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

251–259 of 259 posts

Re: Google's Paris HQ raided in tax probe

#251

Post by weberc2 »

Xylakant wrote: post #147
weberc2 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the article is to be believed, the problem is that France is prosecuting law-abiding companies, presumably because they're doing business in rival nations.

That's not what the text says. Googles spokesperson is quoted as saying they're complying with the law - but well, what is Googles spokesperson supposed to say? The whole paragraph starting with "accused of" is not about "legally being accused of breaking the law" but about the fact, that this (seemingly) legal tax structuring is under increased scrutiny. One part of that is testing if that's actually really legal be…

"Several have been accused of using legal methods to minimise their tax bills. In Google's case, its tax structure allows it to pay tax in the Republic of Ireland, even when sales appear to relate to the UK."

I took this to mean Google was among the companies accused of using "legal methods". Am I misreading?

Re: Google's Paris HQ raided in tax probe

#252

Post by cscurmudgeon »

EdHominem wrote: post #243
cscurmudgeon wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How scientific of you! :) > but who would want to keep using Bing long enough to quantify the suck? 20% of the market?

Even if we believe the 20% figure, what's the chance that they made that choice? Considering Microsoft popularized the dark pattern of changing preferences during auto-updates...

Sigh.

> Even if we believe the 20% figure,

Those are widely accepted.

> Considering Microsoft popularized the dark pattern of changing preferences during auto-updates...

You think Google never does anything like that?

http://hothardware.com/news/google-paid-apple-1-billion-for-...

http://www.wired.com/2016/04/eu-accuses-google-antitrust-vio...

> According to the complaint, Google requires companies that want to bundle Google’s apps with their products to make Google Search the default search engine on those devices. They’re even offered financial incentives to not even include any other search engines, European authorities allege.

When Google does it, it is all kosher I guess.

Re: Google's Paris HQ raided in tax probe

#253

Post by gnaritas »

chillacy wrote: post #245
gnaritas wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> money from corporations are doubly taxed as well No they are not. Money is always taxed when it changes ownership, as corporations are legal persons, it pays taxes on its profit. When shareholders are given some of that profit via dividends, that money is again changing ownership so it taxed as income to those shareholders. Saying something is double taxed is to misunderstand "when" tax applies. If you don't want c…

Double taxation isn't just some vague term I made up: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/double_taxation.asp What you described is commonly referred to as double taxation. I merely pointed out that this is more evidence that businesses are legal entities defined by the government. If businesses weren't legal entities, this wouldn't be an issue. However you could have noted that most corporate money is dished out as…

> What you described is commonly referred to as double taxation

Yes, just as liberals are referred to as leftists by conservatives, it's an inaccurate and derogatory means of referring to a perfectly normal tax practice whose sole purpose is intended to make the listener think it's unfair by glossing over the fact that money is taxed when it changes hands, not when it's earned. Anyone who calls it double taxation is participating in partisan propaganda and intentionally spreading ignorance.

Re: Google's Paris HQ raided in tax probe

#254

Post by EdHominem »

cscurmudgeon wrote: post #252
EdHominem wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if we believe the 20% figure, what's the chance that they made that choice? Considering Microsoft popularized the dark pattern of changing preferences during auto-updates...

Sigh. > Even if we believe the 20% figure, Those are widely accepted. > Considering Microsoft popularized the dark pattern of changing preferences during auto-updates... You think Google never does anything like that? http://hothardware.com/news/google-paid-apple-1-billion-for-... http://www.wired.com/2016/04/eu-accuses-google-antitrust-vio... > According to the complaint, Google requires companies that want to bundl…

>> the 20% figure,

> Those are widely accepted.

Almost every time I saw IE, or MSN, and now Bing, I'd been tricked into using it.

MS users are rarely voluntary users, I know because I've been one.

> When Google does it

You're getting pretty defensive. Does that means you admit MS does it and the only defense is that other companies might as well?

What's your estimate of people who have tried two or more search or mapping engines and have intentionally settled on the Microsoft product?

Re: Google's Paris HQ raided in tax probe

#255

Post by EdHominem »

nametakenobv wrote: post #248
EdHominem wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea that France is owed a piece of all media-spend directed towards french people is disgusting and legally unsupportable. The only reason it's even a debatable issue is that they forced Google to redirect the .com domain to the .fr domain for IPs geo-located in France. No country can be trusted with this power because this is only where it starts.

This is just pointless drivel. Do you understand why taxation exists at all? Government is not some arbitrary institution that just sits there and gets money. The government is the people. The french people say "if you want to do business with us, you have to pay for the privilege". The government is the vehicle to facilitate this. Less Ayn Rand, more real economics and politics before criticizing, please.

Why the government of France though? Their only involvement is that people are advertising to French people.

The French people have already been taxed to build-out the shared infrastructure, and have payed tax ISP, etc, and will be taxed on any purchases. So why should their government get yet another cut? And of things being done in other countries.

> The government is the people. The french people say "..."

The French people did not ask to be locked into the .fr portal. That's the only way this scheme works.

When Trump is elected (or maybe Hillary) will you roll over and accept everything they demand, justifying it as the will of the people? Or do you recognize that the government very frequently acts for the good of the politicians and against the people. Up-front tax money is good for politicians; look at them, raising money, and fighting the good fight. But long-term they've just built internet walls that will be used for oppression and destroyed the goose that laid those golden eggs.

Re: Google's Paris HQ raided in tax probe

#256

Post by chillacy »

gnaritas wrote: post #253
chillacy wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Double taxation isn't just some vague term I made up: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/double_taxation.asp What you described is commonly referred to as double taxation. I merely pointed out that this is more evidence that businesses are legal entities defined by the government. If businesses weren't legal entities, this wouldn't be an issue. However you could have noted that most corporate money is dished out as…

> What you described is commonly referred to as double taxation Yes, just as liberals are referred to as leftists by conservatives, it's an inaccurate and derogatory means of referring to a perfectly normal tax practice whose sole purpose is intended to make the listener think it's unfair by glossing over the fact that money is taxed when it changes hands, not when it's earned. Anyone who calls it double taxation is…

Hmm, wasn't aware of that. I learned it in my econ textbook in high school, so I assumed it was standard terminology. My intention wasn't to offend, and I personally have no issue with the practice.

Re: Google's Paris HQ raided in tax probe

#257

Post by cscurmudgeon »

EdHominem wrote: post #254
cscurmudgeon wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sigh. > Even if we believe the 20% figure, Those are widely accepted. > Considering Microsoft popularized the dark pattern of changing preferences during auto-updates... You think Google never does anything like that? http://hothardware.com/news/google-paid-apple-1-billion-for-... http://www.wired.com/2016/04/eu-accuses-google-antitrust-vio... > According to the complaint, Google requires companies that want to bundl…

>> the 20% figure, > Those are widely accepted. Almost every time I saw IE, or MSN, and now Bing, I'd been tricked into using it. MS users are rarely voluntary users, I know because I've been one. > When Google does it You're getting pretty defensive. Does that means you admit MS does it and the only defense is that other companies might as well? What's your estimate of people who have tried two or more search or map…

> You're getting pretty defensive.

You are the one fetishizing Google. I know MS and Google are both slimy. Google just has a better PR machine.

> and the only defense

I am not defending MS.

> What's your estimate of people who have tried two or more search or mapping engines and have intentionally settled on the Microsoft product?

Most normal people don't know what a search engine and just go with the default.

http://techcrunch.com/2009/10/06/google-a-web-browser-is-not...

http://techcrunch.com/2009/06/17/yeah-what-is-a-browser-anyw...

Re: Google's Paris HQ raided in tax probe

#258

Post by EdHominem »

cscurmudgeon wrote: post #257
EdHominem wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> the 20% figure, > Those are widely accepted. Almost every time I saw IE, or MSN, and now Bing, I'd been tricked into using it. MS users are rarely voluntary users, I know because I've been one. > When Google does it You're getting pretty defensive. Does that means you admit MS does it and the only defense is that other companies might as well? What's your estimate of people who have tried two or more search or map…

> You're getting pretty defensive. You are the one fetishizing Google. I know MS and Google are both slimy. Google just has a better PR machine. > and the only defense I am not defending MS. > What's your estimate of people who have tried two or more search or mapping engines and have intentionally settled on the Microsoft product? Most normal people don't know what a search engine and just go with the default. http:…

> Most normal people don't know what a search engine and just go with the default.

Exactly. Microsoft's users are there because they don't know about the alternatives or are locked in.

> You are the one fetishizing Google. I know MS and Google are both slimy. Google just has a better PR machine.

I see, it is a personal thing for you.

I was just saying that Microsoft's services are essentially unusable. That's not because of Bill or Ballmer, but because Bing is just bad.

The only reason I'm mentioning dark patterns is to say that it's 20% with all the cheating they can do. Not because one in five people thinks their offering has value.

Re: Google's Paris HQ raided in tax probe

#259

Post by rurban »

Shivetya wrote: post #233
mike_hearn wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For example, as an Irish company, you can open a subsidiary in France to do business in France. The whole point of the EU single market is that you do not have to do that. You can set up shop in Ireland and sell to the French market until the cows come home. You only owe Irish taxes (modulo the recent completely crazy VAT changes). Laws that say "forget the law, anything we think is unreasonable is illegal" are a gro…

Unlike the US, countries in the EU do not appear to be able to compete by offering favorable conditions to corporations and this especially concerns taxes. which is a big design fault that hampers the EU especially as nations facing debt problems will use it to shore their finances up which keeps up and coming countries from doing that, being up and coming.

Unfortunately this is not true anymore. With the raise of US/UK style neoliberalism various states like Luxembourg, Slovakia, Lichtenstein, Germany, Austria, Ireland ... try to outcompete each other in offering less taxes, less union influence, less labor costs for more jobs and companies regularly blackmail the EU states for more favorable conditions.

E.g. Germany can only hold its current EU stronghold by outcompeting France with much lower labor costs.

Post reply on HN