Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes
91–100 of 163 posts
Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes
#92Earlier 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.
The Dutch government has, for a long time, actively presented itself (euphemistically) as a great place for foreign business. They of course would not openly advertise that as a tax avoidance opportunity, but you do the match.
While I'm not sure if this still happens today, the Dutch IRS used to have "special arrangements" with many big companies, for which the details were notoriously never made public. I believe this mostly applied to companies with a physical presence within the country (therefore also impacting the local society and economy and used as rhetorical justification for these deals). Still, since these deals where made behind closed doors, who knows what they may have arranged with foreign multinationals.
The problem with having any confidential deals, is that it becomes impossible to know what goes on as a whole (until a whistle-blower may steps forward). It doesn't mean there is any conspiracy going on, just that it becomes impossible (or at least really hard) to rule it out. History does have something to teach about what usually happens when opportunities for abuse are readily available, without much public scrutiny.
To drive this point a little further: Dutch citizens were relatively recently confronted with how their IRS turned out to not be quite the impeccable (or even legally operating) agency it is supposed to be. With that in mind, only God (and the IRS itself) knows what the agency exactly does with multinational corporation. I'd say they certainly lost the benefit of a doubt by now.
Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes
#93I'm getting more and more frustrated by my own country's willingness to facilitate this. It just doesn't make any sense. From what I can tell it's all based on old-fashioned debunked economic theories in the same vain as "trickle-down-economy". There's a growing resistance to the Netherlands as a "Doorsluisland", and our current administration's political turmoil will hopefully provide the momentum for actual change…
We claim to want our systems to operate like chess, but they tend toward poker.
The global tendency toward populism is at least partially driven by the gut feeling that there are two systems: chess for thee, and poker for me.
Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which movie was that when someone wanted to arrest a guy in Curaçao and the local police was like: "No no! Can't do it front of the bank! It will scare off other clients"?
I don't think it was a movie, but Narcos the series.
Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes
#95Why can't just every company do this & make such hacks obsolete?
Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes
#96I'm getting more and more frustrated by my own country's willingness to facilitate this. It just doesn't make any sense. From what I can tell it's all based on old-fashioned debunked economic theories in the same vain as "trickle-down-economy". There's a growing resistance to the Netherlands as a "Doorsluisland", and our current administration's political turmoil will hopefully provide the momentum for actual change…
Uber has its corporate head quarters for the EU in Amsterdam. For a company the size of Uber to have 50 different entities is not particularly special, you will find several other multinationals there with the same number. It makes sense to have one for each jurisdiction they operate in, for example. The term "shell companies" seems to imply something nefarious, and that may very well be the case, but in itself having 50 entities in The Netherlands is not really a sign of that.
It's also important to point out that they do not choose The Netherlands for low corporate tax rates, they are not the lowest in the EU by far, but because of "tax rulings". Those are agreements they can make with the tax authorities that ascertain them how much tax they will pay this year as long as revenue, costs, etc, stay within a certain bandwidth. In the US it can take over a year for them to get any certainty on what their tax bill would be for the previous year, and shareholders hate that uncertainty.
No one thinks it's a good idea to compete in a "race to the bottom" of attractive tax laws, but as far as I'm concerned competing on better service is fair game. Many politicians screaming at The Netherlands tend to conveniently forget the part where their own country just delivers very poor service tax-wise.
Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes
#97As 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…
Uber, like all massive companies, are always doing dodgy tax avoidance things. But, even if they're doing tax avoidance, it's still legal as long as it's not blatant fraud.
Like all media companies, Business Insider has manipulated the content to cause outrage with their target markets for readers.
Though, on the topic of wording data, it's always interesting to see how media organizations & companies as a whole swing things, for example:
"Uber claimed $4.5 billion in global operating losses ... in reality, it brought in $5.8 billion in operating revenue" could've been written as:
"Uber brought in $5.8 billion in operating revenue, however, declared a loss of $4.5 billion"
or
"In a 2019 filing, Uber declared a $4.5 billion loss, despite earning $5.8 billion in operating revenue."
Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes
#98As 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…
Not that I disapprove of that, I just wish I could pull the same trick with HMRC - I'm just not rich enough or in friendly terms with governments overseas to do that.
Is this equality?
Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes
#99The double-dutch isn’t cool. You know what’s cool? The 500,000-dutch with 50 layers of Irish and a few Caymens on top.
Re: Uber used 50 Dutch shell companies to dodge taxes
#100Any details on why 50 instead of 1? Even if it was to segregate liability for individual pieces of IP, it still seems excessive Many jurisdictions offer a single entity with segregated limited liability. Specifically “Segregated Portfolio Companies” or Series LLCs offering the same concept in other jurisdictions. Would seem out of character for the Netherlands not to have this in their catalogue of entities, since th…
Some tax havens banned IP holding companies. Why is this not written in international law and closed once and for all?
The main reason for that is because there is no One World Government yet, and no such thing as international law.