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

Post by [deleted] » Thu, May 13, 2021, 5:04 AM UTC

lifeformed wrote: post #115

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…

You could reframe it as: The tax benefits are there to incentivize philanthropic giving. Society benefits from their giving and they receive a tax benefit and PR boost in return. It's not like they're saving more money total by giving it away. And sure, it'd be nice if philanthropists were super humble and anonymous, but the money helps either way, and I don't think those who are helped by the giving care if the give…

Post by jb775 » Thu, May 13, 2021, 5:31 AM UTC

colechristensen wrote: post #175

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…

One: this seems to be about uber activities outside the US Two: the US is actively working on what it is calling a global minimum corporate tax Three: anonymous shell companies were made illegal in the US in January It seems your comment is rather uninformed. There is of course much to do but it is hard to look at what is happening and come to the conclusion that it is all nothing

Post by markvdb » Thu, May 13, 2021, 5:39 AM UTC

perryizgr8 wrote: post #100

fighterpilot wrote: post #78

I've heard this suggested before: abolish all corporate tax and increase capital gains tax to equal income tax. This will level the playing field between large and small businesses, since the former has the means to dodge byzantine corporate tax laws. It will also give an incentive for companies to stay onshore. Any downsides?

Corporate tax does not make sense because "income" and "profit" for a company are very loosely defined. Instead, a simple GST on products and services should be enough. Unambiguous and easy to reason about, with very less maneuverability to avoid. In fact, I would rather income tax for individuals also be done away with. Just tax every transaction in the market. That is much fairer and presents less avenues to avoid…

Post by rcpt » Thu, May 13, 2021, 5:45 AM UTC

0xy wrote: post #147

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…

It's really hard to evade personal income tax, so why shouldn't the government just give up and tax corporations at 0%, while having high progressive personal income taxes? Or, better yet, proper sliding consumption taxes. If you want a yacht or private jet, pay 150% in taxes. Norway already taxes luxury cars at over 100% of their value.

Post by EvilEy3 » Thu, May 13, 2021, 5:52 AM UTC

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.