Live data from Hacker News

G7: Rich nations back deal to tax multinationals

bbc.co.uk

391–400 of 931 posts

Re: G7: Rich nations back deal to tax multinationals

#391
post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re ignoring that the companies can just keep lots of cash without distributing it to individuals in order to avoid taxation under your system. So for example the company can rent houses, cars, and airplanes for every employee to ensure there is not much money left to be taxed as income. On paper they look like corporate expenses but it’s really just a way to distribute money without it being taxable.

> You’re ignoring that the companies can just keep lots of cash without distributing it to individuals Nobody benefits from a company growing indefinite wealth without distributing it to actual people. > So for example the company can rent houses, cars, and airplanes for every employee If they could do this, all companies would do this already to avoid taxes. In reality, this is dealt with by (in the UK) considering…

> Nobody benefits from a company growing indefinite wealth without distributing it to actual people.

Shareholders do. And shareholders own the company.

Re: G7: Rich nations back deal to tax multinationals

#392
This reminds me of Ken MacLeod's Descent [0]. It's a great hard SF book, mainly about UFOs, governments and conspiracies, but in a typical MacLeod style it covers plenty more subjects. I can't recommend it enough, and I definitely can't do it justice in a HN comment.

Anyway... there's a sub-thread in the book about how things got really bad economically for the population, about a brewing revolution, and how governments around the world have struck a deal to 'defuse a hidden time-bomb under the world economy'. This was known as the Big Deal. It was tried many times before, but failed. So no one took it very seriously this last time. Except, this time there was a military crackdown on tax havens (except Switzerland): France took over Monaco, Belgia over Luxembourg, US over Panama, Russia over Dubai etc.

This time, it did work. There's a funny and sad moment when a student receives a letter from the 'student loan company', informing her that her loan was suspended, but she should apply for a grant, instead. And it took her a moment to remember what a grant even is.

[0]: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/20618981-descent

Re: G7: Rich nations back deal to tax multinationals

#393

I do wonder if we wouldn't be better off eliminating corporation tax entirely. The revenue of a corporation can, roughly, be: 1. Spent on goods or services from another company (including freelancers, contractors, etc.) 2. Spent on rent 3. Spent on capital purchases 4. Spent on wages 5. Spent on debt repayment or other forms of financing 6. Paid out in dividends 7. Spent on share buybacks 8. Invested in something els…

I agree about the "corporate tax creates work in tax avoidance", but if corporate taxes are abolished, wouldn't it drive more individuals to incorporate their own businesses? The tax avoidance industry now shifts to servicing individuals, and again we find ourselves with inequality between individuals who can afford those services and those who cannot. An alternative way to tax would be to simply raise interest rates…

Incorporation and maintaining related documentation is a tough job.

I guess one solution could be to classify various types of corporations and tier them. And then tax rules change accordingly.

Similar to how tax breaks are given to startups.

Re: G7: Rich nations back deal to tax multinationals

#394

I do wonder if we wouldn't be better off eliminating corporation tax entirely. The revenue of a corporation can, roughly, be: 1. Spent on goods or services from another company (including freelancers, contractors, etc.) 2. Spent on rent 3. Spent on capital purchases 4. Spent on wages 5. Spent on debt repayment or other forms of financing 6. Paid out in dividends 7. Spent on share buybacks 8. Invested in something els…

This a typical economist analysis, and I think it's mostly right. But I don't think those making these decisions think in such terms at all. People love to tax companies, because they think it's "someone else" paying those taxes. Maybe there is also some anthropomorphising going on where you think of the company as another person who is much wealthier than you.

> People love to tax companies, because they think it's "someone else" paying those taxes.

I think you can very safely generalize this to "people are always in favor of more benefits for themselves that they don't have to pay for".

Re: G7: Rich nations back deal to tax multinationals

#395

I do wonder if we wouldn't be better off eliminating corporation tax entirely. The revenue of a corporation can, roughly, be: 1. Spent on goods or services from another company (including freelancers, contractors, etc.) 2. Spent on rent 3. Spent on capital purchases 4. Spent on wages 5. Spent on debt repayment or other forms of financing 6. Paid out in dividends 7. Spent on share buybacks 8. Invested in something els…

I agree about the "corporate tax creates work in tax avoidance", but if corporate taxes are abolished, wouldn't it drive more individuals to incorporate their own businesses? The tax avoidance industry now shifts to servicing individuals, and again we find ourselves with inequality between individuals who can afford those services and those who cannot. An alternative way to tax would be to simply raise interest rates…

If they want to use their money then they have to pay dividends or wage.

Re: G7: Rich nations back deal to tax multinationals

#397

This feels like US wants to keep competition out from creating big companies. Very similar to feeling to how wealthy wants higher income taxes (not wealth taxes) when they have all the money the need. To maintain status quo. Seems like US enjoyed with this arrangement by creating very large companies (monopolies) worldwide, now they want to keep US world order intact. Good for world, China wouldn't play balls with th…

pretty sure google and facebook would be just as big even if they didn’t dodge taxes. especially as they were already sizable before they started doing it.

it’s mostly to disincentivize all this creative accounting

Re: G7: Rich nations back deal to tax multinationals

#398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the UK if you're in full time employment and only have one job, then there's literally nothing to do. Not even clicking somewhere to approve your tax return - your employer does it all for you. I know people who are literally unaware when the tax year ends because they never in their entire adult lives had to do anything with the tax return - it's just completely irrelevant to a normal working person. And on the o…

It's even better - they work out if you paid too much automaticallly and send you a check in the mail. Had 3 checks over the past decade or so from having time off between jobs but paying full rate for the remaining time. Nothing quite so satisfying as a £1000 check from HM Revenue and Customs!

Finland has next step. They have my account number in records so every year they move what they owe me automatically to my account.

Re: G7: Rich nations back deal to tax multinationals

#399

I do wonder if we wouldn't be better off eliminating corporation tax entirely. The revenue of a corporation can, roughly, be: 1. Spent on goods or services from another company (including freelancers, contractors, etc.) 2. Spent on rent 3. Spent on capital purchases 4. Spent on wages 5. Spent on debt repayment or other forms of financing 6. Paid out in dividends 7. Spent on share buybacks 8. Invested in something els…

If you’re going down this route, many will argue that all forms of income tax are equally “wrong”. Henry George - a 19th century political economist - proposed exactly this, and suggested the only thing that should be taxed should be land: impossible to hide from a tax inspector, potentially a waste to the public commons if useful land that could be exploited isn’t and you can even protect land you wish to keep prist…

[deleted]

Re: G7: Rich nations back deal to tax multinationals

#400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you’re going down this route, many will argue that all forms of income tax are equally “wrong”. Henry George - a 19th century political economist - proposed exactly this, and suggested the only thing that should be taxed should be land: impossible to hide from a tax inspector, potentially a waste to the public commons if useful land that could be exploited isn’t and you can even protect land you wish to keep prist…

George’s ideas are interesting to ponder now and then. I’d definitely want to be a billionaire in that system, though, you’d pay pennies on your penthouses split with everyone living below you. If only taxes were that easy to figure out.

Well, the hope would be that you would have never become a billionaire in the first place because somewhere along the line that wealth was predicated on holding cheap real estate and collecting rents.

Now, that argument doesn't help with switching too an LVT, but there are other reasons to be optimistic. Taxing Jeff Bezos at any level is worthless in comparison to a) Paying enough UBI that the warehouses would unionize, b) directly expropriating the warehouses into the postal system. (post : IP :: warehouse sku system : content-address based networking).

Basically, trying to account for the power of billionaries and mega corps in monetary terms is a dangerous exercise where they can probably out-loophole you.

Post reply on HN