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

Netflix Posted Biggest-Ever Profit in 2018 and Paid $0 in Income Taxes

itep.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 512 posts

Re: Netflix Posted Biggest-Ever Profit in 2018 and Paid $0 in Income Taxes

#201

Post by xienze »

moorhosj wrote: post #160
xienze wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that will definitely limit the amount of expertise that comes with a Congressman/Congresswoman. The expertise they have is in glad-handing, personally enriching themselves, and playing political games. They're certainly not subject matter experts in anything outside that realm. Term limits don't have to mean that we're losing out on this valuable "expertise", it could be something as simple as "retire at 65", you k…

==They're certainly not subject matter experts in anything outside that realm.== Except many of them clearly are. Bill Foster worked as a particle physicist at Fermilab for 22 years [1]. Sean Casten started and sold an energy recycling company called Recycled Energy Development [2]. Those are two examples just from suburban Chicago. Try not to let political cynicism cloud reality. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bi…

> Except many of them clearly are.

How many? And I think it's particularly telling that the folks you managed to find are newbies to the political arena and not career politicians, a class of individuals that can only exist thanks to the absence of term limits. Also telling is that in Foster's case, his expertise is completely useless in a political context. Let me know when he gets around to drafting a major particle physics bill.

Re: Netflix Posted Biggest-Ever Profit in 2018 and Paid $0 in Income Taxes

#202

Post by kbenson »

manquer wrote: post #167
citilife wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not siding one way or the other, that will definitely limit the amount of expertise that comes with a Congressman/Congresswoman. Think about it, it takes at least six months for us to learn our jobs, they have to learn about hundreds of things ongoing in the government before they can make informed decisions. You then even rely more on lobbyists (or "experts") who at least generally know what they are talking about.…

I am not sure they have the required expertise anyway, most of the elected politicians have zero understanding of tech for example, many of them never even used email, the woeful questioning of zukerberg showed how clueless they are. Career bureaucrats are the ones who run many of hundred things that run the government. Politicians need to provide direction and reflect the will of the people. Hardly need to career po…

It's not like we're blindly considering something that has never been tried. California enacted term limits, and there were studies[1] as to the effect it had. Information as to some aspects of it is but a click or search away. Here's some highlights of the summary I linked to:

In both houses, committees now screen out fewer bills assigned to them and are more likely to see their work rewritten at later stages. The practice of“hijacking” Assembly bills—gutting their contents and amending them thoroughly in the Senate—has increased sharply. As a body, the Legislature is less likely to alter theGovernor’s Budget, and its own budget process neither encourages fiscal discipline nor links legislators’ requests to overall spending goals. In addition, legislative oversight of the executive branch has declined significantly.

...legislators are learning more quickly than their precursors, but that frequent changes in the membership and leadership of legislative committees, especially in the Assembly, diminish their expertise in many important policy areas. Many committees lack the experience to weed out bad bills and to ensure that agencies are acting efficiently and in accordance with legislative intent.

That said, overall the summary finds that the effects of term limits were neither as good as proponents hoped or as bad as detractors feared.

1: "How Have Term Limits Affected the California Legislature?" https://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/rb/RB_1104BCRB.pdf

Re: Netflix Posted Biggest-Ever Profit in 2018 and Paid $0 in Income Taxes

#203

Post by jdhn »

frebord wrote: post #136

Can someone explain to me why businesses pay any tax at all. It makes no sense to me that we want to restrict the flow of money through a business. Maybe we could tax cash holdings of a company, but why would you tax any income that ultimately goes to expansion, shareholders, employees? People see these "tax evading" corporations as so evil, but why? Do they really even remotely understand what is going on? I suspect…

I believe the argument is that by taxing companies, you can broaden the tax base beyond individuals which theoretically will let you lower the tax rates on individuals while maintaining or increasing the amount of taxes that you take in.

Re: Netflix Posted Biggest-Ever Profit in 2018 and Paid $0 in Income Taxes

#204

Post by undecisive »

AlexB138 wrote: post #162
chanandler_bong wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The answer is to outlaw lobbyists, it would fix a lot of problems. That, and enact term limits for Congress. That will fix even more.

> The answer is to outlaw lobbyists, it would fix a lot of problems. That, and enact term limits for Congress. That will fix even more. When you think there are simple answers to big problems it's generally because you don't actually understand the problem. How would you outlaw lobbyists? Setting aside the fact that it would be unconstitutional, do you think it should be illegal for you to air your grievances to elec…

Aside from the fact that many countries have ways of limiting lobbyist influence through law, a simple but dramatic way would be to say:

0. Lobbying is a right, but one that can only be exercised by individual citizens, not corporations.

1. Anyone who wishes to "lobby" congressional candidates or congresspersons must register their financial interests

2. Make it illegal to directly accept money for lobbying services (akin to prostitution)

Sure, it wouldn't make lobbying impossible - but it would make it much harder.

Re: Netflix Posted Biggest-Ever Profit in 2018 and Paid $0 in Income Taxes

#205

Post by com2kid »

chanandler_bong wrote: post #79
otachack wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not that simple. Companies lobby to keep, even coerce, laws that benefit them and allow these sorts of things to happen. What is the common person, or collection of persons, supposed to do when they are against that kind of force? I believe one way is to actually be involved in politics and get into the seats that govern and make the laws. But it's easier said than done.

The answer is to outlaw lobbyists, it would fix a lot of problems. That, and enact term limits for Congress. That will fix even more.

> The answer is to outlaw lobbyists, it would fix a lot of problems. T

So, no one is allowed to write their senators anymore? People can't request to meet with their elected representatives? Subject matter experts aren't allowed to express their opinions within earshot of a member of congress?

Lobbying is just people with a shared interest expressing their views to elected representatives.

Now, the concept has gotten a bit overly... complex, but outlawing lobbying all together would be a huge infringement on freedom of speech.

Re: Netflix Posted Biggest-Ever Profit in 2018 and Paid $0 in Income Taxes

#206

Post by skh »

manquer wrote: post #191
skh wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure Netflix paid tons in employer contributions to employee income taxes, social security taxes, etc. This situation should not be viewed as Netflix paying tax. An employee's benefits, pay, time off, etc. are all part of the compensation of an employee. If Netflix did not pay this on behalf of the employee then the employee would have to pay it. For instance, for contractors they (the contractor) pay the full FI…

You and companies do pay tax on expenses typically as some type of indirect tax (global defn, not the US defn) such as VAT, GST , excise , import/export duties etc.

A company takes in money from products and services it sells. From this amount of money the company pays employees and equipment, services, etc. for the running of the company. These are called expenses in business accounting. The company does not pay tax on the money it took in that it then spent buying/paying for things. This is what is meant by the phrase, "companies don't pay tax on expenses".

Re: Netflix Posted Biggest-Ever Profit in 2018 and Paid $0 in Income Taxes

#207

Post by [deleted] »

EpicEng wrote: post #103
cpursley wrote: post #87

Meh, corporations don't pay income taxes anyways even when they do; their consumers pay the tax (it's just another expense). A national sales tax is a better way to collect.

A consumption tax would all of a suddenly increase prices by a large margin for the poorest among us.

[deleted]

Re: Netflix Posted Biggest-Ever Profit in 2018 and Paid $0 in Income Taxes

#208

Post by xparco »

driverdan wrote: post #34

Rather than being outraged at the headline, what are the actual details? Why were they able to pay no taxes? Was it due to carried losses or something like that? Anyone mad at a company for not pay taxes is misdirecting their anger. Companies follow the law. If you don't like the law elect different politicians. Don't get mad at companies that follow the law.

Go to hell you scum, my grandparents were treated like shit due to law, color of thier skin

Re: Netflix Posted Biggest-Ever Profit in 2018 and Paid $0 in Income Taxes

#209

Post by airstrike »

joefourier wrote: post #169
frebord wrote: post #136

Can someone explain to me why businesses pay any tax at all. It makes no sense to me that we want to restrict the flow of money through a business. Maybe we could tax cash holdings of a company, but why would you tax any income that ultimately goes to expansion, shareholders, employees? People see these "tax evading" corporations as so evil, but why? Do they really even remotely understand what is going on? I suspect…

Gross income isn't taxed, but profits are. However, I do agree that the annual basis of corporate taxation creates odd incentives - if on December 31st a company finishes the year with $10 million in cash, and on January 1st they spend $9 million, they will still pay tax on the $10 million, while if they spent it just a few hours before, they would have just paid tax on $1 million . Estonia's corporate tax system see…

That's not how this works.

You pay taxes on what you earn, not on your cash balance. The company will always pay taxes on the $10 million, regardless of when it spends the $9.

Also GAAP taxes are different from cash taxes paid to the IRS.

Re: Netflix Posted Biggest-Ever Profit in 2018 and Paid $0 in Income Taxes

#210

Post by hjanssen »

mikestew wrote: post #200
trhway wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>it should be illegal for you to air your grievances to elected officials? Doing it for money - yes, that should be illegal.

You mean acting as a paid representative on someone else's behalf to stand before a government official? Isn't that what lawyers do?

What are you trying to say with that?
Post reply on HN