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

Netflix Posted Biggest-Ever Profit in 2018 and Paid $0 in Income Taxes

itep.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–510 of 512 posts

Re: Netflix Posted Biggest-Ever Profit in 2018 and Paid $0 in Income Taxes

#501

Post by elliekelly »

chimeracoder wrote: post #226
elliekelly wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>There aren't that many politicians to bribe. I think this is really the crux of the issue. If a CEO met with a politician and said "I've talked to all my CEO buddies and if you do XYZ we're all going to make substantial contributions to your campaign and PACs" that's clear-cut bribery and honest services fraud. But if the same CEO hires a lobbyist to say the exact same thing to a politician suddenly it's "free speec…

> But if the same CEO hires a lobbyist to say the exact same thing to a politician suddenly it's "free speech" and we're expected to believe the government can't do anything to reign it in. This is not what happens during lobbying. If you have any concrete evidence of this sort of exchange happening, please report it, since it's a blatant violation of federal law.

It's absolutely how it works: https://www.vox.com/first-person/2017/6/29/15886936/politica...

Re: Netflix Posted Biggest-Ever Profit in 2018 and Paid $0 in Income Taxes

#502

Post by macspoofing »

jayko wrote: post #493
macspoofing wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have evidence of Netflix paying-off corrupt IRS agent, right?

How is an IRS agent a regulator? IRS are just enforcers of regulation.

I interpreted 'regulator' as IRS agent because the discussion is on Netflix tax bill and you talked about some corrupt agents ... but OK, an IRS agent isn't really a regulator ... kind of. The executive branch bureaucracy is tasked with enforcing existing laws (which includes regulating specific domains). Regardless, my actual point stands and you haven't answered that. More specifically 1) what is it that you're actually talking about and 2) do you actually evidence of any impropriety with respect to Netflix' tax bill? Because you are so sure about all those corrupt agents who lined their pockets in order to give Netflix a lighter tax burden.

Re: Netflix Posted Biggest-Ever Profit in 2018 and Paid $0 in Income Taxes

#503

Post by standerman »

tptacek wrote: post #484
standerman wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe most companies can get the results that they want with small, strategic lobbying. It could be both effective and efficient, from an economic standpoint. Why else would organizations like ALEC exist? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Legislative_Exchange_...

Why shouldn't ALEC exist? There is a sizable fraction of our polity that believes in the principles underlying ALEC proposals. Are you upset that those people are organized enough to write model legislation, or are you upset that the countervailing forces in the US don't have something as effective as ALEC? We have the same thing for judges. The conservatives have the Federalist Society. The liberals have the ACS. Bu…

I am not upset. Points 5 and 6 on that article detail what I believe are legitimate criticisms about the lack of transparency in the process and how ALEC is used to bypass what I view as reasonable requirements for lobbying the government.

Re: Netflix Posted Biggest-Ever Profit in 2018 and Paid $0 in Income Taxes

#504

Post by prostoalex »

ericd wrote: post #488
prostoalex wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

During low-inflation years - no. The lenient rates were introduced during high-inflation years. If somebody was pursuing a long-term project spanning over several years (let's say, building a new apartment complex), high punitive tax rates at liquidity time (let's say, 5 years down the road) combined with decreased buying would obliterate any real profitability. The 12-month cut-off window, though, seems completely a…

This is a very interesting point. It seems to me that we should tax capital gains at normal income rates, but only after adjusting the cost basis for inflation. It’s a little insane that we pay tax on the inflation adjustments for TIPs and other supposedly inflation neutral instruments, which all but guarantees that they lose money every year.

Yes, incorporating inflation sets the stage for increasing the capital-gains tax.

I am not sure what the counter-argument to that is, but one thing I can think of is increased complexity of a tax return for an average joe investor, who bought and sold a few funds in his portfolio. Opponents will also likely point that an official measure - CPI - can be manipulated for political purposes.

Re: Netflix Posted Biggest-Ever Profit in 2018 and Paid $0 in Income Taxes

#505

Post by tptacek »

standerman wrote: post #503
tptacek wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why shouldn't ALEC exist? There is a sizable fraction of our polity that believes in the principles underlying ALEC proposals. Are you upset that those people are organized enough to write model legislation, or are you upset that the countervailing forces in the US don't have something as effective as ALEC? We have the same thing for judges. The conservatives have the Federalist Society. The liberals have the ACS. Bu…

I am not upset. Points 5 and 6 on that article detail what I believe are legitimate criticisms about the lack of transparency in the process and how ALEC is used to bypass what I view as reasonable requirements for lobbying the government.

Why would a private organization that exists to write draft legislation need to be open and transparent? The legislation is public when it's proposed, and it's the task of legislators to evaluate it on its merits.

Re: Netflix Posted Biggest-Ever Profit in 2018 and Paid $0 in Income Taxes

#506

Post by joefourier »

airstrike wrote: post #209
joefourier wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gross income isn't taxed, but profits are. However, I do agree that the annual basis of corporate taxation creates odd incentives - if on December 31st a company finishes the year with $10 million in cash, and on January 1st they spend $9 million, they will still pay tax on the $10 million, while if they spent it just a few hours before, they would have just paid tax on $1 million . Estonia's corporate tax system see…

That's not how this works. You pay taxes on what you earn, not on your cash balance. The company will always pay taxes on the $10 million, regardless of when it spends the $9. Also GAAP taxes are different from cash taxes paid to the IRS.

That's absolutely false, otherwise all low-margin businesses would go bankrupt from taxation, and Netflix would have paid taxes on their profits in the above article.

Re: Netflix Posted Biggest-Ever Profit in 2018 and Paid $0 in Income Taxes

#507

Post by brianpgordon »

notahacker wrote: post #420
brianpgordon wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This argument is facile. There's an obvious and clear difference between a person representing their own interests and a person paid by a corporation specifically to advance its interests.

It's not a difference which is easy to legislate without unintended consequences (people's own interests frequently overlap with those of their employer, and most people with informed opinions on the implications of a policy are in employed in areas not unlinked to that policy). What is facile is to argue that a law which simply bans corporations from hiring people describing themselves as lobbyists or government rel…

It would be entirely possible to write campaign finance laws so that organizations like the EFF can only be funded by private donations and not by corporations, if they want to make campaign contributions or run "issue" advertising. I don't really see what unintended consequences you're referring to. The problem with getting corporate money out of politics is that the people getting it wouldn't like that, not that the law would be difficult to craft in a fair way.

Re: Netflix Posted Biggest-Ever Profit in 2018 and Paid $0 in Income Taxes

#508

Post by ericd »

prostoalex wrote: post #504
ericd wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a very interesting point. It seems to me that we should tax capital gains at normal income rates, but only after adjusting the cost basis for inflation. It’s a little insane that we pay tax on the inflation adjustments for TIPs and other supposedly inflation neutral instruments, which all but guarantees that they lose money every year.

Yes, incorporating inflation sets the stage for increasing the capital-gains tax. I am not sure what the counter-argument to that is, but one thing I can think of is increased complexity of a tax return for an average joe investor, who bought and sold a few funds in his portfolio. Opponents will also likely point that an official measure - CPI - can be manipulated for political purposes.

Hm yeah. I'd say that CPI is already manipulated for political purposes. Not sure if this would exacerbate it.

Re: Netflix Posted Biggest-Ever Profit in 2018 and Paid $0 in Income Taxes

#510

Post by blumenko »

JamesBarney wrote: post #492
smsm42 wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the reasons why it makes sense to have different rules for investment income is investment income tax (at least if you're investing in a corporative stock) is a double tax - the corporation you invest in is taxed on its profit (so your income from it is less than it would be) and then your income from it is taxed again. It kinda makes sense that parts of the double tax would be less than the single one. Of cou…

This is only true of dividends. But I don't think it wasn't true of stock buybacks. Also there is plenty of business income that is not double taxed because it isn't run through a C Corp. Then in regards to incentives. We already have interest rates to adjust the knobs of investment versus consumption. Capital gains is just a way to make the tax system less progressive.

Stock buybacks come from profits which are taxed, and those who sell the shares back to the company also have to pay capital gains tax. And S corp income is taxed at personal income rates, not capital gains rates (except for some ridiculous 20% rebates in some situations in the new tax law (but is still higher than capital gains)).
Post reply on HN