Live data from Hacker News

Denmark: No aid for companies which pay out dividends or are reg. in tax havens

bloomberg.com

281–290 of 308 posts

Re: Denmark: No aid for companies which pay out dividends or are reg. in tax havens

#281

The irony of this is that Denmark is kind of a tax haven for international holding companies that can be tax-free.

It's only ironic if you're prone to mixing up nationalities. 1. Denmark is a country in Scandinavia where they speak Danish . It's not a tax haven and it is not the country where they speak Dutch. 2. That country is called the Netherlands and that country has a tax evasion scheme named after it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_Sandwich

I am Danish, I think I'll manage to know the difference between the country I was born and raised in and the country were a lot of my friends are from.

Denmark is a tax haven for holding companies.

Re: Denmark: No aid for companies which pay out dividends or are reg. in tax havens

#282
post #215
post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I strongly doubt it. The corporate tax provisions are stricter than most developed economies. All indexes I've seen have Denmark pretty far down tax haven friendliness. Genuinely curious on your source.

There is a type of company structure similar to a limited partnership, but where the ownership was anonymous: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kommanditselskab That was apparently misused by a relatively small companies abroad, where passing profits through this company would keep the information from the right authorities. Not really sure what happened with the case, new rulesets were applied to combat potential abuse.…

That's not what I am talking about though. I am talking about the zero tax rate for holdning companies. it's an active strategy by the Danish government.

Re: Denmark: No aid for companies which pay out dividends or are reg. in tax havens

#283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure who you're replying to. I didn't mention suing anyone or any idea of wage theft.

You suggested paying a dividend was similar to paying employees. When throwaway2048 challenged this, you brought up stock-based compensation. Surely if such compensation (including dividends) was an obligation in the same way as wages, then the employee would have some recourse when it's interrupted. In other words, they could sue.

> ...if such compensation (including dividends) was an obligation...

But I don't think it's an obligation. Not sure where you're reading that from what I said.

Sock compensation is often discretionary, and dividend payments as well. Not an obligation.

Re: Denmark: No aid for companies which pay out dividends or are reg. in tax havens

#284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's only ironic if you're prone to mixing up nationalities. 1. Denmark is a country in Scandinavia where they speak Danish . It's not a tax haven and it is not the country where they speak Dutch. 2. That country is called the Netherlands and that country has a tax evasion scheme named after it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_Sandwich

I am Danish, I think I'll manage to know the difference between the country I was born and raised in and the country were a lot of my friends are from. Denmark is a tax haven for holding companies.

And I am Danish too. If Denmark is indeed a tax haven it should be fairly easy for you to document that, right?

Re: Denmark: No aid for companies which pay out dividends or are reg. in tax havens

#285
post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I strongly doubt it. The corporate tax provisions are stricter than most developed economies. All indexes I've seen have Denmark pretty far down tax haven friendliness. Genuinely curious on your source.

Not for holding companies. It's a well known secret and is a way for the Danish government to lure in large international holdning companies. No sure why people are downvoting me. I'm Danish and I do know the tax system pretty well.

It's probably because you're calling Denmark a tax haven without providing any documentation? Denmark is not recognised as a tax haven by any country (that I'm aware of). I'm willing to learn something new, but you are not providing any support for your statements.

Re: Denmark: No aid for companies which pay out dividends or are reg. in tax havens

#286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not for holding companies. It's a well known secret and is a way for the Danish government to lure in large international holdning companies. No sure why people are downvoting me. I'm Danish and I do know the tax system pretty well.

It's probably because you're calling Denmark a tax haven without providing any documentation? Denmark is not recognised as a tax haven by any country (that I'm aware of). I'm willing to learn something new, but you are not providing any support for your statements.

That doesn't mean you should assume I don't know the difference between Denmark and Holland.

Tax haven is not an official title for any country or place but a definition and Denmark is by definition a tax haven for holdning companies.

Just because it's not well known doesn't mean it's not a tax haven. That word is quite ambiguous. Most countries have some sort of setup to attract foreign investments.

"Back in 1999, Denmark allowed Danish companies to hold shares in foreign subsidiaries. In 2009, the Danish government enacted the Danish Tax Reform Act allowing international corporate investors to use Denmark as a holding company jurisdiction. The 2009 Danish Tax Reform law improved Danish participation exemptions applied to dividends and capital gains realized on the transfer of shares by abolishing the holding periods of one year and three years respectively.

Another benefit is the ability to receive dividend payments subject to little or no taxes. Other tax haven jurisdictions often do not provide such benefits. The condition for a no tax status on dividends is that an entity owns at least 25% of the Danish company.

PepsiCo and other large international companies have established over 500 Danish holding companies over the past few years. PepsiCo Investments, the PepsiCo Danish Holding Company, is managed from a small Copenhagen office by one tax lawyer. Such international demand created a dynamic holding company industry in Denmark.

In essence, Denmark allows the registration of completely tax-free holding companies. Dutch holding companies can receive income from numerous different sources and simply pass them to other corporations in different countries. This is why holding companies are globally famous for their tax free funds “pass through” capabilities."

https://www.offshorecompany.com/company/denmark-holding/

Re: Denmark: No aid for companies which pay out dividends or are reg. in tax havens

#287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's probably because you're calling Denmark a tax haven without providing any documentation? Denmark is not recognised as a tax haven by any country (that I'm aware of). I'm willing to learn something new, but you are not providing any support for your statements.

That doesn't mean you should assume I don't know the difference between Denmark and Holland. Tax haven is not an official title for any country or place but a definition and Denmark is by definition a tax haven for holdning companies. Just because it's not well known doesn't mean it's not a tax haven. That word is quite ambiguous. Most countries have some sort of setup to attract foreign investments. "Back in 1999, D…

And then you go on to provide me a source that calls Denmark Dutch multiple times... Måske du lige skulle læse det igennem du copy-paster?

Tax havens are places that are recognised as such. It's not any country with a tax loophole. There are plenty of lists of tax havens and Denmark is not on those lists. That, of course, doesn't make Denmark immune to having tax loopholes, but it's just a bad premise for any discussion to volunteer your own special definition that contradicts most of the facts out there.

Re: Denmark: No aid for companies which pay out dividends or are reg. in tax havens

#288
post #262
post #244

This submission broke HN's rules by editorializing the title. Doing that eventually causes your account to lose submission privileges on HN, so please don't do that. " Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize. " https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Cherry-picking a detail from an article and making that the title is editorializing—in fact it's the leading form…

What if the cherry picked detail is the interesting detail worth discussing on hn?

The official answer is: then it will make a particularly interesting comment to add to the thread.

The unofficial messy answer is: sometimes, let's say 10% of the time, there are exceptions.

Re: Denmark: No aid for companies which pay out dividends or are reg. in tax havens

#289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't mean you should assume I don't know the difference between Denmark and Holland. Tax haven is not an official title for any country or place but a definition and Denmark is by definition a tax haven for holdning companies. Just because it's not well known doesn't mean it's not a tax haven. That word is quite ambiguous. Most countries have some sort of setup to attract foreign investments. "Back in 1999, D…

And then you go on to provide me a source that calls Denmark Dutch multiple times... Måske du lige skulle læse det igennem du copy-paster? Tax havens are places that are recognised as such. It's not any country with a tax loophole. There are plenty of lists of tax havens and Denmark is not on those lists. That, of course, doesn't make Denmark immune to having tax loopholes, but it's just a bad premise for any discuss…

Please read the actual source.

Here is another

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/wealth-management/1215...

It's obvious you don't know Danish tax law. Let's just leave it at that.

Re: Denmark: No aid for companies which pay out dividends or are reg. in tax havens

#290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You suggested paying a dividend was similar to paying employees. When throwaway2048 challenged this, you brought up stock-based compensation. Surely if such compensation (including dividends) was an obligation in the same way as wages, then the employee would have some recourse when it's interrupted. In other words, they could sue.

> ...if such compensation (including dividends) was an obligation... But I don't think it's an obligation. Not sure where you're reading that from what I said. Sock compensation is often discretionary, and dividend payments as well. Not an obligation.

Then, Like I said, its nothing like salary, which is absolutely an obligation.
Post reply on HN