Tesla Paid Zero Federal Income Tax in 2024, Despite $2.3B in Income

Post by peanuty1 » Sat, Feb 01, 2025, 10:56 PM UTC

dzonga wrote: post #229

oskarkk wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, under Obama SpaceX got it's first big contracts from NASA, without which SpaceX wouldn't exist today. That was a risky bet then, but the government got a really good return on that investment.

up until I read how elon made his money - no majority of it didn't come from paypal or zip2. but from gvt contracts or loans. that's when I learned I'm playing the wrong game by trying to provide private services instead of targeting gvt.

Post by xyzzy123 » Sun, Feb 02, 2025, 2:55 AM UTC

steve_adams_86 wrote: post #238

xyzzy123 wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Check out Hess v Commissioner. For certain types of businesses the individual is almost indistinguishable from the business.

Unfortunately in my case my small business would be 100% transferable to any other individual. But that’s a very interesting grey area.

Post by Auracle » Sun, Feb 02, 2025, 7:20 AM UTC

johnnyanmac wrote: post #209

SeanAnderson wrote: post #8

I wish this article was written with a less biased tone. I'm genuinely interested in understanding it better. As far as I can tell, the article cites two things: $500M tax savings by using an accelerated depreciation schedule (unclear if they saved $500M more by using accelerated vs a regular depreciation schedule, but I assume no) and they claimed $300M in tax credits. The article doesn't address the other $1.5B, pr…

>I think the real thing here is the weaponization of EV tax credits as some sort of boogeyman. It's a hot topic right now since Trump just ended the EV credits. Which you'd think Musk would want to keep. And beyond this article, Musk has "quiet quit" on Tesla as a car company, based on his earning calls. They said little about cars and instead deflected the hype to "AI robots" in 2027. It's all just so weird.

Post by declan_roberts » Sun, Feb 02, 2025, 2:36 PM UTC

steve_adams_86 wrote: post #237

lesuorac wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To save people the trouble. > The relevant ruling on this subject came in 1994 in a case known as Hess v. Commissioner. The plaintiff, a self-employed exotic dancer, had implants that expanded her bust size to the size 56FF. For tax purposes, she treated these as a deductible business expense on her schedule C. The IRS contested her deduction. > ... The courts ruled in her favor: https://taxfoundation.org/blog/how-br…

There is nothing I can do to engrave my body in a way that benefits by business. It’s an interesting case, but it seems to make sense. Buying a car for myself to use for my business doesn’t make sense at all; it’s actually bad for my business and creates a significant liability.

Post by spiderfarmer » Sun, Feb 02, 2025, 11:16 PM UTC

vtashkov wrote: post #212

spiderfarmer wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or HN is also used by people from the EU who feel paying taxes is necessary for a functioning society.

Or I am from the EU and I don't see many of you coming here to live your nice life with big taxes, 2 months queues for doctor appointment, 3 bedroom appartments in the ballpark of 1 million dollars AT LEAST, while net salary around $5k per month.