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

Google Boss: We Follow The Law On Tax

news.sky.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 69 posts

Re: Google Boss: We Follow The Law On Tax

#31

Post by skore »

pvnick wrote: post #24
skore wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now now, be fair. There IS a difference between "paying only the taxes that I am required to pay" and setting up a Double Irish with a Dutch Sandwich. One is investing resources to minimize failure ("I want to make sure we don't pay more than we need to pay"), which I completely agree with - if your accountant fails to do that, it's not a good accountant. But the other is a proactive investment of even more money to…

"My good friend and CFO, Larry, why didn't you set up that offshore account that would legally save us millions of dollars in taxes per quarter like we talked about? That way we could hire more workers so they could feed their families and receive adequate health coverage." "Oh that wouldn't be fair to the people that couldn't do that." "You're fired."

Alright, you really are just trolling, got it.

So unless you are setting up multiple subsidiaries in tax havens and funnel the money around in a way that lets you narrowly avoid the laws that otherwise quite clearly determine what your fair share to society is, there is no way to have a proper business and in the end, the children get hurt and poor little Rebecca can't afford to pay for lunch at school and everybody points fingers at her. Boo, boo, haa, haa, money, money. Understood.

This kind of strawman argument really used to make me sick, but these days, I'm mostly bummed out about how I've become so used to seeing it.

Re: Google Boss: We Follow The Law On Tax

#32

Post by pvnick »

skore wrote: post #31
pvnick wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"My good friend and CFO, Larry, why didn't you set up that offshore account that would legally save us millions of dollars in taxes per quarter like we talked about? That way we could hire more workers so they could feed their families and receive adequate health coverage." "Oh that wouldn't be fair to the people that couldn't do that." "You're fired."

Alright, you really are just trolling, got it. So unless you are setting up multiple subsidiaries in tax havens and funnel the money around in a way that lets you narrowly avoid the laws that otherwise quite clearly determine what your fair share to society is, there is no way to have a proper business and in the end, the children get hurt and poor little Rebecca can't afford to pay for lunch at school and everybody…

Here's my logic:

1. Your "fair share to society" is determined by the law.

2. These companies are following the law to the "t"

3. If you don't like it then change the law.

It's that simple. Case closed.

Re: Google Boss: We Follow The Law On Tax

#33

Post by polshaw »

rayiner wrote: post #28

I see a lot of talk about "tax loopholes" but not any specifics about exactly what those loopholes are. It's easy to blame the law (a process which is mostly just a self-reinforcing talking point), but has it occurred to anyone that maybe neither the law nor Google are "crooked?" You can take the most straightforward law and it still won't withstand a company putting all their IP in a tax haven and then attributing m…

Google doesn't sell searches, it sells advertising. They do much of that sales process for UK advertisers (effectively all of it according to one whistle-blower) in the UK, and 'close' them (and declare them) in Ireland.

Nobody is suggesting double taxation, but google does a substantial amount of (profitable) business in the UK, and (at least morally) that portion should be taxed in the UK.

Re: Google Boss: We Follow The Law On Tax

#34

Post by nijk »

noonespecial wrote: post #18

I think politicians are just upset that those tax law loopholes that were supposed to be just for their friends are now being exploited by those upstart interweb companies like "the google". Our supporters paid good money for those exclusive exemptions, dammit. This is just making us look bad...

Or maybe not all politicians are in favor of the loopholes.

Re: Google Boss: We Follow The Law On Tax

#35

Post by ars »

rayiner wrote: post #28

I see a lot of talk about "tax loopholes" but not any specifics about exactly what those loopholes are. It's easy to blame the law (a process which is mostly just a self-reinforcing talking point), but has it occurred to anyone that maybe neither the law nor Google are "crooked?" You can take the most straightforward law and it still won't withstand a company putting all their IP in a tax haven and then attributing m…

> I see a lot of talk about "tax loopholes" but not any specifics about exactly what those loopholes are.

See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_Irish_arrangement

The "cheating" accusation comes because you have to be very large to be able to make use of this. If everyone could use this tax arrangement people wouldn't complain. (Well, they would complain that it exists, but not that people use it.)

Re: Google Boss: We Follow The Law On Tax

#36

Post by mjw »

mcintyre1994 wrote: post #11

Google is clearly in the right here, unless somebody can actually point out a law they're breaking. Simplifying a lot, Google have 2 responsibilities here: Pay at least the amount of tax they owe, maximise stuff shareholders care about. It doesn't take much to work out the optimal solution to them two problems is to pay exactly the minimum amount of tax possible.

Firstly, if google sees its only responsibilities as "maximize shareholder value" and "obey the letter of the law" then perhaps they should officially give up on the "don't be evil" thing.

Secondly, it's disingenuous of them to ask the taxpayer to "just change the rules" if we don't like their avoidance, when they're funding the very regulatory capture which makes it hard for us to do that, via their investment in these schemes.

Re: Google Boss: We Follow The Law On Tax

#37

Post by nijk »

mcintyre1994 wrote: post #11

Google is clearly in the right here, unless somebody can actually point out a law they're breaking. Simplifying a lot, Google have 2 responsibilities here: Pay at least the amount of tax they owe, maximise stuff shareholders care about. It doesn't take much to work out the optimal solution to them two problems is to pay exactly the minimum amount of tax possible.

They have a responsibility to accurately report their activities to tax authorities.

In a previous hearing, Google told parliament that they do engineering only in California.

That claim doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

Re: Google Boss: We Follow The Law On Tax

#38

Post by AnthonyMouse »

skore wrote: post #20
pvnick wrote: post #7

If my accountant paid a penny more taxes than I owed I would fire them. That politicians are attacking successful companies for trying to pay as little in taxes as possible is offensive and embarrassing. If you're unhappy with the law then change it. Otherwise shut the hell up and stop wasting the tax money you're complaining about.

Now now, be fair. There IS a difference between "paying only the taxes that I am required to pay" and setting up a Double Irish with a Dutch Sandwich. One is investing resources to minimize failure ("I want to make sure we don't pay more than we need to pay"), which I completely agree with - if your accountant fails to do that, it's not a good accountant. But the other is a proactive investment of even more money to…

I'm not sure what line you're attempting to draw. An accountant's job isn't just to make sure you file the right paperwork, it's to identify courses of action that could have a significant effect on the bottom line. You seem to be suggesting that a business would be doing something unreasonable by moving any of its operations into a jurisdiction with lower taxes, since that would be making an investment in order to pay less taxes.

Re: Google Boss: We Follow The Law On Tax

#39

Post by skore »

pvnick wrote: post #32
skore wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alright, you really are just trolling, got it. So unless you are setting up multiple subsidiaries in tax havens and funnel the money around in a way that lets you narrowly avoid the laws that otherwise quite clearly determine what your fair share to society is, there is no way to have a proper business and in the end, the children get hurt and poor little Rebecca can't afford to pay for lunch at school and everybody…

Here's my logic: 1. Your "fair share to society" is determined by the law. 2. These companies are following the law to the "t" 3. If you don't like it then change the law. It's that simple. Case closed.

No, the "fair share to society" is determined by the prevailing morals of society. You can make laws all day, if society doesn't agree with them, you run into problems (ask some leaders in the middle east).

Imagine a town at a lake. There is a law that all citizens can only take so much water out of the lake. Now there is a guy taking a lot of water out of the lake - to the point where he steps over the law. But wait! He is actually registered as the citizen of a different town! Phew. Law abiding citizen after all.

What happens is that some corporations extract more value from society than is healthy for that society. That they have so much money that they can bend the tax code to their will without breaking it is completely besides the point. The result is the same: They have a net negative effect on society. That's not fair.

The lake of the town is being sucked dry. Just look at how much money those Double Irish corporations have in their accounts while a lot of of countries struggle to pay their public employees and have to make drastic cuts that directly affect pretty much only the middle and lower classes. That's not fair at all.

Well, at least they can keep buying those iPads on credit that will ruin the rest of their lives.

Re: Google Boss: We Follow The Law On Tax

#40

Post by rayiner »

polshaw wrote: post #33
rayiner wrote: post #28

I see a lot of talk about "tax loopholes" but not any specifics about exactly what those loopholes are. It's easy to blame the law (a process which is mostly just a self-reinforcing talking point), but has it occurred to anyone that maybe neither the law nor Google are "crooked?" You can take the most straightforward law and it still won't withstand a company putting all their IP in a tax haven and then attributing m…

Google doesn't sell searches, it sells advertising. They do much of that sales process for UK advertisers (effectively all of it according to one whistle-blower) in the UK, and 'close' them (and declare them) in Ireland. Nobody is suggesting double taxation, but google does a substantial amount of (profitable) business in the UK, and (at least morally) that portion should be taxed in the UK.

But that's doesn't make things any clearer. Google might do the sales process in the UK, but how much should that count when the ads are shown internationally and the platform that brings in the eyeballs is developed outside the UK? Clearly they should pay some taxes in the UK, but how to divvy it up? And how to achieve that process when there is nobody with overarching jurisdiction over the whole entity?
Post reply on HN