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

More Than 100 Universities and Colleges Included in Offshore Leaks Database

icij.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 71 posts

Re: More Than 100 Universities and Colleges Included in Offshore Leaks Database

#41

Post by burkaman »

DoofusOfDeath wrote: post #29
ThomPete wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the legality is set up so that it's only those who have a lot of money who can do this. This is the problem. I am all for not paying more taxes than necessary but it should be the same for everyone not just for the few with money to pay the lawyers and pay the fees.

Wouldn't that be an argument against the legislature, or perhaps lobbyists, rather than against the nonprofits stuck with the law?

Laws are limits, not instructions. You shouldn't drive exactly the speed limit when it's pouring rain.

Re: More Than 100 Universities and Colleges Included in Offshore Leaks Database

#42

Post by ThomPete »

hust6 wrote: post #36
ThomPete wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the legality is set up so that it's only those who have a lot of money who can do this. This is the problem. I am all for not paying more taxes than necessary but it should be the same for everyone not just for the few with money to pay the lawyers and pay the fees.

It's not a problem to me. If I have spent 30 years loosing blood, sweet and tears to gain advantage in an unfair world, I am going to defend that advantage. Your view is unrealistic because you don't want that advantage, forget about doing anything to get it, and pretend people who have the advantage can be tamed. Like turning lions into deer. Never going to happen.

I am not sure what view you referring to. I am not talking about what is realistic I am answering the parent.

Re: More Than 100 Universities and Colleges Included in Offshore Leaks Database

#43

Post by yorwba »

jiggunjer wrote: post #39
mirimir wrote: post #6

I don't see Caltech or MIT. Interesting.

I don't see Europe. Where are they hiding their money?

I don't think European universities tend to have large funds that they could evade taxes on, since they are usually funded by taxes.

Re: More Than 100 Universities and Colleges Included in Offshore Leaks Database

#44

Post by ringaroundthetx »

trgv wrote: post #35
DoofusOfDeath wrote: post #23

I don't really understand the premise of these articles. If an organization is working within the legal confines of the relevant tax systems, exactly what are they guilty of? Being the best possible stewards of their donations?

Universities are supposed to be morally upright. Even if they can't be prosecuted for this, it's still news that they're cheating. Additionally, I think there's a really important difference between following the law and being a moral person (or a moral university, or a moral corporation). The law might approximate our conception of morality, but it doesn't cover it completely. There is an enormous grey area of activ…

Which moral argument are you subscribed to here again?

Did you read the article? The ICIJ notices that these are registered as charities in the states which means they are tax exempt except when the come across things that trigger UBIT. UBIT is an automatic 40% tax. University endowments are able to invest everywhere tax free, except when some debt financed transactions trigger UBIT for all tax exempt shareholders.

UBIT wasn't created to ensnare university endowments in scenarios where founders and board members of independent companies happened to get an exit through debt financing.

This is a circumstance where you adapt. Avoid that misapplication of tax by registering a business in another country and investing in the same thing through it.

Re: More Than 100 Universities and Colleges Included in Offshore Leaks Database

#45

Post by ringaroundthetx »

Declanomous wrote: post #27
fovc wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The only time university endowments pay taxes is when they invest in debt-financed financial firms such as private equity funds and hedge funds. These investments are considered a business activity unrelated to their tax-exempt missions."

Somehow that part of the article didn't click for me. The NYT article linked in the following sentence does a great job of explaining why they are being taxed if you don't have a finance background.

Yeah I think ICIJ's outrage-bait here is a swing and a miss.

UBIT 40% tax on charities was not created to hit university endowments. This is a reason to use an offshore entity.

Re: More Than 100 Universities and Colleges Included in Offshore Leaks Database

#46

Post by ringaroundthetx »

icc97 wrote: post #16

The UK's offenders: * Oxford * Cambridge * The University of Law Employee Benefit Trust

It is very presumptuous to say offender.

Which moral argument do you think they are undermining, and what proof do you have of that?

A registered entity in a Caribbean nation is just as benign as a registered entity in a United State.

Re: More Than 100 Universities and Colleges Included in Offshore Leaks Database

#47

Post by reactor4 »

jayess wrote: post #2

These "leaks" are annoying. They just give you a page with virtually no information, just a chart showing some connection. Release everything. Don't insult my intelligence by deciding for me what to release.

offshore leaks database: https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/

Re: More Than 100 Universities and Colleges Included in Offshore Leaks Database

#48

Post by forapurpose »

jayess wrote: post #28
Jedd wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're not really deciding for you what to release, since you have nothing to release. Is your concern that their interpretation of the source material is inaccurate, or that you're being intentionally misled or occluded? The ICIJ has been around for two decades, and their credibility is robust. I don't think they're likely to be making claims like this without access to substantial evidence.

It’s not that I distrust them, it’s just that I’m a lawyer, operations, and finance guy. The source documents would be extremely interesting to me. Instead I get a meaningless graph that tells me almost nothing. If there’s one thing I’ve learned in personal experiences with journalists is that they’re just that, journalists. They don’t have expertise in finance, law, or most anything complex. Let the data be open sou…

> They don’t have expertise in finance, law, or most anything complex.

Do you know that?

Also, I certainly wouldn't agree that journalism isn't complex.

Re: More Than 100 Universities and Colleges Included in Offshore Leaks Database

#49

Post by forapurpose »

DoofusOfDeath wrote: post #23

I don't really understand the premise of these articles. If an organization is working within the legal confines of the relevant tax systems, exactly what are they guilty of? Being the best possible stewards of their donations?

Legality isn't the standard of behavior; it's just a minimum. Someone once said right here on HN: "Never forget, the holocaust was legal, slavery was legal, segregation was legal. If you use the state as a metric for ethics you'll end up disappointed." (It was so good, I wrote it down.)

This behavior isn't mass murder or oppression, but failing to pay your share of your communities/nation's bills - which puts more burden on your neighbors / fellow citizens - isn't acceptable to me. 'I can get away with it in court' isn't a good excuse.

Re: More Than 100 Universities and Colleges Included in Offshore Leaks Database

#50

Post by hippich »

seanmccann wrote: post #33

You can incorporate in Delaware to allow shareholders from any US state avoid double taxation. You incorporate (mostly funds) in zero tax countries to allow worldwide investors avoid double taxation. A shareholder of an "offshore" corporation often still pays the taxes in their home country. There's certainly a lot of abuse, but there are valid reasons to own offshore stock.

"You can incorporate in Delaware to allow shareholders from any US state avoid double taxation" - could you please expand on it? Are you talking about corporate tax + dividends tax, or about something else when saying "double taxation"?
Post reply on HN