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

Paradise Papers: Dear Tim Cook

projekte.sueddeutsche.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 817 posts

Re: Paradise Papers: Dear Tim Cook

#61

Post by dontreact »

wjnc wrote: post #41
bauerd wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what your argument is. Is it (a) that tax avoidance is morally justified, (b) morally justified only in the business context or (c) not of concern, because the business and the moral are two separate contexts?

The second one: Taxes are not moral for a corporation, they are a cost and a compliance concern. A world where even tax seeking corporations do not hold tax offices to the letter of the law and the deals they make is a lot more messy than one where corporations follow a clear line: min(Tax | Law abiding). Governments should fix this. I would call this the Peter Drucker way of looking at this. Morality (let's call it…

I no longer believe that it's possible for a single government to fix this. There is too much money in the game, the tax codes of multiple countries interact in too many complex ways, and I've already lived through multiple such tax loophole games being shut down by governments (most recently the double irish) only for new ones to crop up. I believe we will _never_ see change on this issue unless at least 1 large multinational steps up to the plate to help in spotting/closing loopholes. We need to, as citizens (or maybe as employees if applicable), try to pressure the ever fewer and ever larger corporations to assist in this.

Re: Paradise Papers: Dear Tim Cook

#62

Post by wjnc »

barrkel wrote: post #24
wjnc wrote: 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…

So, should Apple start selling cigarettes if that raises the profit rate? Perhaps move into prostitution in countries where it is legal? Legality is a red herring.

Apple could certainly do that. Prostitution is legal in many jurisdication. They can go for any market they want. But in the Peter Drucker-line of the argument, that is a false flag.

This is a nice example of philosophy of law. Usually morality and legality overlap pretty much and follow each other over time. In this case (tax) morality and legality seem to grow apart over time without anyone fixing this. Since governments make the rules, I propose let governments fix the rules.

The aspect of acting responsibly asks firms for something else. Act responsibly within what you (as a firm) normally do. I for one cannot understand the minds of people within the cigarette-industry. The firm I work for invests many billions for customers (insurance) and has a firm line: no guns, no tobacco. I guess no oil is just too hard at the moment, although I have a feeling in a few years things could (should imho!) be different.

Re: Paradise Papers: Dear Tim Cook

#64

Post by mattmanser »

hiisukun wrote: post #30

I have nothing against companies minimising their taxes in legal ways. I understand the various incentives at play, and it makes quite some sense - all parties concerned appear to be acting predictably. However: I do take issue with companies minimising their tax in ways that are not legal, but appear legal unless discovered. I haven't the time or knowledge of various countries' tax laws to discover which is the case…

In the UK, for example, you have to register any tax avoidance scheme that you're using (as an individual at least).

If the HMRC then look into that tax scheme and deem it against the rules, you pay the tax, but without penalty.

As I understand it, if you don't register the scheme and you are found to be using the previously grey-area avoidance scheme, then you get done for tax evasion.

That's how it's supposed to work at least, but companies seem to get sweetheart deals in these circumstances.

Re: Paradise Papers: Dear Tim Cook

#65

Post by DoctorPenguin »

That really hurt to read. What I get from this article is: "I use apple products every day and now I feel bad for using them. But I won't stop anyways because who cares really. Please do anything to make your company less profitable so I can feel better again."

Re: Paradise Papers: Dear Tim Cook

#66

Post by jitbit »

While I do agree with the point that "govs should fix taxes, not corporations"... Still.

It's a fact that (at least in the EU where I live) the majority of tax burden ends up on small companies - mom & pop shops, little bakeries etc. Who simply can't afford these global tax avoidance tricks (or can't use them because they're "local")

Not that this is wrong or right, just a fact you can't argue with. I run a small software shop in the EU (4 ppl) I know what I'm talking about.

Re: Paradise Papers: Dear Tim Cook

#67

Post by dontreact »

icebraining wrote: post #52
jacquesm wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dear Tim, You don't understand how shares work. Shareholders can only benefit from shares in two ways: through speculation about the share price or through dividends. I'm kind of disappointed that I'd have to explain to a man of your stature that money that Apple parks abroad will not benefit the shareholders except in the most indirect ways. If Apple brought home their overseas funds then it would benefit the US and…

Most cash "parked" abroad is being invested in stocks and other financial instruments - and much of it in the US - not kept in a checking bank account. In fact, Apple's "Irish money" is managed by an Apple subsidiary in Reno, Nevada, and is invested in all kinds of assets in the US.

Wow. And then they use the returns here? This sounds like money laundering (even if it technically isn't).

Re: Paradise Papers: Dear Tim Cook

#68

Post by sillysaurus3 »

jacquesm wrote: post #37
wjnc wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dear Jacques (i'll stop with the game now ;) - I really emphatise with the social responsibility part of the story. The game Apple is playing with stored cash abroad is abject. Nobody is profiting from that. But we can agree that it's not the nature of a corporation to pay more taxes than necessary? If people offer you crazy deals: agree. Governments should coordinate not to make crazy offers and perhaps even tit-for…

The social responsibility part is what it is all about. If corporations use their legal and bargaining power to opt-out of the social contract then everybody will lose. There is such a thing as being too big and I firmly believe that most multinationals are no longer playing by the rules in the sense that they violate the spirit of those rules whereever they can by focusing solely on the letter of the rules. That's a…

What's to be done about it?

We're the ants.

That depressing truth has a way of manifesting. I'm not quite sure what to feel about it. Our attempts here are futile. We're not going to get any legislation passed.

The fact is, companies can opt out of the social contract. They are big, and they're going to play by different rules. But I don't think that's strange -- that's just life.

It happens in China and Russia. Why should the US, Canada, or Europe be any different?

Re: Paradise Papers: Dear Tim Cook

#69

Post by fastball »

tankenmate wrote: post #56
fastball wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think tax avoidance is morally justified. EDIT: Better phrasing - I think tax avoidance is not a moral problem. Laws are a moral problem, and tax avoidance is not against the law. /EDIT The entity making the tax code (the government) and the entity that collects taxes (the government) are one in the same. If the government wants me, as an individual or business, to pay taxes at a certain rate X, they should write t…

And I think that it is morally justified that I should be able to use roads, send my kids to school, and drink water that has been paid for by all those not smart enough or earn billions enough to avoid paying taxes. I think it is morally right that I shouldn't pay my fair share because I and my other well heeled chaps can lobby governments in some small country to pay 25 times less tax than others. I think it is mor…

My point is that this isn't about morality. Taxes are not a moral problem. Tax evasion is a moral problem because breaking the law is a moral problem.

I don't think forcing people to pay any amount of money (taxes) is moral. Is it good for society? Yes. Is it moral? Who knows? How are you so easily making moral judgements when morality is so subjective?

I find the idea of forcing my morality on anyone else repugnant, except in the case where all parties have agreed to the moral code (laws).

Re: Paradise Papers: Dear Tim Cook

#70

Post by thanatropism »

jacquesm wrote: post #25
wjnc wrote: 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 Tim, You don't understand how shares work. Shareholders can only benefit from shares in two ways: through speculation about the share price or through dividends. I'm kind of disappointed that I'd have to explain to a man of your stature that money that Apple parks abroad will not benefit the shareholders except in the most indirect ways. If Apple brought home their overseas funds then it would benefit the US and…

> The taxes paid would go towards infrastructure, education, health care and other items that benefit all people in our society, and by extension also to us shareholders.

This assumes, of course, that governments can spend the money as efficiently as Apple.

Post reply on HN