Live data from Hacker News

Paradise Papers: Dear Tim Cook

projekte.sueddeutsche.de

481–490 of 817 posts

Re: Paradise Papers: Dear Tim Cook

#481
post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fix can certainly involve appealing to morals and human responsibility. A company is, after all, just a group of people. This should be a very strong tactic considering how liberal Silicon Valley is. The major players preach constantly about progressive ideals, yet fail to do more than the minimum when push comes to shove. My business partner and I purposefully pay normal taxes, avoiding accountants' crazy tax re…

IANAL but it is my understanding that if those tax reduction schemes are legal many companies are legally bound by their stock holders to exploit them, or else be found negligent in their duties.

If companies are duty-bound to act unethically (if legally) for the sake of share holder profits then I think that speaks to a flaw in the system driving these decisions.

Re: Paradise Papers: Dear Tim Cook

#482
post #80

What annoys me the most is that, as a small company, I can't evade from my country tax system. I pay the taxes. All of them, at full rate. But there are these big companies which can afford to create offshore companies/holding just to evade some tax system, and lower their tax rate. So, what? The tax rate of a country is now "artificial", because it will never be applied to all revenues from all companies, because th…

Would you not make use of a tax break even if you taking it harmed your neighbour? Everyone's response would be "It may suck for you that you can't leverage that loophole, but that person is not breaking the law." It's like the difference between claiming mileage vs. claiming vehicle rental/gas for work trips. You're not breaking the law by claiming one over the other, you're leveraging the framework to greater effec…

That’s why the opportunity shouldnt be there. It’s unfair and leads to further concentration of power. In other words it’s anti competitive.

Re: Paradise Papers: Dear Tim Cook

#483
post #8

Dear Herr Krach, thank you for your letter. I think you misunderstand how business works. Apple is a profit seeking corporation. Profits we make, we hope to distribute to our shareholders. Paying taxes is an obligation with which we comply, both to the letter and in spirit. We meet such obligations, but not nilly-willy. Our shareholders would not look kindly upon executives who pay more taxes than necessary. Avoidanc…

Dear Mr. Cook,

how you conduct business at home is obviously between you, the American government, and the American people. I said as much in my original letter. But if you're doing business abroad in Germany, it may serve you well to remember that Germany is not a shareholder economy, but a stakeholder [1] economy. Maximizing shareholder profits is not the only thing a corporation is supposed to care about.

As the German Corporate Government Code states, for example: "The Management Board assumes full responsibility for managing the company in the best interests of the company, meaning that it considers the needs of the shareholders, the employees and other stakeholders, with the objective of sustainable value creation." [2]

Obviously, we're talking about largely unenforceable social norms here, though it raises the question as to whether you're really acting within the spirit of the law. More importantly, where social norms are increasingly bypassed and subverted, statutory change tends to follow. For example, corporate tax avoidance mechanisms have revived discussion about the EU's Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) [3], which you may find considerably less profitable than your current setup.

Equally obviously, such legislation may not pass. But the more aggressively multinational companies pursue tax avoidance schemes, even if perfectly within the letter of the law, the more support legislators will have for enacting statutes that counter such schemes.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Krach (equally fictitiously)

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stakeholder_(corporate)

[2] http://www.dcgk.de/en/code/current-version/management-board....

[3] https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/business/company-tax/c...

Re: Paradise Papers: Dear Tim Cook

#484
post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Companies which parent owner is based in the US. Companies are already paying taxes based on consolidated regime, it is just that they consolidate all entities within a tax jurisdiction. So the concept exists, it could just be extended. 2. You wouldn't have a double taxation. You would apply to companies what the US applies to US individuals. If you have a subsidiary in Germany and paying local taxes of 10, but th…

You still have double taxation because of dividend taxes. The US has one of the highest corporate tax rates already, as a country we’d be far better off making it zero.

Money is taxed every time it changes hands or moves around. When I get my paycheck, I pay taxes on it. Then, when I buy a ham sandwich, the shop owner pays taxes on it. Is that unfair "double taxation?"

Re: Paradise Papers: Dear Tim Cook

#485
post #80

What annoys me the most is that, as a small company, I can't evade from my country tax system. I pay the taxes. All of them, at full rate. But there are these big companies which can afford to create offshore companies/holding just to evade some tax system, and lower their tax rate. So, what? The tax rate of a country is now "artificial", because it will never be applied to all revenues from all companies, because th…

Would you not make use of a tax break even if you taking it harmed your neighbour? Everyone's response would be "It may suck for you that you can't leverage that loophole, but that person is not breaking the law." It's like the difference between claiming mileage vs. claiming vehicle rental/gas for work trips. You're not breaking the law by claiming one over the other, you're leveraging the framework to greater effec…

J.K Rowling, author of the Harry Potter books and who is fairly wealthy has an interesting moral stance on paying tax:

"... I am indebted to the British welfare state; the very one that Mr. Cameron would like to replace with charity handouts. When my life hit rock bottom, that safety net, threadbare though it had become under John Major’s Government, was there to break the fall. I cannot help feeling, therefore, that it would have been contemptible to scarper for the West Indies at the first sniff of a seven-figure royalty cheque. This, if you like, is my notion of patriotism..."

http://www.taxfairness.ca/en/news/j-k-rowling-paying-taxes-a...

Re: Paradise Papers: Dear Tim Cook

#486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think laws are moral. I think that, in a functioning democracy, laws are dictated by whatever views are currently held to be moral by the largest portion of participants in the democracy . Laws are what the largest proportion of people in a pure democracy have agreed is moral. If you think laws are consistently being put into place that don't reflect the morality of the populace, then you have an issue with y…

> I personally do not believe in objective morality. Then why is murder wrong?

Who says it's wrong?

Re: Paradise Papers: Dear Tim Cook

#487
post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Companies which parent owner is based in the US. Companies are already paying taxes based on consolidated regime, it is just that they consolidate all entities within a tax jurisdiction. So the concept exists, it could just be extended. 2. You wouldn't have a double taxation. You would apply to companies what the US applies to US individuals. If you have a subsidiary in Germany and paying local taxes of 10, but th…

You still have double taxation because of dividend taxes. The US has one of the highest corporate tax rates already, as a country we’d be far better off making it zero.

> You still have double taxation because of dividend taxes.

Corporations are distinct from their owners, that's the whole point of a corporation. That's not double taxation, it's single taxation of two separate entities, one of which acts as a liability shield for the other.

> The US has one of the highest corporate tax rates already,

Nominally, but one of the lowest effective corporate tax rates

Re: Paradise Papers: Dear Tim Cook

#488
post #477
post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about the internet? The highway system?

Same thing with the internet. Government spending got us super expensive connections between a handful of universities. Free markets took that and brought it as what we know as the fast, cheap internet to our doors. Although regulations in the telecom/cable/ISP markets are working hard to impede that. Yes, govt made the highways. Did not really repair them afterwards (at least around here) but it was definitely a goo…

What kind of role do you think the government should play? Should we continue to privatize things like prisons? Seems it would be difficult to incentive rehabilitation when prisons are paid per bed filled. On the other side, should we privatize the military? the fire department? the courts? the police? why not?

Re: Paradise Papers: Dear Tim Cook

#489
post #281
post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They aren't, for the most part, doing anything illegal though. They are using the existing laws to their best advantage. The fix for this can't be trying to appeal to their morals. It would have to be something else that just limits the legal choices. Edit: If you disagree, are you saying that shaming them into not doing this solely on some moral compass is the right fix? Does that scale?

The fix can certainly involve appealing to morals and human responsibility. A company is, after all, just a group of people. This should be a very strong tactic considering how liberal Silicon Valley is. The major players preach constantly about progressive ideals, yet fail to do more than the minimum when push comes to shove. My business partner and I purposefully pay normal taxes, avoiding accountants' crazy tax re…

Can you seriously look at the state of politics and business and tax evasion in 2017 and really believe most executives, even in Silicon Valley, are susceptible to "moral persuasion"?

If they were, they would already be acting in the way you think they should.

Re: Paradise Papers: Dear Tim Cook

#490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you not make use of a tax break even if you taking it harmed your neighbour? Everyone's response would be "It may suck for you that you can't leverage that loophole, but that person is not breaking the law." It's like the difference between claiming mileage vs. claiming vehicle rental/gas for work trips. You're not breaking the law by claiming one over the other, you're leveraging the framework to greater effec…

That’s why the opportunity shouldnt be there. It’s unfair and leads to further concentration of power. In other words it’s anti competitive.

I do agree with this. Opportunities shouldn't be there unfairly. If one person should be able to leverage an opportunity, in my mind, so should everyone. In that sense, I'm currently in favour of the basic income strategy being piloted in Sweden right now. I would like to see everyone on an equal playing field. But that said, in the meantime I'm going to leverage every tool I have access to, just as you should and everyone else should.
Post reply on HN