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

321–330 of 512 posts

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

#321

Post by int_19h »

AlexTWithBeard wrote: post #286
PurpleBoxDragon wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Over a reasonable horizon, you weren't profitable. The average worker isn't allowed to do that even when they lose money in a given year. Why is it so naturally assumed to be acceptable for a business to do it? Maybe the time is to just remove the loopholes in general from both business and personal income taxes.

An average worker has few job-related expenses.

Everything that is necessary for a human to function is job-related expenses for somebody who is working. We just choose to not recognize it as such.

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

#322

Post by e1g »

deeviant wrote: post #292
chongli wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it so naturally assumed to be acceptable for a business to do it? Because a business isn't a person. Taxing a business is taking real money away from payrolls, money that would get taxed again anyway once it was paid out. Corporate income tax only makes sense when you look at it as a barrier to entry for competition in the marketplace. Big companies like Netflix know how to avoid taxes. Small companies don't.…

Except a large portion of revenue does not go to workers, but to shareholders, who pay far less taxes then those who strain their backs in creating said revenue.

Except for outliers like Apple, it is atypical for shareholders to get more of revenues than the workers.

Payroll, benefits, offices, etc are easily >50% of revenue in virtually all ventures (including diamond trade and definitely your favourite tech unicorn)

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

#323

Post by airstrike »

ivalm wrote: post #246
airstrike wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Business expenses are deductible. For example, if you are a reseller, you can spend before the end of the year to increase your inventory (and decrease your profits for that year).

Only operating expenses, but in any case you will pay more next year.

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

#324

Post by robdachshund »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #316
lmilcin wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More than that, public companies have obligation to maximise profits for their shareholders as long as they are following the letter of law. There is not much choice here, they can't pay even if they wanted unless they can show this is somehow in shareholders' best interest.

>public companies have obligation to maximise profits for their shareholders // They're not. Not in EU or USA at least. So, not they aren't under any obligation to be shitty to the public by diminishing tax paid in the countries they operate in. Anyone posting an attempted contradiction should cite the relevant laws making it a legal requirement for companies to maximise profits [above any [other] moral consideration…

Jello Biafra v. Dead Kennedys is an example of this. Singer lost most of his rights to his music because he didn't want to do a Levi's ad. Since he ran the label the band was on, they sued him for lost profits. He lost.

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

#325

Post by trothamel »

delecti wrote: post #236
hjanssen wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Though there is a distinction between corporate lobbying and e.g. the EFF: corporations lobby for their own interests, the EFF does it for everyone. Besides that, if company lobbying did not exist, the EFF wouldnt exist because there would be no one to work against. The EFF was specificly founded to defend the peoples interests against corporations.

You need to be more pedantic. The EFF is a 501(c)(3) organization, and that's a type of corporation. If you want to outlaw lobbying by for-profit corporations, then they'll just create subsidiary lobbying organizations. The NRA is a 501(c)(4), which is also a tax exempt non-profit designation, and realistically it serves primarily as a lobbying group for gun manufacturers.

I'd say that's selling the NRA short. I have a few friends that are NRA members, they're as focused on gun rights as the corporations are.

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

#326

Post by AlexTWithBeard »

andrewla wrote: post #280
PurpleBoxDragon wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Over a reasonable horizon, you weren't profitable. The average worker isn't allowed to do that even when they lose money in a given year. Why is it so naturally assumed to be acceptable for a business to do it? Maybe the time is to just remove the loopholes in general from both business and personal income taxes.

Business taxes and personal taxes are different. Businesses pay taxes on income, while individuals pay taxes on revenue. The differences are significant enough that any sort of parallel like this does not hold a lot of value. Yes, it might make sense to disallow this for corporations, but the justification seems reasonable -- it's not a loophole that allows corporations to take home huge amounts of money without payi…

Individuals pay taxes on income as well.

Professional expenses are usually deductible, but most of W2 people (including myself) don't have too much to deduct.

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

#327

Post by usaar333 »

arkades wrote: post #273
theartfuldodger wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Profits should follow arbitrary calendar years?

Because private citizens aren’t given the same affordances. The double standard is objectionable.

Yes they can. Carry-forward losses exist with capital gains losses as well as net operating losses from self-employment.

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

#328

Post by gojomo »

arkades wrote: post #273
theartfuldodger wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Profits should follow arbitrary calendar years?

Because private citizens aren’t given the same affordances. The double standard is objectionable.

They can't treat their living expenses exceeding income as deductions, no.

But if:

* their sole proprietorship loses money in one year, it can be carried forward to offset taxes the next year

* they have net losses in investments, those can be carried-over to offset gains in other years

* any LLCs in which they are members have allocated losses, those can be carried-over against profits in later years

These are the ways a private individual engages in economic activity that are analogous to what a C-Corp does, and for these, the standard is essentially the same.

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

#329

Post by AlexTWithBeard »

chongli wrote: post #283
PurpleBoxDragon wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Over a reasonable horizon, you weren't profitable. The average worker isn't allowed to do that even when they lose money in a given year. Why is it so naturally assumed to be acceptable for a business to do it? Maybe the time is to just remove the loopholes in general from both business and personal income taxes.

Why is it so naturally assumed to be acceptable for a business to do it? Because a business isn't a person. Taxing a business is taking real money away from payrolls, money that would get taxed again anyway once it was paid out. Corporate income tax only makes sense when you look at it as a barrier to entry for competition in the marketplace. Big companies like Netflix know how to avoid taxes. Small companies don't.…

Taxing a business is taking real money away from payrolls

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think payroll expenses are not a part of profit, so no double taxation here.

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

#330

Post by throwaway190102 »

deeviant wrote: post #292
chongli wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it so naturally assumed to be acceptable for a business to do it? Because a business isn't a person. Taxing a business is taking real money away from payrolls, money that would get taxed again anyway once it was paid out. Corporate income tax only makes sense when you look at it as a barrier to entry for competition in the marketplace. Big companies like Netflix know how to avoid taxes. Small companies don't.…

Except a large portion of revenue does not go to workers, but to shareholders, who pay far less taxes then those who strain their backs in creating said revenue.

No, The only portion of revenue that goes to shareholders would be that of profits, and Netflix doesn't pay dividends so none of that money goes to shareholders. It goes to capital re-ivestment, or the workers in the form of bonuses and the like. The sharholders in a company like netflix only make money when the companies shares become more highly valued (usually from that profit re-investment).

Also implicit in this statement I think, is the assumption that shareholders don't provide as much value to the business, or perhaps the economy writ large. Arguably the investors at least initially play a more crucial role than any employee no mater how back-breaking their work because without starting capital most businesses don't even get started in the first place. But in general all aspects of the business contribute to success, Shareholders, employees, and executive. I don't think moralizing one class over another is useful to this sort of conversation.

Post reply on HN