Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google's Paris HQ raided in tax probe

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 259 posts

Re: Google's Paris HQ raided in tax probe

#111

Post by thomasz »

kbenson wrote: post #100
allendoerfer wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Laws that say "forget the law, anything we think is unreasonable is illegal" are a growing problem in Europe. It makes the EU look like fools Not trying to start a flamewar here, but the common German/European perspective on the US legal system consists of corporations owning it (because of huge costs), consumers abusing it ("cat in microwave/washing machine/toaster", unreasonable compensations, class action lawsuit…

> "cat in microwave/washing machine/toaster" Okay, I'm curious. What's this supposed to mean? That consumers are putting cats in those devices and getting away with it, or putting cats in those devices to void warranties or something? The best I can come up with is that you are thinking of cat in the microwave, which is an urban legend . I'm not sure how that's affecting the view of the US legal system.

There is a widespread believe in Europe, that in the US, you can "dry" your cat in the microwave oven or "wash" it in the washing machine and then sue the manufacturer for billions, unless they specifically warned that this could kill the cat.

Re: Google's Paris HQ raided in tax probe

#112

Post by ptaipale »

batmansmk wrote: post #92
derekp7 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In other words, they found a bug in the way the law is written, and they are exploiting that flaw to their benefit.

Yes, and it is forbidden, as in France what matters is the spirit of the law and not the way it is expressed. It helps keeping common sense upfront; keeping readable and compact text laws.

That sounds somewhat scary. The law is not what is written, but what someone says is the "spirit" of it? The end result is going to depend on who gets to interpret the spirit, and this idea is frightening.

Re: Google's Paris HQ raided in tax probe

#113

Post by chillacy »

mike_hearn wrote: post #43
nametakenobv wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google makes money in France. Given France's economy size, it's probably billions. They need to pay taxes to the french government for the privilege of doing business there, so the government can sped it on schools and other infrastructure, so the french citizens can be prosperous.

The idea that doing business is a "privilege" granted by the state is exactly why France's economy is famously bad, with unemployment double that of the UK.

Is doing business not a privilege elsewhere? In the US you need to register your business and pay taxes (money from corporations are doubly taxed as well). The only businesses here who don't do that are drug dealing / crime enterprises.

Re: Google's Paris HQ raided in tax probe

#114

Post by lukeschlather »

DannyBee wrote: post #87
eloisant wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They've had an office in Paris since 2002, for business. Maybe you're talking about their engineering office. You might think they made it to please politicians, but I think the real reasons is for recruitment. There are many talented engineers in France, some of them not willing to move to Zurich, London or Silicon Valley. If they want a chance to hire them they need an office in France. Anyway, supposing they get r…

Yes, they've had a business office, that precisely noone cares about :) "You might think they made it to please politicians" This is not even a secret. The original office existed because of certain folks not wanting to relocate, but it was only ever grown to please politicians. It was even made into a media event with eric schmidt and the president of france. "but I think the real reasons is for recruitment" This is…

Have you worked in a software company like Google (Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon... ) ?

I have. I'd be surprised if any software company of that size gave up even a single qualified engineer to avoid legal trouble (legal trouble that is entirely Google's fault and not the engineer's.) That's just not the way the market works right now.

Re: Google's Paris HQ raided in tax probe

#115

Post by btilly »

evgen wrote: post #99
mike_hearn wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not exactly. The degree to which judges should be allowed to creatively interpret laws is a controversial issue that has long split down left/right lines. I mean that's basically the entire cause of the split in the Supreme Court between strict literalists and those who believe in a living constitution. Obviously judges have to apply some degree of common sense because English is inherently vague, but the amount that…

Not exactly. You have to look no further than the right's cherished paragon of literalism Antonin Scalia to see a judge contorting himself into knots to try to present his interpretive opinion on the law and meaning of the text as though it was clearly spelled out in either. There are no literalists, especially when their pet political ideals are threatened in some way. If you think the split is literalist/interpreti…

To be fair, it is harder for us to notice that interpretations are creative when they lead to the conclusions that we thought were obvious.

Take, for instance, the establishment in Heller of the right to bear arms as an individual right. Most conservatives believed that to be the case all along, and think it is clear from the wording. However liberal observers were more likely to notice that this interpretation had not appeared in 2 centuries of jurisprudence, and societies of professional historians had long reached the opposite conclusion about original intent.

For another, look at Citizens United which established that corporations had a right to free speech, and therefore could not be restricted from spending on political speech. Conservatives saw this as a straightforward issue of, "I have no actual freedom of speech if I cannot spend money to broadcast it." Liberals noted that this overturned several previous precedents, and the Constitution had never intended corporations to be considered people.

In these and other cases, conservatives don't recognize the creativity of interpretation because the result seems natural and right to them. Liberals do notice.

The same is true going the other way. But liberals do not object to noticing that they have been creative, so are less likely to fail to notice when they have been.

Re: Google's Paris HQ raided in tax probe

#116

Post by dsfyu404ed »

kbenson wrote: post #100
allendoerfer wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Laws that say "forget the law, anything we think is unreasonable is illegal" are a growing problem in Europe. It makes the EU look like fools Not trying to start a flamewar here, but the common German/European perspective on the US legal system consists of corporations owning it (because of huge costs), consumers abusing it ("cat in microwave/washing machine/toaster", unreasonable compensations, class action lawsuit…

> "cat in microwave/washing machine/toaster" Okay, I'm curious. What's this supposed to mean? That consumers are putting cats in those devices and getting away with it, or putting cats in those devices to void warranties or something? The best I can come up with is that you are thinking of cat in the microwave, which is an urban legend . I'm not sure how that's affecting the view of the US legal system.

He should have cited the woman who spilled hot coffee on her. The legal precedent being set by the court was "if it's hot enough to hurt someone label it that way" and to do that they had to award punitive (you screwed up and we're punishing you) damages. If they just ordered the company to pay based on medical costs it would have basically said "this is your fault and you should pay for her medical care" but by awarding punitive damages the court was trying (and succeeded) to send a message about what is and is not acceptable.

Re: Google's Paris HQ raided in tax probe

#117

Post by DannyBee »

realusername wrote: post #18
ersii wrote: post #4

"Several have been accused of using legal methods to minimise their tax bills." Since when is it illegal to follow the law? Sure, we all have different opinions on the legal gray areas and of whether certain or all laws are legitimate and to what extent - but come on, that quote is just ridiculous.

All the laws are judged on intent, not on the exact wording, why would finance laws be any different than the other ones ?

Wait what? in the US, laws are judged on exact wording first, and then intent only if the wording is unclear.

Re: Google's Paris HQ raided in tax probe

#118

Post by allendoerfer »

kbenson wrote: post #100
allendoerfer wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Laws that say "forget the law, anything we think is unreasonable is illegal" are a growing problem in Europe. It makes the EU look like fools Not trying to start a flamewar here, but the common German/European perspective on the US legal system consists of corporations owning it (because of huge costs), consumers abusing it ("cat in microwave/washing machine/toaster", unreasonable compensations, class action lawsuit…

> "cat in microwave/washing machine/toaster" Okay, I'm curious. What's this supposed to mean? That consumers are putting cats in those devices and getting away with it, or putting cats in those devices to void warranties or something? The best I can come up with is that you are thinking of cat in the microwave, which is an urban legend . I'm not sure how that's affecting the view of the US legal system.

I am not saying that it is absolutely true, just that it is the notion many have: In the US you can do something stupid and blame the manufacturer for the damages, if it was not saying in the manual, that you cannot do it.

Combine that with uncapped and ridiculously high compensation claims plus class action lawsuits, which are not a thing over here, and you get a comical impression.

As I said, this may not be totally true, but even though the European Commission brings up stupid ideas once in a while ("Let's introduce quotas for netflix!"), I would say on the global scale the image of the EU legal system is quite okay.

Re: Google's Paris HQ raided in tax probe

#119

Post by arcticfox »

Nadya wrote: post #98
allendoerfer wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Laws that say "forget the law, anything we think is unreasonable is illegal" are a growing problem in Europe. It makes the EU look like fools Not trying to start a flamewar here, but the common German/European perspective on the US legal system consists of corporations owning it (because of huge costs), consumers abusing it ("cat in microwave/washing machine/toaster", unreasonable compensations, class action lawsuit…

>cat in microwave How oddly specific....were you referencing this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMH8Tof69SE I do agree the U.S has a problem with rather frivulious lawsuits over "not following the letter of the law" or "wasn't mentioned in the safety manual to not do this thing that should have been common sense". It seems when people think "American legal system" things like this come to mind: http://i.imgur.com/…

The peanuts picture is funny, but it's 100% the simple. logical, and safe way to do it.

Re: Google's Paris HQ raided in tax probe

#120

Post by ChuckMcM »

As others have pointed out this can happen in France given the way in which laws are prosecuted, my sister lives there part time and really likes this aspect of the country.

That said, its really interesting to watch such powerful interests dance around (in a more general sense) shooting each other. The whole scheme which companies like Apple, Google, others use to "legitimately" minimize their tax burden and the financial pressure being put on the people of the EU by the immigration situation and general financial mismanagement, has really created a fascinating pressure vector.

The pressure point is this; If these companies paid their "fair" taxes in the countries where they do business, then there would be extra tax money to support the government obligations and less need for austerity programs.

Interesting times.

Post reply on HN