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

France has approved a digital services tax despite threats of retaliation by US

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 501 posts

Re: France has approved a digital services tax despite threats of retaliation by US

#441

Post by harry8 »

bko wrote: post #15

I never understood the logic behind taxing large internet businesses. The idea behind taxes is that you use some public resource and you pay for that service. You own a home in a neighborhood, you pay property tax that funds the schools. You drive a car, you pay gasoline tax that funds the streets. You hire workers locally, you pay the tax to pay back all the contributions public institutions made to adding the skill…

Totally. Don't tax them. They don't need it.

The don't need property rights either. No legal redress. Access to the economy enabled by having a stable, democratic system? Well they probably should only be allowed to have the customer base they would have if life expectancy was around 50 due to cholera and so on and that part of disposable income that remains when everyone is sick all the time. Contracts aren't binding to their counter-parties. And they are banned from hiring anyone who is educated. They can treat their own water, and put in their own plumbing systems, based on market rates for doing that themselves.

But then how do you deal with national defence contributions because obviously not being invaded is kind of useful. National parks? Well while the company doesn't use them, the people who make up the company do and user pays can't work for that. But even if individual people don't use them, they get to live in a place where people are happier because national parks exist.

Do I need to go on with this? They literally make zero profit and in fact can't exist at all without tax being paid.

Tax cheats just want to cheat the system and make someone else pay while they reap the benefits. Cheating is cheating.

Re: France has approved a digital services tax despite threats of retaliation by US

#442

Post by harry8 »

liberte82 wrote: post #76
ElKrist wrote: post #21

The US administration is presenting the new tax as if it was specifically targeted to US companies because of their origin. Like a tariff. It is not the case at all. Yes the biggest tech giants that do not pay enough tax are mostly from the US (also other companies from other countries are affected too) But it is not because they are from the US that this new tax is created. It is simply because they don't pay enough…

The US is big into tariffs these days, why do they complain when the same treatment is applied in return?

The US loves a cheat.

Home town legal decisions are the norm. Gerrymandered electorates are the majority. The american exceptionalism of we can but you can't is openly embraced by all in politics and the media. Regulatory capture is the norm. Revolving door Washington lobbyists is not even a story anymore.

Cheating is an absolute way of life nowadays. Which is really, really strange because it seems to me that most Americans really don't like cheats and cheating. Brady.

Re: France has approved a digital services tax despite threats of retaliation by US

#443

Post by xbmcuser »

bko wrote: post #15

I never understood the logic behind taxing large internet businesses. The idea behind taxes is that you use some public resource and you pay for that service. You own a home in a neighborhood, you pay property tax that funds the schools. You drive a car, you pay gasoline tax that funds the streets. You hire workers locally, you pay the tax to pay back all the contributions public institutions made to adding the skill…

If Amazon is so efficient it will still be competitive against local retailers when the local retailers and Amazon have to pay the same sales tax. Which actually is not Amazon or Local retailers paying but the customers they just have to collect it.

Re: France has approved a digital services tax despite threats of retaliation by US

#444

Post by rorykoehler »

wonder_er wrote: post #345
beowulfey wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't understand it because it is strictly a philosophical difference of yours. You operate in the paradigm of taxation == fees or penalties imposed on people and corporations by the goverment. It is seen as strictly a negative thing. The opposite idea is that taxation is an /investment/ by corporations and individuals, directed and designed by the government, to allow society to keep running smoothly. You may no…

I don't "feel" forced into paying them. I AM forced into paying them. > no one is able to look past the fact that they feel forced into paying them. This is rather dismissive of a broad category of valid complaints a group feels. The US Government uses tax revenue to fund many things, but some of those things are horrifically misguided wars and a global military empire. is that global military empire an investment? I…

Whether you feel forced or not has little to do with whether you are forced to or not. I don't feel forced to even though I am because I understand and appreciate what I get in return. I would want to pay for these things anyways if taxation didn't exist.

I agree on the war front but that can only be changed from within and would exist with taxation or not only without taxation it would be a far more violent experience for you.

Re: France has approved a digital services tax despite threats of retaliation by US

#445

Post by metta2uall »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #430
ripdog wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those large tech companies can make money in France because the french government provides all that is necessary for a free, fair and functioning market. How could Google make money in France if there was no french police force, education system, market regulation, court system, contract enforcement? All money made on the white market in any country is facilitated by that government, and taxes are paid on all profits…

Those large tech companies can make money in France because the french government provides all that is necessary for a free, fair and functioning market. Staying out of the way? They can do that for free.

Capitalist governments do not stay out of the way - take a look at the volume of corporate law. (That's in addition to healthcare, education, policing, building industry regulation, etc)

Re: France has approved a digital services tax despite threats of retaliation by US

#446

Post by metta2uall »

opportune wrote: post #195

Part of me originally wanted the US to retaliate since this theoretically threatens my paycheck, but a 3% tax on revenue generated within the country is pretty low and seems reasonable considering how ineffective taxing profits is due to loopholes. I really don't think it's sour grapes so much as trying to address the Irish/Luxembourgish tax schemes

Given how much after-salary profits the big tech companies make do you really need to be worried about your paycheck?

Re: France has approved a digital services tax despite threats of retaliation by US

#447

Post by romwell »

azinman2 wrote: post #116
romwell wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah right, who'd even notice Alibaba? FYI, Alibaba's revenue (~56B) exceeds that of Ebay (~10B), Uber (~11B), Expedia (~11b), Twitter (~3b), Groupon (~3v) and Tripadvisor (~2b) combined . Yes, Amazon/Apple/Microsoft/Google/Verizon are still huge. But it doesn't mean there aren't other big fish out there.

But what’s Alibaba’s revenue from France? I suspect the proportion is quite low compared to American companies.

What's Verizon's revenue from France? I suspect the proportion is quite low compared to Chinese companies.

Re: France has approved a digital services tax despite threats of retaliation by US

#448

Post by jadel »

kemiller wrote: post #440
fuzz4lyfe wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Markets exist without governments and often despite them (see the illegal drug trade for an example) but I have never seen a successful government without markets. You may have the causation backwards.

Black markets exist, but they pay a different sort of tax: the muscle and violent losses required to keep their property. Lawful governments do that better, and that’s what taxes pay for. Google and Facebook have access to the legal system in France, not to mention the wires that run the internet itself. You can argue about what the optimal taxation scheme is but arguing that it’s not necessary, or that the internet…

Yeah, I must say that I have never really understood that idea. In times of increased productivity it seem like you would want to tax the machines, the markets and the networks. Now it is people that are paying for housing, education and internet connections while finance, insurance and tech companies makes profits. Putting a huge burden on the one thing that doesn't scale, the input. Rather than what does, the output.

Re: France has approved a digital services tax despite threats of retaliation by US

#449

Post by tryptophan »

beowulfey wrote: post #248
bko wrote: post #15

I never understood the logic behind taxing large internet businesses. The idea behind taxes is that you use some public resource and you pay for that service. You own a home in a neighborhood, you pay property tax that funds the schools. You drive a car, you pay gasoline tax that funds the streets. You hire workers locally, you pay the tax to pay back all the contributions public institutions made to adding the skill…

You don't understand it because it is strictly a philosophical difference of yours. You operate in the paradigm of taxation == fees or penalties imposed on people and corporations by the goverment. It is seen as strictly a negative thing. The opposite idea is that taxation is an /investment/ by corporations and individuals, directed and designed by the government, to allow society to keep running smoothly. You may no…

>It is seen as strictly a negative thing.

Negative because of magnitude. I don't think anything except for the most die-hard libertarians want 0 taxes. Stop unnecessary staw-manning.

>The opposite idea is that taxation is an /investment/ by corporations and individuals, directed and designed by the government,

People dislike it because it is seen as a terrible investment. ROI is extremely low on tax dollars. There is just no incentive for efficiency. Arguably stuff like medicare and social security is just pure consumption. 0 wealth is generated there. Stuff that can be classified as investment takes like >...to allow society to keep running smoothly.

Many argue that most of what the government spends money on is unnecessary. The amount of money absolutely necessary to keep things running smoothly is thought to be less than what is spent now. The budget could be cut in half, many people would be mad or sad, but its not like the country would fall apart. At its core, all a government __needs as a bare minimum to be classified as such__ is to provide is military protection and a legal system, because those things are what government cannot be defined without.

>The difficulty for most Americans is seeing taxation as a long term benefit rather than as a penalty.

You are making an assumption that tax = good and More tax = more good. This isn't a "difficulty in seeing" for those that disagree. Perhaps people who disagree aren't dumb or have the misfortune of not being blessed with enlightenment such that they agree with you.

Money transferred to the government doesn't become magically different or something. There is no 'moral correctness' in transferring money to the government. It just takes agency away from individual citizens and grants it to a bunch of people who don't care at all about losing a few billion here and there.

Re: France has approved a digital services tax despite threats of retaliation by US

#450

Post by asdfasgasdgasdg »

bko wrote: post #15

I never understood the logic behind taxing large internet businesses. The idea behind taxes is that you use some public resource and you pay for that service. You own a home in a neighborhood, you pay property tax that funds the schools. You drive a car, you pay gasoline tax that funds the streets. You hire workers locally, you pay the tax to pay back all the contributions public institutions made to adding the skill…

> The idea behind taxes is that you use some public resource and you pay for that service.

IMO this is a fundamental misapprehension. The idea behind taxes isn't to compensate the state for resources consumed. The idea is that the state can tax you, so it does, to use that money for whatever its priorities are.

This is kind of a "purpose of a system is what it does" viewpoint on taxation, but I think it's also the most accurate. If you look at it from any other perspective, you're going to see weird inconsistencies like rich people paying more than they consume, deductions that don't match corresponding benefits provided to the public, etc.

Post reply on HN