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

John Oliver buys $15M in debt and forgives all of it on 'Last Week Tonight'

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 292 posts

Re: John Oliver buys $15M in debt and forgives all of it on 'Last Week Tonight'

#261

Post by SilasX »

talmand wrote: post #169
MichaelBurge wrote: post #162

You could probably use debt forgiveness as a collection technique: If the person doesn't agree to start paying it back, you threaten to forgive the entire amount all at once in a way that is not tax-advantageous. Now you owe taxes on your $80k of extra income(forgiven debt), and the government is less lenient than banks when they're collecting tax debt. They might eventually be able to get it discharged, but it'd req…

How exactly is forgiven debt considered income?

Because if it weren't, you could take all your compensation/revenue as an (untaxed) "loan" that you never pay back.

"What? I don't owe any taxes! That was all a loan!"

Re: John Oliver buys $15M in debt and forgives all of it on 'Last Week Tonight'

#262

Post by qmr »

dannypgh wrote: post #44
qmr wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't felt urge to watch a single episode with him.

You're proud of the fact you've pre-judged Trevor Noah's performance without watching a single episode?

I've watched clips. Just doesn't do it for me.

Re: John Oliver buys $15M in debt and forgives all of it on 'Last Week Tonight'

#263

Post by st3v3r »

bko wrote: post #222
stanmancan wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In his latest clip, he mocks information being passed by Excel. He wasn't mocking that information was being passed via excel, he was mocking _what_ information was being passed via excel. The fact that companies can but and sell excel documents with a name, address, SIN, and debt amount, and that's it. No contracts, no history, no anything, just, this person now owe's you $X. Also, I find it incredibly irresponsible…

Banks have very strict guidelines with how they handle sensitive documents with personal information. Can't say the same for the secondary market though. > No contracts, no history, no anything, just, this person now owe's you $X. Going through the details isn't worth it to the buyers since its for such a small amount. They give them names, numbers and amounts to their phone bank and they see what they can get. Killi…

I'm sorry, but I don't believe that for a second. It doesn't matter how little the debt is purchased for; those details are important.

Re: John Oliver buys $15M in debt and forgives all of it on 'Last Week Tonight'

#264

Post by st3v3r »

bko wrote: post #87
KayEss wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For trading debt I would certainly hope that the actual contracts under which the debt was agreed where included. Yes that would be difficult, but it ought to be a minimum requirement.

The problem is that this debt is for very small amounts, often a few hundred dollars/thousand dollars traded for pennies on the dollar. This is a risk the seller/buyer is willing to take since the cost is so low and it isn't even worth taking the time to review the contract in depth for such a small payout.

If it's not worth taking the time to ensure the most basic of due diligence is taken, then you shouldn't be able to contact anyone about the debt.

Re: John Oliver buys $15M in debt and forgives all of it on 'Last Week Tonight'

#265

Post by thwarted »

AstroJetson wrote: post #249
thwarted wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

any important information being passed by Excel is a travesty I think that's putting it mildly. A major issue with using Excel files for data transfer is, to put it bluntly, the lackadaisical way people treat Excel files. They are passed around and edited. Passed back once edited. Passing them around creates copies of them. They get goofy names as people try to manage the multiple editors and editions. There's no ver…

I checked with the company, and they do track the debt they "forget". They also send a letter to the debtor to say that the debt has been cleared. That takes care of the case where it comes back to life, the debtor has some level of proof that the debt was taken care of. I didn't ask if they tracked all of it in an Excel file ;-)

Figured it was something like this. This is great news if you're trying to get rid of bill collectors. Just make some "proof" on "company letterhead" that the debt has been cleared. It's no more scummy than harassing collectors.

Re: John Oliver buys $15M in debt and forgives all of it on 'Last Week Tonight'

#266

Post by deaddodo »

zeveb wrote: post #135
bmh_ca wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Often it seems that facts, evidence, and observation are derided as "left". I find John's commentaries to be suitably supported by substance, with constructive conclusions. I worry that characterization as "left" is a defence against cognitive acknowledgements that just happen to be dissonant with neurostatic precepts.

> Often it seems that facts, evidence, and observation are derided as "left". Well, those on the left would think so. Oddly enough, those on the right think that facts, evidence & observation are derided as 'right.' Weird how that happens, isn't it? It's almost as though we all sincerely believe that we are correct and that those who disagree with us are incorrect.

Though I agree with you fundamentally; this is not always grey. A simple example:

When 99/100 scientists agree that climate change is a thing and random politicians, business leaders and religious leaders are the dissenters; fact is very clearly on one side and bias the other.

Re: John Oliver buys $15M in debt and forgives all of it on 'Last Week Tonight'

#267

Post by eonw »

thwarted wrote: post #265
AstroJetson wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I checked with the company, and they do track the debt they "forget". They also send a letter to the debtor to say that the debt has been cleared. That takes care of the case where it comes back to life, the debtor has some level of proof that the debt was taken care of. I didn't ask if they tracked all of it in an Excel file ;-)

Figured it was something like this. This is great news if you're trying to get rid of bill collectors. Just make some "proof" on "company letterhead" that the debt has been cleared. It's no more scummy than harassing collectors.

sounds like a business model almost as slimy as those collecting expired debt, but at least if i was selling forged documents i could sleep at night.

Re: John Oliver buys $15M in debt and forgives all of it on 'Last Week Tonight'

#268

Post by deaddodo »

desigooner wrote: post #5
dvcc wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's still debt, it's not as if the money is not owed it's just debt that has no legal repercussions for not paying. From my understanding at least. So really he saved them from harassing phone calls, not really the money itself.

If the debt collectors somehow manage to trick the debtors into acknowledging the debt, the debt clock is reset & it goes back on to your credit report.

This is not even in the least bit true. The credit report "debt clock" is static. Activity, acknowledgement, etc matters not.

The debt is only valid six months from delinquency to seven years post that date. Period.

Re: John Oliver buys $15M in debt and forgives all of it on 'Last Week Tonight'

#269

Post by talmand »

SilasX wrote: post #261
talmand wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How exactly is forgiven debt considered income?

Because if it weren't, you could take all your compensation/revenue as an (untaxed) "loan" that you never pay back. "What? I don't owe any taxes! That was all a loan!"

I guess I had a too simplistic viewpoint on the matter, how a contract is ended between two private parties shouldn't involve the government unless some form of criminal activity has been done.

As for the compensation idea, I'm assuming you mean from employment, I would have to hope that's already covered by the income tax laws where there are guidelines in what determines compensation from employment and what is considered employment. Many people have tried many schemes around that one. Besides, even if someone tried something like that it's quite a bit different than a debt owed to the hospital because they performed surgery on you.

But from what I'm reading from the links provided the government doesn't get involved until the owner of the debt files the form to involve them. Which seems odd in of itself to me. It's almost like a punishment placed on the party owing the debt from the owner of the debt through the powers of the state; which is odd since the owner has decided to not collect.

But then again, I'm not familiar with laws governing debt so I'm sure there's some elaborate nuance I'm not understanding.

Re: John Oliver buys $15M in debt and forgives all of it on 'Last Week Tonight'

#270

Post by SilasX »

talmand wrote: post #269
SilasX wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because if it weren't, you could take all your compensation/revenue as an (untaxed) "loan" that you never pay back. "What? I don't owe any taxes! That was all a loan!"

I guess I had a too simplistic viewpoint on the matter, how a contract is ended between two private parties shouldn't involve the government unless some form of criminal activity has been done. As for the compensation idea, I'm assuming you mean from employment, I would have to hope that's already covered by the income tax laws where there are guidelines in what determines compensation from employment and what is con…

>I guess I had a too simplistic viewpoint on the matter, how a contract is ended between two private parties shouldn't involve the government unless some form of criminal activity has been done.

If that were where it ended, we couldn't have income taxes :-P

But as for the broader point: if you don't tax forgiven loans, you're effectively allowing a vector for untaxed income -- whether personal or business.

I agree it gets a little trickier when the debt was for for a non-monetary good in the first place (e.g. surgical services), but many of the same concerns apply -- I may hide income by transacting it in the form of a service.

You're right that public policy purposes may disfavor that sort of thing (e.g. counting charity surgical services as taxable income), but this is common -- there was the time someone won a free trip to space but refused because he'd have to pay taxes on its market value.

Post reply on HN