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

Adding unusable RAM for tax reasons

cpcwiki.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 307 posts

Re: Adding unusable RAM for tax reasons

#211

Post by drcode »

magicalhippo wrote: post #73
geocrasher wrote: post #5

This reminds me of the Subaru BRAT in the early '80s. There was a 25% tarrif on imported pickups. So Subaru added two plastic jump seats in the back of the BRAT, even making them face backwards. No seat belts as I recall just handles. They weren't even really intended to be used. They were just cheap plastic. But they served the purpose of making the vehicle a four-seater car instead of a pickup, with only a 2.5% tar…

Here in Norway we have the infamous "E6 ham". We have an import tax on dry-cured ham[1], but not unprocessed meat. Someone figured out it was cheaper then to import unprocessed meat from Spain to Norway, turn the truck around as soon as they were customs cleared and drive the 3000 km or so back to Spain for curing. Once cured they'd re-import the processed meat, which now has a different tariff due to being "Norwegia…

Nutella was similarly invented as a chocolate substitute, to (you guessed it) avoid chocolate tariffs.

Re: Adding unusable RAM for tax reasons

#212

Post by shuntress »

mek6800d2 wrote: post #189
shuntress wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a judge's responsibility to literally judge whether a given application of the law is appropriate. This encompasses every possible input including "what they believe lawmakers meant to say" . Edit: To get out in front of the obvious "Well what about when a judge just decides to do whatever they want??" response, I will say: That is why tradition, precedent, checks & balances, voting rights, and institutional tr…

I'm having a little trouble interpreting (pun a happy happenstance!) your comment. Judging whether an application of a law is "appropriate" basically gives judges free rein to do whatever they want, although I can't think of a better description of what judges should do. (I suppose your use of "literally" is problematic in that, as used, it simply refers to your definition of a judge's responsibillity but is easily c…

My use of "literally" is only intended to convey the literal meaning of the word.

And thank you for providing some excellent example of why tradition, precedent, checks & balances, voting rights, and institutional trust are important.

Re: Adding unusable RAM for tax reasons

#214

Post by yeetaccount4 »

cromka wrote: post #58

> Without the stiff competition of the smaller, lighter, easier-to-drive, and more fuel efficient import pickups and vans, Detroit automakers were no longer required to keep pace with innovation of foreign brands. One has to wonder how much this innocent-looking levy contributed to the overall global warming situation, by never having the US automakers to be incentivized to manufacture more efficient commercial fleet…

I’ve heard that pickups got so big in the past decade or so because of Obama-era emission regulation. A bigger truck was classified differently and not subject to such strict guidelines, so when the old 3/4 and 1-ton trucks couldn’t possibly meet the new rules they got bigger to get around them.

Re: Adding unusable RAM for tax reasons

#215

Post by vba616 »

autoexec wrote: post #131
bentcorner wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's also the infamous Toy Biz, Inc. v. United States case where Marvel Comics argued that their X-Men toys where "nonhuman toys" and not dolls to avoid an import tax. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toy_Biz%2C_Inc._v._United_Stat... The irony is that in the X-Men universe, the X-Men fight for a unification of mutants and humans.

Still, technically true though I'd think. Mutants aren't human. The X-Gene makes them "Homo sapiens superior" and distinguishes them from humans who were mutated by other means (radiation, spider bites, etc). Do X-men want to erase the distinction or do they just want peaceful coexistence between the two species?

I realize this is more about the X-men universe, but the statement "mutants aren't human" bugs me.

The human body accumulates on the order of 10 quadrillion uncorrected mutations per day, supposedly:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC47258/

(I'm assuming 30 trillion cells and that ~2.7% of mutations go uncorrected based on the rat figures mentioned)

Re: Adding unusable RAM for tax reasons

#216

Post by vba616 »

kentonv wrote: post #113
etskinner wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if they could, in theory, sell you the car for 150% of it's final price (so that they seats are there when sold), then buy back the seats immediately for 50% of its price. The invoice would say something like: Car with passenger seats: $15,000; Passenger seat buyback: $5,000; Total after buyback: $10,000. That way everyone gets what they want, and they've technically sold it with the seats still installed.

Law isn't interpreted by computers, it is interpreted by human judges, who generally aren't impressed by such hacks (though you might get lucky).

Also see: structuring.

You have to report behavior X, and if you deliberately don't do behavior X to avoid reporting it, that's a crime too!

Let's see you put that on the blockchain...

Re: Adding unusable RAM for tax reasons

#217

Post by geoduck14 »

magicalhippo wrote: post #203
actually_a_dog wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess it's not that "infamous," then, is it?

Perhaps the wrong choice of word, English is my second language after all. But it's quite well known in the food importing industry here AFAIK, and most seem to recognize it's exceptionally silly. But it's cheaper...

Welcome to English!

Infamous refers to something that is "well known for being bad!". A classic example would be a (well known) pirate! If the tax you are talking about is bad (I'm pretty sure it is) and well known (also, yes), then "Infamous" is a fine word to use

Notorious is a similar word - well known for something bad

Famous works if it isn't bad, but it usnusually used for people, and I would imagine "the highest threshold" of well-known stuff - so expect people to argue with you: "I haven't heard of X, so it must not be famous!"

Renowned and prominent are fine alternatives to "famous"

My personal favorite is Preeminent- which carries the notion of "#1 best". "My king is the Preeminent leader" - there is NO OTHER leader that can be king

Again, welcome to English, enjoy your stay!

Re: Adding unusable RAM for tax reasons

#218

Post by friedturkey »

jrockway wrote: post #29
HeavenFox wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's also the Ford vs Chicken Tax; basically U.S. import tariff for passenger van is 2.5% and cargo van is 25%, so Ford, which manufactured their Transit van in Turkey, installed seats in factory and stripped the seats once they arrived in the U.S. Now looks like they are in trouble for this scheme. https://jalopnik.com/ford-faces-potential-1-3-billion-fine-f... (And why it's called Chicken Tax is another fascinat…

Wow. I hope the government loses their lawsuit here. Customs & Border Protection should have absolutely no jurisdiction over what an item is used for once it enters the country.

I sincerely hope Ford gets hit hard and pays back all the profits they made from their tax dodging scheme plus penalties.

I'm beyond tired of massive corporations sending jobs to other countries, pretending to care about their own country and lying about being made locally, and dodging taxes. Ford hit all three here.

Re: Adding unusable RAM for tax reasons

#219

Post by vba616 »

mc32 wrote: post #60
jrockway wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow. I hope the government loses their lawsuit here. Customs & Border Protection should have absolutely no jurisdiction over what an item is used for once it enters the country.

It was pretty transparent that they did that to circumvent regulation. Imagine Coca-Cola getting clearance for importing coca leaves for flavoring but then instead sells it to a third party who processes it for something else.

At least decades ago when I first read about it, it was said that the third party, a company called the Stepan Co., imports the coca leaves, removes the cocaine, and sends the leaves to Coca-Cola and the cocaine to Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals.

https://apnews.com/article/af06f48660bf613e12d411a8f4dd4784

Re: Adding unusable RAM for tax reasons

#220

Post by vba616 »

JohnBooty wrote: post #157
notch656a wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Am I the only one that sees no problem with that? Why the hell should coca-cola be responsible for what someone else does with coca leaves?

I mean, we (ideally) pass laws to benefit society. I'm not somebody who really loves rules and regulations and I'll be the first person to say that America's "war on drugs" has been an utter disaster in multiple ways. But, generally speaking, flooding a country with cocaine is not what most of us would call beneficial to society. If you don't think that we should have a society and/or laws, cool, that's another discu…

>I mean, I guess we could just let Coca-Cola import metric tons of coca leaves, sell them to whoever the fuck they want, and then just... prosecute the people who do bad things with them?

Yes? Basically?

(1988)

"Workers at the Stepan Co. plant, the nation’s only legal importer of cocaine, must undergo strict background checks, and agents from the federal Drug Enforcement Agency frequently visit, said plant manager John O’Brien.

DEA spokesman Milton Smilek in Newark said there haven’t been any security problems at the plant just west of New York City. He said it processes hundreds of tons of cocaine each year."

This is where Coca-Cola is said to get its flavoring from.

Post reply on HN