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

Netflix Europe offices raided in tax fraud probe

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 366 posts

Re: Netflix Europe offices raided in tax fraud probe

#351

Post by scotty79 »

vlovich123 wrote: post #229
lotsofpulp wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>So my effective tax rate on consumption is indexed on my ability to hide my assets? Where are you getting this from? Sales tax has nothing to do with one's assets. Also, land value taxes make hiding assets moot, since all real assets have to be stored on land. Of course, copyright protections would need to be reformed to be for far shorter durations of time. >Maybe my household LLC should buy all my groceries while…

> Where are you getting this from? Sales tax has nothing to do with one's assets Earlier you said > And poorer people are automatically exempted from tax since the power law formula parameters be set to slowly ramp up I too am very confused on how you envision this sales tax working where it's variable in some way that poor people don't get the tax but rich people do so I understand why OP is asking about asset track…

Personally I wouldn't do the spending tracking for individuals to decide tax rates just because it's complex and perhaps to intrusive.

I'd go with same tax rates for everybody, but tax credits for useful activities. Since being a poor consumer is useful activity because those pay most attention to what they buy I'd be just giving people tax credit for existing and possibly for working if I wanted to incentivise that. Since purchase tax for individual consumers should be collected and paid by the sellers to save the individuals the burden of it and to ensure compliance then the best form of tax credit for consumers is just cashed given them directly from the government. Some for existing some possibly to supplement their salaries if they work. There's some risk that they won't spend it all to pay for their purchase tax but this can be forgiven as it'll mostly happen for the very poorest.

Re: Netflix Europe offices raided in tax fraud probe

#352

Post by Dracophoenix »

avidiax wrote: post #306
tokinonagare wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a company is doing business here, the actual location of file is irrelevant. Also when the government is really motivated, he can arrested the founders or executives directly (Pavel Durov). Which is what they should do to Netflix execs if they are doing business illegally.

That sounds like a pretty poor precedent when e.g. Russia or China raids the local office of a social media company to get data on a dissident.

This situation already happened with X/Twitter when the Brazilian Supreme Court attempted to compel Elon & co to disclose the social media accounts of alleged rioters. Unfortunately, it seems few people learn from even recent history.

Re: Netflix Europe offices raided in tax fraud probe

#353

Post by scotty79 »

mort96 wrote: post #347
scotty79 wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also don't expect nothing other from thief then continuing to steal. I also expect thieves to be protective of their own assets. I'm just saying they are still thieves and any outrage in their name is misplaced. Screw the French when they are robbed for the benefit of other countries, because they steal from other countries using their public companies as well.

If you are criticising markets in general and capitalism's tendency of bigger companies buying up smaller companies then I understand and agree with you. If you are criticising France in particular then I don't understand what you think the problem is.

I think I take special offence to government owned company doing that.

Re: Netflix Europe offices raided in tax fraud probe

#354

Post by lotsofpulp »

scotty79 wrote: post #351
vlovich123 wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Where are you getting this from? Sales tax has nothing to do with one's assets Earlier you said > And poorer people are automatically exempted from tax since the power law formula parameters be set to slowly ramp up I too am very confused on how you envision this sales tax working where it's variable in some way that poor people don't get the tax but rich people do so I understand why OP is asking about asset track…

Personally I wouldn't do the spending tracking for individuals to decide tax rates just because it's complex and perhaps to intrusive. I'd go with same tax rates for everybody, but tax credits for useful activities. Since being a poor consumer is useful activity because those pay most attention to what they buy I'd be just giving people tax credit for existing and possibly for working if I wanted to incentivise that.…

How is it complex or intrusive? We’re almost already completely there via various electronic payment methods linked to each individuals’ tax ID#.

You would no longer have to give out your tax ID# to employers or customers. The electronic payment company (which should be a government utility, but that’s a different conversation) simply reports your purchases, just like we do with various 1099/W-2 forms right now.

Re: Netflix Europe offices raided in tax fraud probe

#355

Post by lotsofpulp »

scotty79 wrote: post #338
lotsofpulp wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A flat sales tax rate is regressive. I don’t see a reason to give rich people that benefit. Roughly speaking, the effects of consumption are not linear. A private jet, yacht, and large and heavy vehicles are going to consume much more public goods (including the environment) than cheaper goods.

You can skew the tax by giving more tax credit to the poor. Also those are not only taxes on consumption but every purchase. Yacht might be too cheap in comparison of resources used but rich don't just buy yahts, they buy entire companies.

The power law formula already skews the tax rate. There’s no need to further skew it with tax credits or other complications. If you want to adjust tax rates, simply modify the curve of the power law formula so that a given level of spending is taxed a lower or higher rate.

Re: Netflix Europe offices raided in tax fraud probe

#356

Post by scotty79 »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #354
scotty79 wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I wouldn't do the spending tracking for individuals to decide tax rates just because it's complex and perhaps to intrusive. I'd go with same tax rates for everybody, but tax credits for useful activities. Since being a poor consumer is useful activity because those pay most attention to what they buy I'd be just giving people tax credit for existing and possibly for working if I wanted to incentivise that.…

How is it complex or intrusive? We’re almost already completely there via various electronic payment methods linked to each individuals’ tax ID#. You would no longer have to give out your tax ID# to employers or customers. The electronic payment company (which should be a government utility, but that’s a different conversation) simply reports your purchases, just like we do with various 1099/W-2 forms right now.

> How is it complex or intrusive?

You'd have to have huge database of what every individual bought ever. How many beers, how many condoms per month they purchase. Or at least how many times they were making purchases in sex shop, liquor store, marihuana dispensary.

Currently your payments as a customer aren't bound to your TAX is if you don't specifically opt into it and you have no reason to do that if you don't have a company.

That's increase in a intrusiveness many would strongly oppose.

You can of course compromise and base your tax progression only on the sum of large purchases that are being registered already like houses and cars and investments.

But there's still issue of charging the correct tax if you don't connect consumer with their tax id on every purchase.

I think that companies that sell directly to consumers should collect purchase tax of consumer and pay it. And the rate should be the same for all consumers. To award consumers tax credits government just could give them cash directly that will come back to the government in the form of purchase tax that consumers pay (to sellers or through payment processors that transfer it to the government).

You can still punish the rich by reducing their tax credits progressively with how much assets such as cars, real estate and investments they own.

Re: Netflix Europe offices raided in tax fraud probe

#357

Post by lacy_tinpot »

lomase wrote: post #340
lacy_tinpot wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And other places don’t understand the sheer amount of wealth and freedom other people have. "It costs a lot of money to look this cheap" and San Francisco spends billions to look that cheap btw. Especially Europe. Europeans don’t even seem to understand how large America is, which is why so few have passports.

America, the land of the free... the place where I could not even walk at night because the streets were full of homless people.

Just carry a gun.

Self-defense is an absolute right unlike other places.

Re: Netflix Europe offices raided in tax fraud probe

#358

Post by scotty79 »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #355
scotty79 wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can skew the tax by giving more tax credit to the poor. Also those are not only taxes on consumption but every purchase. Yacht might be too cheap in comparison of resources used but rich don't just buy yahts, they buy entire companies.

The power law formula already skews the tax rate. There’s no need to further skew it with tax credits or other complications. If you want to adjust tax rates, simply modify the curve of the power law formula so that a given level of spending is taxed a lower or higher rate.

Only of you have something to feed into the power formula and you don't unless you collect data more personal than what people are used to having collected.

Some people even object to paying with cards today because they don't want their transactions to be tied together to their identity.

So alternatives to power formula that achieve similar effect in different ways might be worth considering.

Re: Netflix Europe offices raided in tax fraud probe

#359

Post by dennis_jeeves2 »

jaimsam wrote: post #89
I_am_tiberius wrote: post #85

I know I'm likely alone in this opinion, but corporate income tax seems like a poorly designed tax to me. Why should companies pay taxes in a year with high profits, even if they face losses for the next ten years? Why should I pay corporate income tax when dividends and income are taxed anyway? Corporate income tax also seems to heavily influence business strategies as a consequence, which wasn't its intended purpos…

A lot of words to say: taxation is theft.

Correct. There is no 'right' way to tax.

Re: Netflix Europe offices raided in tax fraud probe

#360

Post by ExoticPearTree »

isodev wrote: post #278
ExoticPearTree wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but you can hire anyone as an administrator and promise them a whole of money if they end up having issues with the law. I would hire homeless people to “run” the company.

A homeless person wouldn’t qualify as they don’t have a fixed address which is mandatory. Ultimately, if you really have bad intentions, you find a way. It’s a question of risk and responsibility if you want to put yourself in such a position or not.

Actually, in many countries, homeless people have IDs with their last address on. Having a home and having an ID with an address on it are two different things.
Post reply on HN