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

331–340 of 431 posts

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

#331

Post by bobthechef »

tails4e wrote: post #326
rapnie wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and for countries like Ireland or Netherlands it is better Don't know about Ireland, but saw a TV highlight about 2yrs ago, that analysed benefits for the country and found there hardly aren't any. For regular citizens and the economy in general, at least. That a lot of the revenues flow to those upholding this lax tax system, while the huge money streams flow through NL to end up in even more lax tax havens.

Having large multinational corporations is hugely beneficial to the Irish economy, through direct employment. Sure any company that is just a brass plaque and funneling money through Ireland is of no benefit, but most of the big ones have significant high quality high tech jobs here. Apple, Facebook, Google, Intel, you name it, they all have huge operations here.

Yes and no. Ireland may seem materially better off than they were before, but they've effectively been recolonized. Putting aside matters of tax evasion, these corporations aren't sticking to just employing labor. They're also politically influential. The rapid shift in Irish cultural norms in recent years is jaw-dropping.

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

#332

Post by slver »

rhizome wrote: post #156
paxys wrote: 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.

I've taken to calling it anti-American (or anti-whatever country in which they're minimizing their taxes). How better to tell the world that you don't care about the societies that made your success possible than to refuse to help fund them?

You write laws and tell companies to follow strictly the letter of the law or else.

And that's precisely what they do.

The problem doesn't sit at the companies.

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

#333

Post by lotsofpulp »

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…

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

That “cultural failure” is the consumers’ purchasing at the cheapest price available. How does a manufacturer compete with one that uses sweatshop labor if people choose to buy the sweatshop labor products? How does Lyft compete with Uber if Uber minimizes tax expenses and can price lower than Lyft?

Going after specific companies for legal maneuvers is a waste of time and energy. At the end of the day, the voting populace will punish whoever can be blamed for limiting their consumption, and the voting populace is to blame. Educating and convincing them to support politicians who support better laws is the only solution.

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

#334

Post by rocho »

ABCLAW wrote: post #39
staticautomatic wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This begs the question of what purpose the shell companies serve.

Shell companies are just companies without offices. You can use corporate entities to organize assets, create trusts, hold certain obligations, create joint ventures, provide equity to align interests, etc. All of these things are beneficial. If you treat this like a game and try to win it, though, the 'building block' of legal personhood can be broken. The mechanics aren't perfect. You can book profits to one entity…

So the profits would go to the offshore corporation, while the losses would go to the US one? But wouldn't the IRS grow suspicious of seeing losses every year?

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

#335

Post by dontreact »

slver wrote: post #332
rhizome wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've taken to calling it anti-American (or anti-whatever country in which they're minimizing their taxes). How better to tell the world that you don't care about the societies that made your success possible than to refuse to help fund them?

You write laws and tell companies to follow strictly the letter of the law or else. And that's precisely what they do. The problem doesn't sit at the companies.

Laws get written with a lot of help and influence from lobbyists who do sit at the companies.

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

#336

Post by burkaman »

rattray wrote: post #324
burkaman wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Becoming a CEO does not magically make your responsibility to society disappear. Shareholders are an additional thing you need to worry about, not the only thing. > stop vilifying people for making money Why? They're doing it in a vile way.

Their responsibility to "the taxpayer" is a few orders of magnitude less acute than their responsibility to the owners of the company they've been hired to manage.

I completely disagree, but I don't really know how to debate such a fundamental thing. It's such a weird philosophy to put your job over your society. I understand it's common, but it's weird. You can find a new job, but you can't find a new planet.

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

#337

Post by slver »

dontreact wrote: post #335
slver wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You write laws and tell companies to follow strictly the letter of the law or else. And that's precisely what they do. The problem doesn't sit at the companies.

Laws get written with a lot of help and influence from lobbyists who do sit at the companies.

Let's get couple of things straight:

1. Politicians are responsible for the laws.

2. Companies are responsible for following the laws.

If you have a beef with any of the above, address the right parties. How they interact and depend on each other is a fact, but also it's not relevant to the above two points. Everyone has a clear responsibility.

Furthermore the phrase "dodged taxes" means "they structured their revenue so they paid less taxes than if they would structure it otherwise". Who the hell says you gotta structure your revenue in order to MAXIMIZE your taxes?

Do you do that? If not, you also "dodge taxes" as far as the media is concerned.

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

#338

Post by trutannus »

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?

Estonia has done just this.

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

#339

Post by johntiger1 »

throwaway2037 wrote: post #252
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

99% of the top 1% are "normal workers" like me - engineers at Google - or my cousin - a radiologist - or one of my best friends - an investment banker - or lawyers, or owners of successful small businesses, etc... These "normal workers" pay a lot of that 40% of the tax bill. There aren't that many CEOs of Fortune 500 companies and board members, A+ list celebrities, and aristocrats. You're getting into the .01% - tha…

First, I assume when you write "normal workers" that you mean non-executives and non-passive income earners. (Executives can get a lot of equity or dividends that accrue taxes at lower rates; passive income earners use asset depreciation to lessen tax burden.) The top 1% in the US is ~400K USD. Real question for OP (and others): What do you think is a reasonable effective income tax rate? (Please do not confuse effec…

Interesting, I always thought Hong Kong was pretty good.

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

#340

Post by varispeed »

throwaway2037 wrote: post #252
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

99% of the top 1% are "normal workers" like me - engineers at Google - or my cousin - a radiologist - or one of my best friends - an investment banker - or lawyers, or owners of successful small businesses, etc... These "normal workers" pay a lot of that 40% of the tax bill. There aren't that many CEOs of Fortune 500 companies and board members, A+ list celebrities, and aristocrats. You're getting into the .01% - tha…

First, I assume when you write "normal workers" that you mean non-executives and non-passive income earners. (Executives can get a lot of equity or dividends that accrue taxes at lower rates; passive income earners use asset depreciation to lessen tax burden.) The top 1% in the US is ~400K USD. Real question for OP (and others): What do you think is a reasonable effective income tax rate? (Please do not confuse effec…

Hongkong is not free, so I am not sure if this is a valid comparison. People of Hong Kong do not have the same opportunities as people of the US. The problem is how much of the tax payer money is being wasted. I think the absolute maximum tax should be no more than 30% and the goal should be to reduce it to 15% by reducing waste in public sector. I currently pay over 50% and this is demotivating. I am at the point when I consider moving to another country or finding less stressing job, that pays much less. It would be a different matter if I saw that 50% actually benefits me in any way, but I feel like this money goes down the toilet each month.
Post reply on HN