121–130 of 467 posts
Meanwhile my (single-person) company is paying around 20% corporation tax, and then I'm getting taxed a further 20-40% on top of that when I pay myself.
edit: ah, it looks like you are paying yourself via dividends.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no tax free allowance in NL? Do you pay extra for healthcare or is it paid for out of that amount?
Healthcare is paid from post-tax income. As a single person, I pay approx. €150 monthly. There is also a deductible of €385-885, and choosing a lower amount means you pay more per month too. There is no tax free allowance. There is general/labor tax credit, but it’s incredibly minimal and reduces with income: * €2.837 for those with a taxable income under €21.043 * €2.837 - 5,977% x (taxable income - €21.043) for peo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Individuals shouldn't see tax. That way the voters don't complain when you need to put it up. If taxation is such an inherent good then why does it need to be hidden from people? If the rate is justifiable the government shouldn't need to hide it. When you consider a democratic society where the government at least indirectly serves the will of the people the idea of the government needing to pull a fast one on the…
> If taxation is such an inherent good then why does it need to be hidden from people? Because the externalities are not always visible, and people do not have enough free bandwidth to spend the time understanding them.
Microsoft's Irish subsidiary paid zero tax because it owed zero tax—and there's no reason it should have paid, or that this should change in future, apart from the greed and envy of others who want to take money from others to which they are not entitled. Those who are unhappy at the taxes they are paying should perhaps take it up with the tax attorneys and/or legislators who have failed them.
The Big tech firms benefit from all of the above, but are not contributing anything back. The system is broken and needs to be fixed, so let's not pretend there is no problem.
Isn't the US levying corporate tax on worlwide income anyway (since the last tax reform). So it's "only" a matter of deciding whether those taxes should be paid in US vs. other countries (and if the intellectual property was developped mostly in the US, it seems fair for the US to get most of it).
That isn't fair at all. If you're opening a location in another country, and that location takes X in revenue, the tax should be paid in that country. Why on earth do you think its fair for US based organizations to spread across the globe, reap the huge profits from that but funnel all the cash back into the US?
It all hinges on how "location takes x in revenue" is defined.
The simplified version of how all these transfer pricing tax avoidance schemes work is this: The good is produced in Country X (e.g., US) then sold to a subsidiary in the tax haven Country Y (e.g., Ireland or some Caribbean Island) for just a tiny amount of profit over cost, and so they owe taxes to Country X on that de minimis profit. The subsidiary in Country Y then sells the good to Country Z (e.g., the rest of the world) for the retail price, and so they earn almost all their profit in Country Y and so pay taxes there, but it's a tax haven so the actual tax rate is minimal. Logic would dictate that the profit should be recognized in the jurisdiction where the good was produced or the one where it was sold to the end customer or some combination of both, but logic does not prevail when it comes to tax law.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There you pay 40-50% incometax first
No one pays that much in a progressive tax system. Every time this discussion comes up people spout off these numbers but if you calculate out how much you actually pay it's probably in the 20-30% of total salary range. That's still high but it's just dishonest and makes people look like idiots when they throw around 40% etc. If you are truly paying 40% of your income in tax you are earning millions and are benefitin…
And when I buy stuff I then have to pay 25% VAT (12% on groceries). So the effective tax is 59% except for groceries.
[1]: https://www.skatteetaten.no/en/rates/employers-national-insu...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> taxing corporations is pointless the argument for taxing profits: - incentivise investments - companies are less likely to hide expenses like salaries - It's more fair for high cost business (car company vs google) Personally, I'd tax all corporation 3% of their revenue. You could lover it by to 2% by what is your operating profit ratio to revenue. You can lower it to 1% by a list of 20-30 deductibles e.g. you inst…
FYI, this setup would be extremely beneficial to gigantic companies and likely would lead to immense consolidation, since effectively you would tax 1% on every supplier transaction down the chain, whereas the vertically integrated gigacompany would only pay 1% once.
e.g.
Revenue 0-20mln EUR, you keep the existing tax scheme
Revenue 20-100mln - you can choose the tax scheme
Revenue 100mln+ - you have to tax revenue
Thresholds are up for debate.
Also, companies already pay around 0-5% of their revenue in income tax. Gigantic companies pay close to 0.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No one pays that much in a progressive tax system. Every time this discussion comes up people spout off these numbers but if you calculate out how much you actually pay it's probably in the 20-30% of total salary range. That's still high but it's just dishonest and makes people look like idiots when they throw around 40% etc. If you are truly paying 40% of your income in tax you are earning millions and are benefitin…
Here in France, as a contractor, if I bill a client 100 000€ annually and decide to get as much as possible in personal income, 30 000€ will go as social taxes (health, retirement ...) and for the remaining 70 000€ you will have to pay around 25% as income tax (if you don't have any children). You will have an income of ~52 000€ for 100 000€ billed during the year. You're not earning millions and yet around 50% of re…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Healthcare is paid from post-tax income. As a single person, I pay approx. €150 monthly. There is also a deductible of €385-885, and choosing a lower amount means you pay more per month too. There is no tax free allowance. There is general/labor tax credit, but it’s incredibly minimal and reduces with income: * €2.837 for those with a taxable income under €21.043 * €2.837 - 5,977% x (taxable income - €21.043) for peo…
TIL. I thought absurdly high tax rates were a nordic specialty. NL seems very wealthy whenever I visit. Are median incomes substantially higher than surrounding countries?
The only kind of income you can avoid taxes on is capital gains - i.e. investing in stocks or real estate. Obviously this is not feasible for the general population, and as such, most people spend their entire monthly income on rent/mortgage, kids, and living expenses. There is no concept of saving, because the assumption is that you can accumulate enough pension to live off of.
1. It's infeasible that Microsoft had profits of 200 billion euros. 2. A comment on the Guardian's journalists' potential financial conflicts of interest: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27352245
Saying someone has a conflict of interest reporting on financial matters because they are unionized? So by your argument, we definitely can not trust nearly any other news organisation, because they have shareholders and are operating for profit? How about your conflict of interest? Do you own stock? If yes, by your own argument you have a financial conflict of interest and can't be trusted.
Being in a union, and your employer not being able to replace you with people outside of the union as a result of left-wing laws that are predicated on an extremely left-wing ideological conception of the world, creates a far more extreme conflict of interest in my opinion.
We don't need to take a centrist position between shareholders operating in a free market to earn a profit, by providing consumers with goods/services they want at competitive prices, and unions extracting economic rent through restrictive anti-free market laws that limit other people's right to free association. One position is inherently fairer and less likely to lead to corrupting conflicting interests.