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

YouTube tells foreign creators they will soon be charged American tax

rt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 223 posts

Re: YouTube tells foreign creators they will soon be charged American tax

#211

Post by jerry1979 »

gruez wrote: post #188
jerry1979 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We should not expect people to devote lots of energy towards frivolous bureaucratic errands. If everyone who collected unemployment correctly identified the tax implications and budgeted appropriately then we would have a very screwed up problem on our hands: a drone-like population of box-checkers who shockingly ignore more important aspects of life.

>If everyone who collected unemployment correctly identified the tax implications and budgeted appropriately then we would have a very screwed up problem on our hands: a drone-like population of box-checkers who shockingly ignore more important aspects of life. I think you're being hyperbolic here. If you knew about this it takes less than 5 minutes for you to get out a calculator and figure out how much you need to…

Yup, I intentionally made my comment a little hyperbolic, but I really want to drive attention to the "everyone" portion of my comment. The errand everyone must correctly perform punishes the most at-risk for failure. If everyone complied perfectly, then the IRS would not ding anyone, but also the population would likely resemble a sad army of soulless drones.

Instead thousands upon thousands of bureaucratic errands end up stacked on sticky kitchen tables next to crying children and loud-talking relatives. Life has way more to offer than pithy remarks from suits about box checking especially when the penalties the suits hand out deal such crushing blows to the people at the kitchen table.

Re: YouTube tells foreign creators they will soon be charged American tax

#212

Post by sudosysgen »

gruez wrote: post #185
donmcronald wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the case of canada (and other countries with a tax treaty with the US), this is a non-issue because you either pay 0% withholding or can deduct the tax from your country's tax return (presumably the tax treaty also contains provisions for your country to net out the difference with the US). This is what Intuit says for that type of income: > If taxes were deducted from your income, you can claim those taxes as i…

>The HUGE issue with that is that my country (Canada) only gets $10 for things like healthcare and social programs while the US gets $15 for doing exactly nothing. So it might not make a difference in terms of the money in my bank account, but it's detrimental to me in terms of a lack of funding for government services. From my previous comment: >(presumably the tax treaty also contains provisions for your country to…

That presumably is doing a huge amount of work.

Re: YouTube tells foreign creators they will soon be charged American tax

#213

Post by michaelcampbell »

eloff wrote: post #71
michaelcampbell wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nothing like getting a stimulus check and then giving it all to the IRS plus some. In what situation is the income tax over 100%

The taxes on unemployment income can easily exceed the stimulus amount, because they're two different things. I don't think the stimulus checks themselves are taxed, but I'm not an American and I don't know for sure.

That's moving the goalposts. The OP makes it sound like given an income "X", adding the stimulus to that will cause the IRS to not only take all the stimulus, but also some of X.

My question is, under what circumstance would getting a gov't stimulus payment actually net you less money than not, all else being equal.

Re: YouTube tells foreign creators they will soon be charged American tax

#214

Post by ricardobeat »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #136
ricardobeat wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

YouTube is operated by Google Ireland Limited, which is not in the US, so your base argument is flawed...

I don't know which Alphabet subsidiary the payments to creators actually come from, but YouTube itself is headquartered in San Bruno, California; not Ireland.

I believe the HQ location has no bearing on the entity you're doing business with. The one in the YT terms & conditions as of now is Google Ireland.

Re: YouTube tells foreign creators they will soon be charged American tax

#215

Post by graeme »

graeme wrote: post #199
gruez wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But their support article[1] says that if you submit your "tax info" (presumably w-8ben?), they'll adjust the withholding rate accordingly. [1] https://support.google.com/youtube/thread/101463270?hl=en

Yeah more than likely Youtube just had poor comma. Amazon had an extremely seamless tax interview that guided you through the needed forms. They even had a prefilled W 8BEN, and I think they pointed to the relevant parts of the tax treaty for me. Believe they scaled this back as non publishers were abusing it to get ITINs in order to get US credit cards. Too seamless if anything.

*poor comms

Re: YouTube tells foreign creators they will soon be charged American tax

#216

Post by eloff »

michaelcampbell wrote: post #213
eloff wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The taxes on unemployment income can easily exceed the stimulus amount, because they're two different things. I don't think the stimulus checks themselves are taxed, but I'm not an American and I don't know for sure.

That's moving the goalposts. The OP makes it sound like given an income "X", adding the stimulus to that will cause the IRS to not only take all the stimulus, but also some of X. My question is, under what circumstance would getting a gov't stimulus payment actually net you less money than not, all else being equal.

That's not how I read it.

Re: YouTube tells foreign creators they will soon be charged American tax

#217

Post by melomal »

Aerroon wrote: post #192
melomal wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do know that they are incorporated in Dublin too, right alongside all the tech companies - because it's a tax haven. https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/explainer-google...

Why does this matter? They can be incorporated in Dublin, but the new rules still apply to a Polish youtuber.

Because of the original argument being that it's a US incorporated company when in fact it's an EU incorporated too therefore why would a EU based creator pay US based taxes when clearly Google is functioning and registered in the EU?

Re: YouTube tells foreign creators they will soon be charged American tax

#218

Post by izacus »

fsflover wrote: post #184
izacus wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And how much did the owner of the video earn from that link? YouTube is not popular because it's easy for YOU, it's popular because the creator can get money for a video with a few clicks while Google manages ad contracts, bidding and infrastructure to make the money making happen. PeerTube doesn't give you that.

Many youtubers simply incorporate an advertisement in their video in agreement with some company. Has been working for many years already.

There's a huge jumpgap between "click there to monetize video" and finding + negotiating a sponsorship contract with a partner.

You hid giant amount of work behind that "simply".

Re: YouTube tells foreign creators they will soon be charged American tax

#219

Post by mavhc »

bitcharmer wrote: post #100
mavhc wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, they are hosting and streaming and re-encoding them for free

You really think they do this for altruistic reasons?

No, but it's weird when people get annoyed that Google are putting ads next to the videos

Re: YouTube tells foreign creators they will soon be charged American tax

#220

Post by AlwaysRock »

gruez wrote: post #139
westpfelia wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think people think its messed up because most people are using the very little money they are given just to not be evicted or buy food. No one is saving it. So the idea that people will be able to cover it in taxes is... well honestly laughable.

Well I guess the alternative would be to withhold part of the stimulus/unemployment checks. That would result in less surprises come tax time, but it also means less money paid out (the amount withheld is basically a interest-free loan from the government).

Or just not tax unemployment...
Post reply on HN