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

Google used a tax loophole to shelter $19.2B

engadget.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 164 posts

Re: Google used a tax loophole to shelter $19.2B

#111

Post by WalterBright »

cryptoz wrote: post #54
ghaff wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Paying as little taxes as possible to avoid jail is absolutely not the rational move for people or corporations. Of course it is, and then both individuals and companies have the option to make voluntary payments as charitable contributions or to support local institutions--as many universities to to their municipalities.

Charities are no replacement for a functioning democratic government. Charities do not build large scale infrastructure or keep populations safe or anything as powerful as a functioning government can do to lift citizens out of suffering and poverty.

The US economy lifted scores of millions of people up from poverty into the middle class in the 1800's, long before government entitlement programs, welfare, and wars on poverty.

You can see it in the statistics on life expectancy, infant mortality, and average height.

Re: Google used a tax loophole to shelter $19.2B

#112

Post by natecavanaugh »

chillacy wrote: post #96
dkural wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but they don't have the "don't be evil" motto, or executives claiming some vague moral superiority to rest of the corporate world in "making the world a better place".

Morality isn't really absolute, so I could see people justifying it. One line of reasoning could go: 1. The letter of the law and the Right Thing aren't always the same thing (jury nullification, MLK) 2. You disagree with what the government spends tax money on 3. You think AI progress is a form of "doing good"

I feel, perhaps wrongly, that this is a non-sequitur. You can't state that morality isn't absolute, but then use an argument to justify why a moral absolute (The Right Thing) defends the proceeding statement.

I agree with 1, sometimes agree with 2, but 3 just doesn't follow for me.

Re: Google used a tax loophole to shelter $19.2B

#113

Post by telchar »

peteretep wrote: post #101
dkural wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no law that says you must set up Bermuda, Dutch and Irish subsidiaries, and use your IP to shuffle profits, or other methods, to evade tax in territories where that revenue is earned. Most companies aren't wealthy enough to do this; and in fact they don't do it. Many of them are public corporations. Their shareholders don't sue or demand such actions.

> There is no law that says you must ... Isn't there? I thought shareholders has a legal remedy if they believed companies weren't maximising return?

No, the fiduciary duty the company has to shareholders is vague in this regard and practically speaking they can define the shareholders interest broadly, for example maximising returns at some indeterminate point in the far future. Shareholders can try to sue over this but almost certainly would lose the suit unless real malfeasance is uncovered. IANAL though.

Re: Google used a tax loophole to shelter $19.2B

#114

Post by natecavanaugh »

throwaway2048 wrote: post #110
totalZero wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no moral obligation to pay additional taxes beyond the minimum that tax law permits.

according to you, do you have the same outlook on people exploiting bugs/backdoors in code on other peoples machines for personal gain?

Personally, I would say, no, not the same outlook, unless you treat any system where an advantage is gained by one actor over another.

But I don't think we can equivocate the action of not only breaking into a system (weak or not) and stealing something from others, from the government (or any actor) leaving money on the table due to their inefficiencies, or lack of foresight.

But if we're going for false equivalencies, you could also say that government's using the act of force to take money is also equally wrong, which is the typical libertarian argument.

I'm not a big fan of either argument, as they all fall apart as soon as you get into the details.

Re: Google used a tax loophole to shelter $19.2B

#115

Post by Analemma_ »

totalZero wrote: post #107
dkural wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but they don't have the "don't be evil" motto, or executives claiming some vague moral superiority to rest of the corporate world in "making the world a better place".

There is no moral obligation to pay additional taxes beyond the minimum that tax law permits.

This mindset seems fine in isolation, but it falls apart when you consider that corporations and the wealthy first subvert democracy to pass tax law with loopholes only they can use, and then use this aphorism as a gag order to keep the rest of us from complaining about it.

Re: Google used a tax loophole to shelter $19.2B

#116

Post by jstanley »

totalZero wrote: post #107
dkural wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but they don't have the "don't be evil" motto, or executives claiming some vague moral superiority to rest of the corporate world in "making the world a better place".

There is no moral obligation to pay additional taxes beyond the minimum that tax law permits.

I think you mean there is no legal obligation to pay additional taxes beyond the minimum that tax law permits.

Whether your moral obligation lies above or below the legal minimum depends on your viewpoint.

Re: Google used a tax loophole to shelter $19.2B

#117

Post by nradov »

joelg wrote: post #47
thrill wrote: post #6

There are no such things as tax loopholes. There is compliance with the law as Congress has written with all of their agendas, and there is noncompliance.

"There are no such things as bugs in code; the computer always executes the code as written." Loopholes and bugs are differences between intent and effect.

It's rather difficult to determine the intent of legislators, especially after some time has passed. Courts sometimes look at Congressional debate transcripts when deciding complex issues of federal law. But different congresspeople often have different conflicting intents even when they vote the same way.

Re: Google used a tax loophole to shelter $19.2B

#118

Post by kinkrtyavimoodh »

dkural wrote: post #86
super-serial wrote: post #79

Bloomberg likes to write about how "tech companies do this" whenever it's something bad. The fact is all companies do this... it's well-known every industry is doing the same. Walmart, Exxon and Pfizer are just a few companies that tax-dodge just as much as Google. It's estimated $700 billion in taxes are dodged so singling out Google's $19 billion seems strange. https://americansfortaxfairness.org/corporate-tax-char…

Yes, but they don't have the "don't be evil" motto, or executives claiming some vague moral superiority to rest of the corporate world in "making the world a better place".

Yes. But "Don't be evil" does not translate to "Don't do anything dkural doesn't approve of".

Re: Google used a tax loophole to shelter $19.2B

#119

Post by ringaroundthetx »

dkural wrote: post #86
super-serial wrote: post #79

Bloomberg likes to write about how "tech companies do this" whenever it's something bad. The fact is all companies do this... it's well-known every industry is doing the same. Walmart, Exxon and Pfizer are just a few companies that tax-dodge just as much as Google. It's estimated $700 billion in taxes are dodged so singling out Google's $19 billion seems strange. https://americansfortaxfairness.org/corporate-tax-char…

Yes, but they don't have the "don't be evil" motto, or executives claiming some vague moral superiority to rest of the corporate world in "making the world a better place".

I would argue that income taxes are still new enough (~100 years) that you can claim moral superiority over the state’s arbitrary claim to support them

The nation state concept was arbitrarily rolled out worldwide over the last few centuries and their passive revenue ideas are just as arbitrary

People largely debate the fairness of the tax amongst all participants in the system instead of the system itself, this is understandable because they are numerous and powerless whereas the multinational class is the exact opposite

But these still have no effect on the intrinsically amoral nature of government revenue ideas

The nation state concept got itself into its own mess

Re: Google used a tax loophole to shelter $19.2B

#120

Post by kinkrtyavimoodh »

jstanley wrote: post #116
totalZero wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no moral obligation to pay additional taxes beyond the minimum that tax law permits.

I think you mean there is no legal obligation to pay additional taxes beyond the minimum that tax law permits. Whether your moral obligation lies above or below the legal minimum depends on your viewpoint.

Does this logic also applies to individuals who look for various kinds of tax exemptions in their personal filings?

Is someone taking a mortgage exemption being immoral?

Post reply on HN