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

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

businessinsider.com.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 431 posts

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

#161

Post by elliekelly »

Fern_Blossom wrote: post #143
seaourfreed wrote: post #93

Congress is corrupt (via lobbyists). Congress would make this illegal if congress men/women didn't sell out American Citizens. 88% of the cost of the US Fed gov is paid for by taxes by workers (income taxes). Less than 12% comes from all corp/business taxes combined with capital gains (taxing the rich 1%). Business shifting tax burden to workers is a massive scale problem. $3.5 Trillion = US Tax Revenues (2019) and 8…

Hot take: Stop thinking of lobbying as a corporate only tool and understand the system was devised as a way for specialized interested (technocratic) to influence congress in an efficient and informed way. The lobbyist system is open to all by purpose. The real problem: the general public doesn't actually give a shit about wiping its own ass when it comes to dealing with their own government. Whose fault is it when y…

Okay then go to K Street and hire yourself a lobbyist. Unless you know someone or have a lot of money under your control you won’t even be able to get a meeting. Your suggestion is as ridiculous as telling the average person to “just ask the Fed for money” when they can’t make rent. If you truly believe the system is equally “open to all” then you have bought the bullshit lobbyists have been selling the public hook, line, and sinker.

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

#162

Post by [deleted] »

rattray wrote: post #149
happytoexplain wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not both? Dissatisfaction drives change. Yes, companies are expected to take advantage of legal means of increasing value, but there is a spectrum of behavior between "shrewd" and "immoral" that still falls entirely within "legal", and the individual human beings in the affected society reasonably have opinions about where the line is. When the numbers are too disgusting, it's OK for people to express dissatisfac…

> Why not both? It's hard to be mad at someone once you realize you'd do the same thing if you were in their shoes. Loopholes like this should be illegal, but their existence ~obligates executives to take advantage of them (fiduciary duty). You'd just be bad at business if you didn't. As someone who wants to be good at business, I can't get mad at the players here – just the game.

[deleted]

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

#163

Post by CryptoPunk »

Really, the income tax, both corporate and personal, should be abolished. Any success towards legally minimizing income tax liability should be welcomed by any one who believes in minimizing the power of the state to violate the rights of private citizens, and favors more economic growth.

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

#164

Post by CryptoPunk »

flukus wrote: post #87
syshum wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rofl... Sorry no you are completely off base. First off I hope the only that keep you from being a thief is not that someone would defend themselves from your attempt. Personally I steal from people as much as I desire to. Which is none at all However self defense is not in viewed philosophy as a threat of violence. Violence that we are talking about here is the itiation of violence for which governments alone have t…

It's not self defense because you aren't defending yourself in this scenario, you're defending your property. It's only your property because you can defend it, but most of the time you won't have to because we all agree that you own it. The same goes for money, you're money is your property because we all agree it is, especially in the modern world where their is no physical item and inherent value. All the money yo…

>>It's only your property because you can defend it, but most of the time you won't have to because we all agree that you own it.

No, it's your property because you created it, or were willed it by someone who did. The basis of a right to property is the same basis as a right to your person: the inherently moral right for one to make exclusive use of unclaimed matter that they appropriated and reconfigured into more valuable matter.

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

#165

Post by rhizome »

thrwn_frthr_awy wrote: post #95
IdontRememberIt wrote: post #67

If IP and shell companies infuriate you. I invite you to investigate why all billionaires have foundations or its cousin structures and "give" their wealth to it... Clue: tax and inheritance (tax) avoidance. Bill, Buffett, etc. are hypocrites. But it is not new, even in the Bible they spoke about it (Matthew 6:2): "So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues…

How would someone at that level of wealth give in a more empathetic way? What should Bill and Buffett be doing instead?

Paying as much taxes as they can. And why not more? IIRC the 1040A has a field where you can give the government as much extra money as you want.

Oh but it doesn't get spent with your name associated, so that's obviously not a good option for egomaniacs.

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

#166

Post by ruined »

rattray wrote: post #149
happytoexplain wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not both? Dissatisfaction drives change. Yes, companies are expected to take advantage of legal means of increasing value, but there is a spectrum of behavior between "shrewd" and "immoral" that still falls entirely within "legal", and the individual human beings in the affected society reasonably have opinions about where the line is. When the numbers are too disgusting, it's OK for people to express dissatisfac…

> Why not both? It's hard to be mad at someone once you realize you'd do the same thing if you were in their shoes. Loopholes like this should be illegal, but their existence ~obligates executives to take advantage of them (fiduciary duty). You'd just be bad at business if you didn't. As someone who wants to be good at business, I can't get mad at the players here – just the game.

>It's hard to be mad at someone once you realize you'd do the same thing if you were in their shoes.

this is projecting.

your comment goes on a bit more like this but i'm not going to quote all of it

there has been a cultural failure of some sort that rewards people that think like this, and encourages this kind of behavior.

maybe we should expect people, especially people in positions of responsibility, to not loot our lives out from under us

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

#168

Post by tqi »

rhizome wrote: post #165
thrwn_frthr_awy wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would someone at that level of wealth give in a more empathetic way? What should Bill and Buffett be doing instead?

Paying as much taxes as they can. And why not more? IIRC the 1040A has a field where you can give the government as much extra money as you want. Oh but it doesn't get spent with your name associated, so that's obviously not a good option for egomaniacs.

$0.15 of every dollar given would also go toward defense spending, which some find objectionable...

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

#169

Post by rhizome »

BoysenberryPi wrote: post #122
IdontRememberIt wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Buffett always complains that he did not pay enough tax. He could simply wire 50% of his fortune to the IRS. His secretary had no choice. (End of sarcasm) They should donate to a foundation. They should not have link with it (direct or indirect ). Their family (direct or indirect) should not have link with it (direct or indirect ). The problem with these structures is that they allow someone to control and directly b…

Frankly if I was a billionaire and had the means to setup my own charity that I had complete visibility into so I knew exactly where every penny was spent I would do that over giving it to another foundation.

Sticking your nose in "where every penny was spent" is not great and I imagine for most people it would lead quickly to micromanagement. What do you know about charities, about running charities? Anything? Give anonymously. To people who already know what they're doing. You're a billionaire, you can afford list price for benefit events.

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

#170

Post by rattray »

ruined wrote: post #166
rattray wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why not both? It's hard to be mad at someone once you realize you'd do the same thing if you were in their shoes. Loopholes like this should be illegal, but their existence ~obligates executives to take advantage of them (fiduciary duty). You'd just be bad at business if you didn't. As someone who wants to be good at business, I can't get mad at the players here – just the game.

>It's hard to be mad at someone once you realize you'd do the same thing if you were in their shoes. this is projecting. your comment goes on a bit more like this but i'm not going to quote all of it there has been a cultural failure of some sort that rewards people that think like this, and encourages this kind of behavior. maybe we should expect people, especially people in positions of responsibility, to not loot…

I expect (well, I don't expect, but I WANT) my government to stop it from happening.

It's foolish to expect people who are in a position of responsibility _to their shareholders_ to act like they're responsible _to you_. They're not.

Close the loopholes, raise the taxes (wealth, cap gains, high-earner income, corporate, etc) and stop vilifying people for making money.

Post reply on HN