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

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 163 posts

Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes

#61

Post by dtech »

throwawayzRUU6f wrote: post #41
technicolorwhat wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Im dutch too and im super frustrated about this. I don't care about paying taxes (I've done so for the last 20+ years) even if they go as high as 52%. But it really irritates me that: - other companies with this tax deals pay almost nothing - its unfair and destroys local competition i.e a Starbucks vs mom's coffee bar.

Is the Netherlands in any way culpable in this - do they go the extra mile to help facilitate the evasion? My layman understanding of the tax evasion schemes is that there's nothing special about Ireland or the Netherlands. They're chosen due to other factors, like English proficiency, stable and well known legal framework - but the essence of the schemes could be done in nearly any western country.

What you're saying is not entirely false, but it is naive at best.

Ireland, the Netherlands & co are fully aware of these tax loopholes, even if we give them the benefit of the doubt that they were not originally intentional. They like the arrangement because it gives them a tiny - compared tot he dodged taxes - tax benefit for basically free.

Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes

#62

Post by candiodari »

FriedrichN wrote: post #48
Cthulhu_ wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the Fear is that if the loophole is closed, the businesses will move elsewhere, taking an X amount of jobs with them - from which the government earns some income taxes. They take the crumbs instead of nothing, because there's no chance they get the cake. It may take EU wide legislation to fix, but even that is no guarantee because companies may just opt to not operate in the EU.

> taking an X amount of jobs with them All three? These shell companies are often just a post address, sometimes an empty office with a plant (and someone to water the plant every week). The excuse is always that if we won't do it, someone else will and that we need international legislation. While that is true, someone needs to kick it off. And I don't want the crumbs, they can stick those crumbs where the sun don't…

Actually Ireland demands that some percentage of workforce plus some percentage of revenue is in Ireland.

So no these are sometimes very large offices, and a bunch of actual business is also routed through these offices.

Unless you mean in the Netherlands, yes, there you can have a post office/lawyer office, something along those lines.

Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes

#63

Post by burntoutfire »

jiriknesl wrote: post #30
madsbuch wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The death of morale... It's OK to commit fraud, kill, and rape as long as you can do it within a loophole in the law. Of cause it is a societal destructive way to see the world as a game.

Paying lower taxes is nothing like kill or rape. There are lots of internet-only companies for which the government did absolutely nothing.

Lol. The government provides stable society which allows for any company to function. Without government, Musks and Jobs of the world wouldn't even get to their first million, as they'd just be robbed and killed on their way there.

Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes

#64

Post by sschueller »

Acinyx wrote: post #55
sschueller wrote: post #37

I don't understand why the US just doesn't make these companies pay the tax instead of trying to get some global minimum tax agreement. If Uber wants to operate in the US. Force them to pay otherwise ban them from operating in the US. Done.

What exactly should they pay tax on? AFAIK, most countries like the US go for a tax on profits, but profits of a multinational country are extremely hard to "locate", as in: in which country was the profit made? Some obvious examples are IKEA stores licensing the rights to the IKEA brand from some company in the Netherlands, which means most stores in the US almost have no profits. Or starbucks USA buying extremely e…

Some rate dependent number of customers and employees in the that country. Also assets held in that country and capital gains made in that country.

Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes

#65

Post by zmix »

Basing a business on the availability of roads and traffics regulation (lights, etc.), payed by the public and not paying money for it shows us lots of the psychology of the decision makers: "We are not the stupid, tax paying public, we are something better."

Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes

#66

Post by poooogles »

bko wrote: post #58
technicolorwhat wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Im dutch too and im super frustrated about this. I don't care about paying taxes (I've done so for the last 20+ years) even if they go as high as 52%. But it really irritates me that: - other companies with this tax deals pay almost nothing - its unfair and destroys local competition i.e a Starbucks vs mom's coffee bar.

> its unfair and destroys local competition i.e a Starbucks vs mom's coffee bar. Do you think tax compliance is higher in small local businesses than large mega corps? Based on my experience in the US, tax fraud is much easier and more common with small businesses. Think about how many small shops don't even have a proper point of sales system, encourage cash, and hire under the table. Stackbucks would not be able to…

>Do you think tax compliance is higher in small local businesses than large mega corps?

I can't speak for anywhere but the UK, but yes 100%. Small businesses overall tax burden is much higher than large multinationals.

Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes

#67

Post by pwagland »

bko wrote: post #58
technicolorwhat wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Im dutch too and im super frustrated about this. I don't care about paying taxes (I've done so for the last 20+ years) even if they go as high as 52%. But it really irritates me that: - other companies with this tax deals pay almost nothing - its unfair and destroys local competition i.e a Starbucks vs mom's coffee bar.

> its unfair and destroys local competition i.e a Starbucks vs mom's coffee bar. Do you think tax compliance is higher in small local businesses than large mega corps? Based on my experience in the US, tax fraud is much easier and more common with small businesses. Think about how many small shops don't even have a proper point of sales system, encourage cash, and hire under the table. Stackbucks would not be able to…

To some extent this is true. It is easier to slide cash under the table to the owner, that said, most cafes where I live are not "mom and pop only" shops. They have employees, even if only a few, and thus tend to have POS etc. It is _very_ uncommon in The Netherlands to not have a POS in except in some market stalls. Almost everyone accepts PIN, and increasingly few people carry cash at all.

The main point is that even if you are only paying (eg 35%) tax on ~70% of your income, you are still paying more than some of these multi-nationals that are paying 0% on 100% of the income.

UK story, but similar concept applies in The Netherlands: https://www.channel4.com/news/starbucks-coffee-income-tax-uk

Specifically: > Its nearest UK rival, Costa, recorded £377m sales last year, compared to Starbucks’s £398m in 2011, and its tax bill came to £15m, or 31 per cent of profits.

Costa is 100% not a mom and pop shop, they are a massive chain, like Starbucks.

Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes

#68

Post by eptcyka »

bko wrote: post #58
technicolorwhat wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Im dutch too and im super frustrated about this. I don't care about paying taxes (I've done so for the last 20+ years) even if they go as high as 52%. But it really irritates me that: - other companies with this tax deals pay almost nothing - its unfair and destroys local competition i.e a Starbucks vs mom's coffee bar.

> its unfair and destroys local competition i.e a Starbucks vs mom's coffee bar. Do you think tax compliance is higher in small local businesses than large mega corps? Based on my experience in the US, tax fraud is much easier and more common with small businesses. Think about how many small shops don't even have a proper point of sales system, encourage cash, and hire under the table. Stackbucks would not be able to…

Starbucks doesn't need to resort to fraud to effectively pay 0% tax.

Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes

#69

Post by rjmunro »

As soon as I read "In 2019, Uber claimed $4.5 billion in global operating losses ... in reality, it brought in $5.8 billion in operating revenue." I think either whoever wrote this has no idea what they are talking about, or they are trying to trick readers.

"in reality" implies there is a contradiction or fraud, when it's totally possible to have $5.8 billion in operating revenue and still make a $4.5 loss. All this actually says is that Uber spent $10.3 billion in costs (or thereabouts, depending on how they account for other things).

Don't get me wrong. Uber probably are doing something dodgy, with all these shell companies, but this opening remark just shouts "Don't trust this source - they don't know what they are talking about".

Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes

#70

Post by DyslexicAtheist »

blue1 wrote: post #13

Shell (the oil company) is actually named Royal Dutch Shell. For a moment I was confused by the title. According to wikipedia it is really named after sea shells.

see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_corporation - not to be confused with "shelf companies" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shelf_corporation) which are structures that have been artificially aged to avoid risk assessments based on how old the company is.
Post reply on HN