Ikea founder leaves fortune to no one, structures it to ensure it lasts forever

Post by mulmen » Fri, Feb 02, 2018, 11:05 PM UTC

charlesdm wrote: post #330

mulmen wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you said there's no point in being frugal if you are paying significant corporate tax. If you have a heavy tax burden surely it is important to allocate your remaining resources frugally? I'm saying option a is better than option c) spend wastefully because you pay high taxes. Your comment seemed to advocate for this third option. I now understand your meaning to be "paying high taxes is not frugal" which I disag…

Perhaps I phrased it wrong -- I believe, if you are a person who is extremely frugal, you will also automatically want to reduce your tax liability. Because at the end of the day the result is the same: an expense means money leaves the business, taxes mean that money leaves the business. It's not necessary.. but probably a personally trait of frugal people. You reduce expenses. You're absolutely right however that h…

Post by ptaipale » Fri, Feb 02, 2018, 11:09 PM UTC

leetcrew wrote: post #227

vec wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A someone who is broadly sympathetic to the idea of labor ownership of the means of production, could I trouble you to explain what's so obvious about the stupidity of this plan? Taxes on corporate profits are generally seen as reasonable in the abstract, and they're common all over the world. I could see setting an unusually high tax rate being problematic, but that doesn't appear to be what happened. And it doesn't…

> Taxes on corporate profits are generally seen as reasonable in the abstract actually corporate taxes are a pretty controversial topic among economists. it's not considered to be a particularly efficient tax, and it is unclear who ultimately bears the burden of the tax.

Post by charlesdm » Fri, Feb 02, 2018, 11:12 PM UTC

mulmen wrote: post #331

charlesdm wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps I phrased it wrong -- I believe, if you are a person who is extremely frugal, you will also automatically want to reduce your tax liability. Because at the end of the day the result is the same: an expense means money leaves the business, taxes mean that money leaves the business. It's not necessary.. but probably a personally trait of frugal people. You reduce expenses. You're absolutely right however that h…

Sure but you can reduce your tax liability to the maximum extent of the law and still pay high tax rates. This is still frugal. I don't disagree with your second paragraph but I don't see how it relates to frugality.

Post by ptaipale » Fri, Feb 02, 2018, 11:18 PM UTC

vkou wrote: post #316

garmaine wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what's going on here. The government is saying: "give us Xkr" and then turning around and buying shares of the company. That's a two step process, but collapse the steps together and it's the same as the government saying "give us X shares of the company," which is nationalization -- the government taking control (even fractional control) of a company by force. If nothing else, company officers and the boa…

> but collapse the steps together and it's the same as the government saying "give us X shares of the company," Great, you've just described taxation. > which is nationalization -- the government taking control (even fractional control) of a company by force. How is buying shares on the public market with government money taking control of a company by force? No current shareholder is obligated to sell their shares.…

Post by ptaipale » Fri, Feb 02, 2018, 11:27 PM UTC

dx034 wrote: post #102

andrepd wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh nice, if he thought he could use the money better, then sure, please carry on not paying taxes. Can I do the same? Or is that a privilege reserved for the mega-rich? Or let's call a spade a spade, and let's call tax evasion tax evasion.

Yes you can. Move to a country with low/no income taxes.