Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tim Sweeney: Tax bill would likely end founder control of independent companies

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 498 posts

Re: Tim Sweeney: Tax bill would likely end founder control of independent companies

#121

Post by herval »

UncleOxidant wrote: post #116
herval wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brazil had such a tax for a long time. It was sub-1%, and was largely agreed as a bad model, since it led to lower liquidity, drying of credit markets, lower consumption, cash hoarding, etc. So not necessarily a great idea. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/249882612_The_Econo...

> cash hoarding That used to be called saving and it was considered a good thing. Lower consumption would be better for the environment as well.

No, _saving_ is when you put money aside and hopefully keep its value at least above inflation. Cash hoarding means individuals and businesses stash bills under the mattress, and business will even decline to sell you anything on credit. And of course, that money devalues with inflation, so it’s not useful as a savings mechanism.

Re: Tim Sweeney: Tax bill would likely end founder control of independent companies

#122

Post by WalterBright »

enumjorge wrote: post #104
WalterBright wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It means they were not successful at crushing their competitors.

My point is huge companies can engage can have negative effects on competition even if they eventually fall. How many businesses has Amazon whipped out in the retail space by leaning on the profits from the cloud division? Just the other day we saw documents from the DOJ’s lawsuit against Google for anticompetitive behavior. In the those documents we saw internal communication about a desire for Google to use their d…

Literally any functioning company has negative effects on its competition.

Google turning the web into a walled garden will simply create opportunity for others.

Re: Tim Sweeney: Tax bill would likely end founder control of independent companies

#123

Post by rsj_hn »

hellbannedguy wrote: post #28
new_realist wrote: post #6

The current tax situation is like property taxes in California before Prop 19: nobody sells, so ownership and control never changes. This facilitates wealth transfer from generation to generation (in the equity case, though the use of trusts) and perpetuates wealth inequality.

You mean old middle class, and poor homeowners, can stay in the house they raised a family in? The only reason my high school educated 80 years old mother in declining health can stay in a home, and county, she feels somewhat safe is because of prop 13. Her biannual property taxes are still a big deal when they arrive. I've said this before, but I'm beginning to think if you didn't live through the craziness before P…

You can have carveouts for your 80 year old grandmother without freezing property taxes for everyone.

Re: Tim Sweeney: Tax bill would likely end founder control of independent companies

#124

Post by CheezeIt »

coenhyde wrote: post #72

Bad idea to tax unrealized capital gains. Proposal; How about we gut our entire tax code and replace it with a single tax that taxes when money moves from one entity to another. Let's call it a Transaction Tax. It would replace Sales Tax, Income Tax, Capital Gains Tax, Inheritance Tax, etc and introduce tax on debt creation (when the bank gives you the money). This would close all loop holes and put the entire tax in…

So having suppliers instead of being vertically integrated gets taxed repeatedly.

This is the whole reason the VAT taxes value added, not the whole transaction.

I have to wonder whether you’ve even looked at existing tax systems, or spent any time sketching out what the consequences of yours might be.

Re: Tim Sweeney: Tax bill would likely end founder control of independent companies

#125

Post by sneak »

TameAntelope wrote: post #119

Okay, doesn't it feel crazy that we're just throwing ideas out there and if it seems to justify the spending for something totally unrelated, it'll have a reasonable chance of becoming literally the highest law of the land? Maybe it's because I'm not in the room, but this feels incredibly slapdash for something so incredibly important.

I expect to see a lot of crazy selfdestructive, self-sabotaging schemes from the USA during the remainder of the attempt at empire, which I expect to last the entirety of the rest of my life.

Most of the up and coming interesting industries that have been happening in the last ten years are mostly happening outside of the USA, and this trend will only continue as it becomes harder and harder to operate there.

Re: Tim Sweeney: Tax bill would likely end founder control of independent companies

#126

Post by cosmotic »

young_unixer wrote: post #98
cosmotic wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be in favor of this I think. It might force Elon, Tesla, or the shareholders to address the elephant in the room: Teslas market cap vs their revenue. Teslas market cap is 1030m on 31.5m of revenue. GM is 79m on revenue of 122.5m. That's 50x the market cap per revenue.

If a company is doing tons of R&D, and everything suggests that that R&D will give huge dividends in the future, then it seems perfectly normal for such a company to have a high market-cap/revenue ratio. If having too big of a market cap relative to revenue is wrong, then you're basically saying that companies should not invest too much in their future, just use their money to sell as much as possible right now. You…

I think Tesla does a good job of making folks think they are doing a lot of R&D, but that's about it. Based on some quick internet research, Tesla is a quarter of the R&D of either Ford or GM...

Unless you think it's higher quality or in a different area... but the whole world is going toward electric cars and autonomous driving. Tesla AutoPilot comes in a distant second to GM according to Consumer Reports: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/28/gms-super-cruise-tops-teslas...

Tesla build quality also ranks low, even according to Elon: https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/03/business/elon-musk-tesla-qual...

Re: Tim Sweeney: Tax bill would likely end founder control of independent companies

#127

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

This proposal seemed utterly reasonable to me, especially this:

> US budget deficits don’t require a radical confiscation scheme like this. We already have a very effective progressive tax system which applies the same rules - but different rates - to everyone. If tax revenue is too low, just raise the top tax brackets

That, together with closing the step-up-in-basis loophole, are the simplest ways to more equitably raise revenue.

Re: Tim Sweeney: Tax bill would likely end founder control of independent companies

#128

Post by summerlight »

Beside of whether this particular tax reform bill is good or not, does it have any chance to survive in the current Supreme Court setup? If it's definitely not, I don't think it's a good idea to pursue it's going to shrink the future political possibility of taxing multi-billionaires.

Re: Tim Sweeney: Tax bill would likely end founder control of independent companies

#129

Post by losvedir »

sneak wrote: post #125
TameAntelope wrote: post #119

Okay, doesn't it feel crazy that we're just throwing ideas out there and if it seems to justify the spending for something totally unrelated, it'll have a reasonable chance of becoming literally the highest law of the land? Maybe it's because I'm not in the room, but this feels incredibly slapdash for something so incredibly important.

I expect to see a lot of crazy selfdestructive, self-sabotaging schemes from the USA during the remainder of the attempt at empire, which I expect to last the entirety of the rest of my life. Most of the up and coming interesting industries that have been happening in the last ten years are mostly happening outside of the USA, and this trend will only continue as it becomes harder and harder to operate there.

Curious to know what up and coming industries you mean?

Re: Tim Sweeney: Tax bill would likely end founder control of independent companies

#130

Post by setpatchaddress »

TedShiller wrote: post #103
threeseed wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment adds absolutely nothing to the discussion. Is there some specific critique you have of what OP has said ?

It’s like saying “I think all music rock stars could improve their music by doing X.” That statement could be interesting if you’re a rockstar. If not, then not so much.

That doesn't make any sense -- something that applies to "all music rock stars" would have to come from a mastering engineer or someone at that level and even then it wouldn't be universally applicable.
Post reply on HN