Live data from Hacker News

Some voters are sick of companies like Amazon paying no corporate tax

nytimes.com

21–30 of 175 posts

Re: Some voters are sick of companies like Amazon paying no corporate tax

#22
post #19

The article is reluctant to mention the reason why they got those tax rebates, and focuses on the way people feel about it. This seems like bad journalism. According to CNBC, “Amazon's low tax bill mainly stemmed from the Republican tax cuts of 2017, carryforward losses from years when the company was not profitable, tax credits for massive investments in R&D and stock-based employee compensation.” https://www.cnbc.c…

> carryforward losses from years when the company was not profitable yes, this definitely should be talked about. Why can't people's income be carried forward like this as well? If i made a lot of money one year, why can't i claim away taxes from years that i didn't make income (such that my tax bracket is lower)?

Not making money is not the same as making losses. You can carry forwards losses you've made on investments.

Re: Some voters are sick of companies like Amazon paying no corporate tax

#23
The intellectual dishonesty of this from allegedly smart people continues to astound me. Amazon has little-to-no taxes mainly because they have such low taxable income in the first place because they spend so much in R&D and other things. They’re actually creating jobs and new businesses rather than showing massive profits and paying a ton in taxes. I have no doubt they take advantage of perfectly legal tax code items like accelerated depreciation, just like millions of other companies. At the end of the day, people of a certain mindset just want to take other peoples’ money and the more of it they have they more desperately people believe they don’t deserve to have it.

Re: Some voters are sick of companies like Amazon paying no corporate tax

#24
post #9
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One could argue that the consumers are the ones paying this too. Sales tax is almost always passed onto the consumer in the form of raised prices.

One could argue that consumers are the ones paying every tax.

Sure. But what is taxed does steer society. Imagine only taxing on pollution (so not on wages/sales/home ownership).

Currently we tax on wages/ sales/ home ownership and not on Amazon an little on pollution. Look around to see the result.

Re: Some voters are sick of companies like Amazon paying no corporate tax

#26

The article is reluctant to mention the reason why they got those tax rebates, and focuses on the way people feel about it. This seems like bad journalism. According to CNBC, “Amazon's low tax bill mainly stemmed from the Republican tax cuts of 2017, carryforward losses from years when the company was not profitable, tax credits for massive investments in R&D and stock-based employee compensation.” https://www.cnbc.c…

Those all sound like corporate tax policies. That's literally what they're talking about. Clearly, a growing portion of the electorate doesn't like those policies. That's the first step in democracy, no? Engagement?

I agree that engagement and discussing policies is important. But it does feel disingenuous and aimed at provoking outrage (to trigger a knee-jerk reaction) when you just mention a fact like "look at these rich guys that don't share anything!" and ignore the context of why it got to be the way it is.

And I'm not saying that there aren't changes that could and should be made. Just that this particular article doesn't have the feel of a fair debate aiming to inform people, but more of an outrage-inducing propaganda.

Re: Some voters are sick of companies like Amazon paying no corporate tax

#27

The article is reluctant to mention the reason why they got those tax rebates, and focuses on the way people feel about it. This seems like bad journalism. According to CNBC, “Amazon's low tax bill mainly stemmed from the Republican tax cuts of 2017, carryforward losses from years when the company was not profitable, tax credits for massive investments in R&D and stock-based employee compensation.” https://www.cnbc.c…

Go look at Amazon's 8k and 10k filings; If memory serves it wasn't until 2015 or 2016 they turned a profit after almost 2 decades. It's been illegal, under racketeering laws, to sell at a loss in order to capture a market for a long, long time, and that's the real story here.

Republicans and Democrats have let that one go; blaming political parties is a straw-man argument. They expect to utter the words and hope you believe it and not fight what they're doing.

In 2008 after the crash the retail industry switched to hiring part-time jobs only; Wal-mart, Meijer, Kroger, almost everyone and a lot of that was due to pricing pressure from online retail namely E-bay and to a larger extent Amazon. People began working 3 or 4 unstable part time jobs to piece together 60+hr weeks in order to make ends meet and still living in destitution (not having savings for a car or house repair). Many turned to drugs and alcohol to deal with the trauma of being in a sitaution where that looked to be a permanent state of affairs. Today, Wal-mart has stopped drug testing new hires, they've implimented a drug rehab program for new hires because they drug test 100 people and literally 99 fail. Other retailers and employers are doing the same.

Any company that views it's customers as the product ultimately is looking to do what anyone does with a product once they are done with it; throw it into the garbage. CNBC is filling your head with garbage and turning you into garbage just like Amazon and the retail industry did to those retail workers I just mentioned; now they get to clean up their mess. Those people get to lose a good 15-20 years of productive live due to this. You have literally nothing to gain by listening to them whatsoever; take a news literacy course and invest a little bit of money on real journalism.

Re: Some voters are sick of companies like Amazon paying no corporate tax

#28
post #14

Voters are sick of it because of a general misunderstanding of corporate taxes, and sensationalized headlines are just making it worse.

I must admit that my knowledge is lacking in this area. Can someone offer a high-level explanation to one of the people who don't understand corporate taxes in the US?

As far as my understanding goes, the bulk of taxes are paid on profit (to be more precise, operating income), and not revenue. As far as I understand, big companies do everything possible to make it seem like they are not profitable from an accounting perspective. As an example, this might mean that they'd pay some subsidiary in Ireland, where corporation taxes are smaller. What am I missing?

Re: Some voters are sick of companies like Amazon paying no corporate tax

#29
post #19

The article is reluctant to mention the reason why they got those tax rebates, and focuses on the way people feel about it. This seems like bad journalism. According to CNBC, “Amazon's low tax bill mainly stemmed from the Republican tax cuts of 2017, carryforward losses from years when the company was not profitable, tax credits for massive investments in R&D and stock-based employee compensation.” https://www.cnbc.c…

> carryforward losses from years when the company was not profitable yes, this definitely should be talked about. Why can't people's income be carried forward like this as well? If i made a lot of money one year, why can't i claim away taxes from years that i didn't make income (such that my tax bracket is lower)?

What you suggest is something completely unrelated.

Re: Some voters are sick of companies like Amazon paying no corporate tax

#30
This comes up all the time. The issue is not the companies. The issue is the loopholes that their highly paid tax accountants are taking advantage of. Change the law not attack the company for acting in the best interest of its shareholders.
Post reply on HN