Adding unusable RAM for tax reasons • Hacker News Board

Re: Adding unusable RAM for tax reasons

#61

Post by hllooo » Thu, Jan 20, 2022, 7:15 PM UTC

djrogers wrote: post #53

MR4D wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not quite true. For instance, I could sell my losses in a growth fund only to buy a different growth fund (not the same index though) and I get to stay in the market. Ideally you would do this on day 364 of losses to maximize the tax incentive.

It's not a tax incentive though - an incentive encourages you to do something, nobody is encouraged to lose money . Also, if one were to do the above, and the growth fund went up, you'd wind up paying taxes on that gain which would offset the tax deduction you took on the loss when you eventually sold it, whereas you could have just stayed in, waited for it to go back up, and you'd be at a wash. If someone followed y…

it can work if you're offsetting existing short term gains and hold the replacement for >1 year, or if the stock never recovers, in which case you pull forward the deduction

Re: Adding unusable RAM for tax reasons

#62

Post by PaulDavisThe1st » Thu, Jan 20, 2022, 7:15 PM UTC

HeavenFox wrote: post #8

geocrasher wrote: post #5

This reminds me of the Subaru BRAT in the early '80s. There was a 25% tarrif on imported pickups. So Subaru added two plastic jump seats in the back of the BRAT, even making them face backwards. No seat belts as I recall just handles. They weren't even really intended to be used. They were just cheap plastic. But they served the purpose of making the vehicle a four-seater car instead of a pickup, with only a 2.5% tar…

There's also the Ford vs Chicken Tax; basically U.S. import tariff for passenger van is 2.5% and cargo van is 25%, so Ford, which manufactured their Transit van in Turkey, installed seats in factory and stripped the seats once they arrived in the U.S. Now looks like they are in trouble for this scheme. https://jalopnik.com/ford-faces-potential-1-3-billion-fine-f... (And why it's called Chicken Tax is another fascinat…

Perhaps a more relevant and legally robust example is the Mercedes Benz Sprinter, which is manufactured in Germany, but US-bound vehicles have various parts removed before shipping. A facility in NC reassembles the vehicles (the removed parts are shipped with the van) once they arrive, which reduces or eliminates the tax.

Re: Adding unusable RAM for tax reasons

#63

Post by Johnny555 » Thu, Jan 20, 2022, 7:16 PM UTC

geocrasher wrote: post #5

This reminds me of the Subaru BRAT in the early '80s. There was a 25% tarrif on imported pickups. So Subaru added two plastic jump seats in the back of the BRAT, even making them face backwards. No seat belts as I recall just handles. They weren't even really intended to be used. They were just cheap plastic. But they served the purpose of making the vehicle a four-seater car instead of a pickup, with only a 2.5% tar…

Oddly, the Subaru Baja is much more car-like than the Brat ever was (the Baja has 4 real seats, not jump seats), but when I had one, it was registered as a pickup, not a car.

Re: Adding unusable RAM for tax reasons

#64

Post by fredoralive » Thu, Jan 20, 2022, 7:17 PM UTC

geocrasher wrote: post #5

This reminds me of the Subaru BRAT in the early '80s. There was a 25% tarrif on imported pickups. So Subaru added two plastic jump seats in the back of the BRAT, even making them face backwards. No seat belts as I recall just handles. They weren't even really intended to be used. They were just cheap plastic. But they served the purpose of making the vehicle a four-seater car instead of a pickup, with only a 2.5% tar…

Recently in Europe we had a kinda reverse - Suzuki removed the rear seats of the Jimny, a small 4x4, to reclassify it as a commercial vehicle to qualify for laxer CO2 emission standards.

Re: Adding unusable RAM for tax reasons

#65

Post by ggrrhh_ta » Thu, Jan 20, 2022, 7:22 PM UTC

version_five wrote: post #32

stenl wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or maybe we need the opposite: basically just state that you did this stupid stuff only to avoid the tax, so you should pay the tax anyway.

The solution to a bad or poorly written law is not to leave it on the books and have some "oh well we actually meant" thing that means it can be arbitrarily applied in a different way than written. Courts can interpret laws if the interpretation is the problem. If there is just a stupid loophole, then either the law itself makes no sense (as seems to apply to this Jones Act) or it needs to be reworded to align with i…

Laws, at least in many European countries, are prefaced with a preamble, introduction, or Vorwort, that explains a bit of the history, the motivation, the underlying principles, the philosophy, the practicality, and the guidelines for interpretation of that law. The words, as written, are not to be taken, in any case literally. Moreover, a literal interpretation contradicting the spirit of the law is unlawful, and that is one of the principles of many legal systems. Using a loophole that contradicts the law is unlawful; imagine the law says you have the right to water your plants in your balcony; however, you only do it when the neighbor below is sitting at their balcony with the intention to bother them: you are abusing the law and committing an unlawful act.

Re: Adding unusable RAM for tax reasons

#66

Post by KarlKemp » Thu, Jan 20, 2022, 7:23 PM UTC

jrockway wrote: post #50

khuey wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Borders are full of rules of the form "X can cross for purpose A but not for purpose B" for both people and goods.

How long does the rule apply for? If someone removes seats from their van, is that tax evasion? What if it's temporary? If an individual can do it, why not Ford? The problem I have here is how easy it is to avoid the tax. CBP shouldn't have any jurisdiction over car modifications and repairs; that responsibility falls to different agencies.

The fact I can’t tell you the individual grain of sand that makes the difference does not imply that the concept of a “sand beach” is meaningless.

Re: Adding unusable RAM for tax reasons

#67

Post by fragmede » Thu, Jan 20, 2022, 7:27 PM UTC

8ytecoder wrote: post #18

eb0la wrote: post #13

Taxes are one of the most powerful incentives in the world. For instance, dumping positions at loss before new years eve might help you with your tax bill since you have losses. And of course, setting up a company in a country where you did buy a lot of spectrum and you have huge losses, effectively creating a tax credit ( https://www.reuters.com/article/telefonica-germany/update-2-... )

Important to note that you can’t buy back the same stock/instrument and claim capital loss in most countries

Tis a very important note for as an amature tax-advantageous practice! You can buy something similar, though. eg trade AMD for Intel or some such. Where investors are concerned about markets rather than invidivuals stocks (AMD and INTC are both hardware tech stocks), the notion is that a rising tide lifts all boats, and that large, sector-related good news for Intel is good news for AMD. It's not strictly true, obviously, but it's close enough that the practice is worthwhile.

Re: Adding unusable RAM for tax reasons

#68

Post by fredoralive » Thu, Jan 20, 2022, 7:27 PM UTC

notch656a wrote: post #22

HeavenFox wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's also the Ford vs Chicken Tax; basically U.S. import tariff for passenger van is 2.5% and cargo van is 25%, so Ford, which manufactured their Transit van in Turkey, installed seats in factory and stripped the seats once they arrived in the U.S. Now looks like they are in trouble for this scheme. https://jalopnik.com/ford-faces-potential-1-3-billion-fine-f... (And why it's called Chicken Tax is another fascinat…

I'm guessing they're only trouble because they took the seats out. Probably cheaper just to leave them in, and sell along with wrench to remove them 'in case it's needed for repair.' A friendly source will publish in a trade magazine it's the same van after 12 minutes to remove the seats, and the scheme will continue.

According to an article about it[1], Ford also removed / panelled in various windows as well, so conversion probably isn't as trivially DIYable as just removing some token seats.

Although I suppose van buyers are slightly more likely to know someone with a welding torch and some steel sheets than the average person, so perhaps they missed a trick...

[1]https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/SB125357990638429655

Re: Adding unusable RAM for tax reasons

#69

Post by sparkling » Thu, Jan 20, 2022, 7:30 PM UTC

Something similar: for the original Playstation 2 that was sold in the EU, Sony included a DVD with a BASIC interpreter to classify the console as a personal computer. This little hack avoided some EU import taxes back in the day.

https://www.theregister.com/2000/11/07/sony_adds_basic_to_pl...

Re: Adding unusable RAM for tax reasons

#70

Post by genezeta » Thu, Jan 20, 2022, 7:35 PM UTC

> The CPC472 itself was sold for how many? pesetas (how many? euros)

As far as I can remember, the CPC472 was sold for the same price as the CPC464. It was never marketed as an actual improvement over the 464 and competition in the market was hard enough to be able to justify a higher price without a clear justification.

Then again my memory is not that good now so anyone feel free to correct me.