)
. No profit, no tax. No refund for losses. Instead, losses carried forward until exhausted
(b)
. "
(a) It all depends on how that profit or loss is derived on paper. That has been the argument for a very long time... Jozip Bloggovsky the immigrant doesn't get his 'HQ' or his travel for work costs off his tax, and so forth, and he doesn't get to write off the loan he services to his wife or his uncle's bank in Farstavia to have that 'HQ'...
(b) Losses carried forward are in fact a deduction against future income - nobody gets a return for a loss, they all pay tax on taxable income - many Jo Bloggs' have a loss every year but they get no carry forward.
The argument here is over the availability of tax deductions to some but not to all....we all know that a 'business' gets to live off the income first before declaring any profit... Jo gets to live off his post-tax income... one huge difference. Perhaps you can justify that anomaly?
Now watch your tongue... I try to be civil and I expect the same....