Global minimum corporate tax: 130 nations to support U.S. proposal • Hacker News Board

Re: Global minimum corporate tax: 130 nations to support U.S. proposal

#241

Post by tomp » Thu, Jul 01, 2021, 10:37 PM UTC

robomartin wrote: post #157

CrazyStat wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Raising corporate taxes is generally popular, not "wildly unpopular." For example, in a recent poll 65% of Americans support raising corporate taxes [1]. This number has been fairly steady over time. It's even higher when you ask about closing loopholes that allow international tax havens, as this 15% minimum tax agreement is trying to do--70-85% support [2]. The only terrible shame here is you laundering your opinio…

65% of Americans have no clue what it takes to run a business of any scale. They can barely calculate a tip at the restaurant, yet they think they are qualified to make decisions on taxation. The flavor of democracy we practice has been good. However, we must be honest enough to admit it can degenerate into mob rule, which generally means decisions are made by the most gullible and ignorant among us on any specific t…

> There is no way my vote on a whole range of medical issues should have the same value as that of a medical professional, such as my wife.

In June last year, the medical crème de la crème were proclaiming that COVID antibodies last 3 months. I (an engineer with no formal biology training past high school) read some obscure studies that past Sars-Cov-1 infection seems to still provide protection against severe Sars-Cov-2 infection, and it was also what my understanding about the mechanics of the immune system suggested (why would antibodies only last 3 months? how could the human race survive?!)

Lo and behold, I was right, the "medical professionals" were wrong. TL;DR: common sense is worth at least as much as a medical degree. Also, never trust people whose incentives aren't aligned with yours.

Re: Global minimum corporate tax: 130 nations to support U.S. proposal

#242

Post by natvert » Thu, Jul 01, 2021, 10:39 PM UTC

gruez wrote: post #229

natvert wrote: post #29

When the benefits of creating a new country outweigh the costs (to shareholders), does it fall within the fiduciary duty of corporate leaders to form a new country?

I thought part of the plan is that non-complying countries get sanctions/tarrifs applied so your plan wouldn't be viable?

It's not my plan, nor am I advocating for it. I just think it's a potential in the logical progression of events.

To your point though, what if a few or even all Fortune n companies formed countries (or one country together). Who would the sanctions really hurt/benefit? I doubt it would hurt the corporate nation states as much as the others.

Re: Global minimum corporate tax: 130 nations to support U.S. proposal

#243

Post by tick_tock_tick » Thu, Jul 01, 2021, 10:47 PM UTC

jcrites wrote: post #176

tick_tock_tick wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's much easier to force a corp to pay dividends or do a share buyback than it is to chase them around the world with some horrible tax policy. A 0% corporate tax with law to prevent excessive hoarding of cash in the corporation is the only sane solution.

How much cash a corporation holds should be a matter for the corporation's CEO, board, and shareholders to decide. If the shareholders are comfortable with the company sitting a on large amount of cash as a rainy day fund, or a reserve that can be used for large acquisitions, significant new research efforts (maybe Apple wants to build cars, and self-driving ones) etc., then who's complaining? With $195 billion in ca…

> How much cash a corporation holds should be a matter for the corporation's CEO, board, and shareholders to decide.

Or whatever the law says.... I don't particular care that Apples investors have no issues with them building cash reserves.

The TSMC example is actually a very good point that allowing corporations to build huge cash reserves allows incumbents too much power in the market.

Re: Global minimum corporate tax: 130 nations to support U.S. proposal

#244

Post by asteroidbelt » Thu, Jul 01, 2021, 10:48 PM UTC

ineptech wrote: post #226

asteroidbelt wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Tax the wealthy. Please don't tax the wealthy. I have a couple friends who are in top 0.1%. They have enough money for the rest of their lives. If you start taking money from them, they will simply stop working and start spending more time with friends and family. The correct goal is not to take money from the rich (which can be achieved by taxing them; this is what Bolsheviks did and it resulted in millions of dea…

> If you start taking money from them, they will simply stop working and start spending more time with friends and family. This model of the world assumes that "rich person" means someone with high income and "raise taxes on the rich" means raising the top marginal income tax rate. I don't think either is true and I struggle to imagine how you could be familiar with the financial details of the .1% and think otherwis…

> People rich enough to be included in "tax the rich" mostly get their money from capital gains

OK, so we are talking now not about income tax, but about capital gains tax? That's quite a different topic.

But, also, no, capital gains tax should not be increased.

Because you cannot become rich by investing into index.

You become rich by founding a company while working 16 hours a day and getting a large share of it. And after many years of that work with lots of failures and a lot of personal losses, you become rich.

Some people try this path, many fail. If you tell them you can continue doing that, but in the end you will get slightly more than a regular dude working 8/5, they will think, why bother.

Alternatively, you can become more rich by investing your personal money into something risky (like buy a share of your friend garage startup). Again, if cap gains tax will eat your gains, you won't do it next time. Why bother, better buy a condo and wait for it to grow.

Increase cap gains tax, and you won't have new trillion cap companies in the US.

Re: Global minimum corporate tax: 130 nations to support U.S. proposal

#245

Post by kelnos » Thu, Jul 01, 2021, 10:48 PM UTC

asteroidbelt wrote: post #167

pope_meat wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tell your 0.1 friends to focus on all those points you made, and quick, because they will be the scapegoat for the mob. Things are getting bad enough to where "cutting ones nose to spite the face" starts to make sense, redistributing the misery the rich have insulated themselves from. Just my feeling on the situation.

> Tell your 0.1 friends to focus on all those points you made They know it already, most of my friends are classical liberals/conservatives. > they will be the scapegoat for the mob You are probably in the top 10% (as most people here on HN), so a lot of people here might become the same scapegoat. > Things are getting bad enough to where "cutting ones nose to spite the face" I'm not sure things are getting bad. Poor…

> I'm not sure things are getting bad. Poorest people now are more rich than poorest people 30 years ago.

> Like in the US now average electrician makes 70K a year. That's a lot of money. And anyone can be electrician.

I would not consider electricians as an example of poor people. And no, not anyone can be an electrician. It takes training and licensing, and many people can't jump those hurdles. (Not to mention the fact that if everyone became an electrician, very few of them would get any work.)

Re: Global minimum corporate tax: 130 nations to support U.S. proposal

#246

Post by mullingitover » Thu, Jul 01, 2021, 10:51 PM UTC

dantheman wrote: post #235

mullingitover wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bezos is playing it pretty straight, but then again 973 million is basically pocket change for him, also let's not forget about the year he paid zero taxes and got a refund : > Bezos filed a tax return in 2011 reporting he lost money because of bad investments, allowing him to claim and receive a $4,000 tax credit for his children, according to ProPublica. Anway Bezos is far from the only mega-rich person, for exampl…

When looking at a single year for people who have losses and expenses it can paint quite a misleading picture. Over 10 years how much did they pay, is a much better question.

How about not paying taxes 10 out of 15 years[1]?

Honestly I get it, and I can argue both sides of this debate. However, for the regular working person who pays taxes year in and year out to hear that people who live in stratospheric luxury aren't paying taxes: it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and by duck I mean rigged system.

[1] https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/27/politics/trump-income-taxes-n...

Re: Global minimum corporate tax: 130 nations to support U.S. proposal

#247

Post by asteroidbelt » Thu, Jul 01, 2021, 10:54 PM UTC

pope_meat wrote: post #239

asteroidbelt wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cost of education went up If you need high education, you just take credit, and pay for it with your salary which is much higher than it was 30 years ago. And if you think that you won't be able to pay for credit because it's not possible to find a decent job with liberal arts degree, then probably you don't need that education. > Cost of housing went up I suspect that's because construction workers are paid well n…

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/income-share-of-bottom-50-...

Why is that a problem?

Looks like the issue is not that "I want to get rid of poverty" but rather "I want to get rid of rich people".

Re: Global minimum corporate tax: 130 nations to support U.S. proposal

#248

Post by PoignardAzur » Thu, Jul 01, 2021, 10:58 PM UTC

UnpossibleJim wrote: post #144

jbaudanza wrote: post #26

Imposing taxes on a legal entity always seemed fishy to me. Politically, it sounds great to say, "Make the corporations pay their share!", but who exactly are we targeting with these taxes? Is it the rich executives? Why not just raise taxes on the rich directly? I suspect in most cases the tax burden is just shifted onto the lower-income workers or the customers somehow.

One of the even bigger issues with this bill is the lack of accountability in government spending. This does nothing to tackle military spending or riders tacked on to bills that have nothing to do with the proposed spending bill. If politicians really wanted to make people happy and get things under control, it would be transparency in spending and no riders on spending bills. This is just another way to wring more…

I mean, I don't disagree that governments can spend their money in undesirable ways, but in general increasing government revenue is a good thing.

Maybe this bill doesn't stop oversized military spending, but it at least puts a damper on the race to the bottom of countries offering low taxes to gigantic corporations.

Re: Global minimum corporate tax: 130 nations to support U.S. proposal

#249

Post by LatteLazy » Thu, Jul 01, 2021, 11:00 PM UTC

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #56

LatteLazy wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, if they paid a dividend apple would pay Corp tax AND the share holder would pay cap gains. A buy back avoids the Corp tax and let's the shareholder delay paying (until they sell) and also pay a lower rate if they're careful (long term holdings I think get a lower rate, 10% I think?). There is another reply here saying Corp tax is still due. I didn't think it was but I'll check after dinner.

If my shares are handled by an LTD I'll never pay tax because i will keep reinvesting that monet.

You'd pay once you took the money out right?

Re: Global minimum corporate tax: 130 nations to support U.S. proposal

#250

Post by dantheman » Thu, Jul 01, 2021, 11:08 PM UTC

mullingitover wrote: post #246

dantheman wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When looking at a single year for people who have losses and expenses it can paint quite a misleading picture. Over 10 years how much did they pay, is a much better question.

How about not paying taxes 10 out of 15 years[1]? Honestly I get it, and I can argue both sides of this debate. However, for the regular working person who pays taxes year in and year out to hear that people who live in stratospheric luxury aren't paying taxes: it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and by duck I mean rigged system. [1] https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/27/politics/trump-income-taxes-…

Trump is a notoriously bad business man who loses money. If you're living if savings which is what happens when you lose money, then there is no tax bill. I'm not discounting fraud, but there is active disinformation on this - propublica mixing wealth totals and income tax just one of many intentional misleading arguments.