Live data from Hacker News

Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes on $6B in revenue

businessinsider.com.au

51–60 of 431 posts

Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes on $6B in revenue

#51
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>US taxes global individual income... Always wondered why US citizens do not make a bigger deal out of this. If I understand correctly, if you are a US citizen, but live somewhere else in the world, IRS still expects to be paid tax from your individual income in that foreign country (possibly in addition to the tax you pay in your country of residence) right? I assume there are minimum income thresholds but still...…

US citizens make something of a deal out of it, as you can see from expat forums every spring when tax-filing season comes. However, relatively few American citizens abroad choose to renounce their citizenship because they find it useful to retain it. The minimum income threshold to pay income taxes (otherwise you just file) is ~$100,000, so that generally means most middle-class people don’t have to pay. The real pa…

> The minimum income threshold to pay income taxes (otherwise you just file) is ~$100,000, so that generally means most middle-class people don’t have to pay.

I wanted to know this, thank you!

Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes on $6B in revenue

#52

In my opinion, this is example of poor/incomplete regulation. Using sports as an analogy, it's like if a game was designed poorly, we have the expectation that players would act in good faith to not take advantage of rules. But players have the incentive to win, not act in good faith.

I wouldn't be surprised if there other big companies doing the same. So we need to fix the regulations to close this loophole.

Loophole makes it seem like it was accidental. This happens over and over again, it's on purpose.

Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes on $6B in revenue

#53

In my opinion, this is example of poor/incomplete regulation. Using sports as an analogy, it's like if a game was designed poorly, we have the expectation that players would act in good faith to not take advantage of rules. But players have the incentive to win, not act in good faith.

I wouldn't be surprised if there other big companies doing the same. So we need to fix the regulations to close this loophole.

The regulation is likely working as intended. The bug is the disclosure here.

Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes on $6B in revenue

#54
post #34
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Individuals can't pretend to be based in Ireland to not pay US taxes. US taxes global individual income, but not global corporate profits.

>US taxes global individual income... Always wondered why US citizens do not make a bigger deal out of this. If I understand correctly, if you are a US citizen, but live somewhere else in the world, IRS still expects to be paid tax from your individual income in that foreign country (possibly in addition to the tax you pay in your country of residence) right? I assume there are minimum income thresholds but still...…

[deleted]

Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes on $6B in revenue

#55
post #34
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Individuals can't pretend to be based in Ireland to not pay US taxes. US taxes global individual income, but not global corporate profits.

>US taxes global individual income... Always wondered why US citizens do not make a bigger deal out of this. If I understand correctly, if you are a US citizen, but live somewhere else in the world, IRS still expects to be paid tax from your individual income in that foreign country (possibly in addition to the tax you pay in your country of residence) right? I assume there are minimum income thresholds but still...…

I guess people think having US citizenship is worth the price of filing extra taxes - otherwise they would renounce the citizenship.

It costs money to maintain the meaning of a citizenship. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to ask people to pay for it.

Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes on $6B in revenue

#56
post #42

The only way to stop this, is to create income (eg. 1-2%) based tax regulations instead of profit based. No way to cheat.

Some industries are very low margin while others are extremely high, I don't think this is viable without breaking a huge chunk of the economy.

Depends on how it is structured.

One way for example could be akin to a cash (and equivalents) tax on holding large amounts.

It would incentize spending the cash in r&d , acquisitions , dividends etc. Low margin companies will not be too badly affected

Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes on $6B in revenue

#57
post #19

> Uber transfered its intellectual property through a $16 billion “loan” from one of its subsidiaries in Singapore that in turn owns one of Uber’s Dutch shell companies, a manuever that grants the company a $1 billion tax break every year for the next 20 years, the researchers found. Shit like this makes my head hurt and infuriates me at the same time.

Be mad at politicians for writing tax codes that work like this rather than companies for taking advantage of them.

Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes on $6B in revenue

#58
post #56
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some industries are very low margin while others are extremely high, I don't think this is viable without breaking a huge chunk of the economy.

Depends on how it is structured. One way for example could be akin to a cash (and equivalents) tax on holding large amounts. It would incentize spending the cash in r&d , acquisitions , dividends etc. Low margin companies will not be too badly affected

That's not a revenue tax anymore.

That just forces companies to minimize their cash stockpiles through investment, inventory, dividends, etc. How does that make the tax system fairer?

Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes on $6B in revenue

#59
post #4

Individuals are subjected to "alternative minimum tax". Why not corporations?

Taxing corporations is one of those things that seems pretty obvious until you really dig into the details, at which point you end up with some uncomfortable conclusions. Thus there is this endless handwringing about corporations paying so little yet at the end of the day, the solutions (those that work) are quite unpopular.

Let's walk down this rabbit hole:

So you want to tax corporate profits. Well, trouble is, it's easy to hide profits. For example, interest payments are subtracted from profits, which allows investors to lend money to corporations as loans, and the interest is only taxed by the recipient, but if you lend money to the corporation by purchasing equity, that is taxed twice. This asymmetric tax treatment incentivizes taking on debt and thus financial fragility and short-term thinking. OK, you say, let's treat interest and dividends the same. Then you have this issue with massive executive compensation, which is untaxed as it is treated as an expense. You'd like for that to not be tax-exempt as well. Thus you decide to tax value add -- that is revenue net of your cost of goods. That way, you catch cheaters, since if corp A reports something as a cost (payment to B), then B better record it as a revenue. B can't hide. Except now comes the foreign sector. What if B is a foreign company? There's the rub. One option is to say the foreign company also has to pay you taxes based on what it sells to A. This would effectively put an end to all the shell company shenanigans. To be fair, you can give credit for income paid to other jurisdictions so you don't end up double-taxing (like we do), but that's minor. So now you are happy with your system. You survey the landscape and what have you accomplished? A sales tax! This is just a value added tax, or VAT, which is another form of sales tax. But sales tax is regressive! And very unpopular. So there is this problem where Americans don't want a national sales tax of, say 20%, but they do want a corporate profit tax of, say 40%. And they are really angry when they see the effective corporate tax being so low, say 5%.

This reveals a cold truth, which is that corporations are effectively pass through entities for the human owners of the corporations. So why tax them twice? Well, because we have so many tax loopholes and such large trade deficits that 40% of our corporations are owned by foreigners that don't pay US taxes and 40% are owned by pension funds and tax-advantaged retirement accounts so that only 20% of US equities are subject to any tax at all. So this thrashing around about corporations reveals yet another uncomfortable truth, which is that our massive outsourcing has resulted in an erosion of the tax base just as much as it has destroyed middle class jobs.

This brings us back to a new variant of the old trilema, which is that you can't have free flow of capital (or equivalently, trade) across borders, a floating currency, and your own interest rate policy.

You can only have two of these. Except the tax version of this is that you can't have free flow of capital (that is trade), a floating currency, and your own corporate tax policy. The best you can do is a national sales tax for goods sold to your own citizens. If you try to tax corporations, you will run into the two-headed hydra that your corporations are owned by overseas investors and that your corporations have set up overseas businesses that sell them valuable inputs, so valuable that all the value is routed overseas.

So what happens is people create a tax policy that tries to also avoid tariffs on trade and foreign capital flows, and then they are shocked when corporations arbitrage that away.

Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes on $6B in revenue

#60
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the difference? Legality? If so, I'm not sure anybody really cares about whether it's legal (in an intellectual sense). People are much more interested in morality and whether a system is working well for society.

Do people really want to have a debate on the ethics and morality of forcibly taking property, income, and labor from people or businesses under the threat of violence? Aka taxation?

Property ownership doesn't exist without threat of violence. What's to stop me taking the phone you're holding? It's the threat of violence from you or society in general.

Money and taxes are just abstractions on top of the property ownership one, if you want to get rid of taxes you'll need to get rid of property ownership. Many cultures were this way.

Post reply on HN