6 ms·

Why can a super successful company like Google not take open pride in doing a bit of civic duty? The fact that they have to be cajoled into doing what is pretty

Why can a super successful company like Google not take open pride in doing a bit of civic duty? The fact that they have to be cajoled into doing what is pretty much standard fare to make society function does NOT enamour me as a customer towards their long term well being in any way whatsoever - quite the opposite: I would happily jump ship if a transparent civilly minded alternative emerged (mostly thinking gmail/google-search here).

gaius 11y ago
Companies like Google should be taxed on revenue, if they hide their profits.
skybrian 11y ago
What would you think of a tax accountant who didn't try to save you money on your taxes (legally)? Probably you'd wonder why they have that job if they're not good at it. For this sort of professional, their customers come first.
- gozur88 11y ago
  And, as a shareholder, what would you think of a CEO who didn't hire a tax accountant to make sure you paid as little tax as possible? It's not like shareholders don't have to pay taxes on capital gains and dividends.
- enraged_camel 11y ago
  >>What would you think of a tax accountant who didn't try to save you money on your taxes (legally)? It wouldn't be up to the tax accountant to make this type of decision. It would be the CEO going to them and saying, "hey guys, I know you have tried to minimize taxes in your past jobs, but we do things a bit differently here..." re: downvotes. You gotta understand that tax accountants' job is more than just to minimize taxes.
flthrieu 11y ago
That's cute. Why don't you set a good example for Google by sending the government double what you owe in income taxes this year? Just call it a gift, because you couldn't correctly call it a "civic duty." In fact, you're in a better position than Google to do so. Any publicly-traded company like Google would be immediately sued for dereliction of duty to shareholders to minimizing taxes if they decided to start giving away extra money (shareholders' money) to the government. By the way, in 2010 Google paid $2.3 billion federal tax on income of $10.8 billion.
- lavezzi 11y ago
  Why would he pay double his income taxes to set an example? No doubt he is already paying the government what he legally owes in that respect. Google on the other hand aren't, are they?
  - JoshTriplett 11y ago
    If your tax preparer tells you that, thanks to deductions written into tax law, you only need to pay half as much tax, do you tell them "no, leave the deductions off, I want to do my civic duty"? In this case, the UK government disagreed with the interpretation of those deductions, leading to a dispute that this article reports the resolution of. But that doesn't seem like any reason to claim that it's the "civic duty" of anyone, person or corporation, to pay more tax than they absolutely have to.
    - olau 11y ago
      The fallacy here is that when you look at the numbers, they're not just using ordinary deductions - they can't because then they couldn't arrive at these results. These kind of things work by deliberately setting up perverse virtual organizational structures to take advantage of complex loop holes. It is abusive, in the strict term of the word. Using your analogy, would what you say if your tax preparer told you that if you proforma-married a woman in country X and used her name to set up a non-existing company in country Y, because then you'd qualify for certain deductions?
sandworm101 11y ago
Because they are a US publicly-traded company. By law, Google only exists for the benefit of its shareholders. Everything else Google does, good or evil, is simply a means to that end. That's how US corps work.
- joosters 11y ago
  But since its management own a large amount of google shares, this argument is not very convincing.
  - sandworm101 11y ago
    Because these managers put personal preferences above shareholder value? They won't remain managers for very long at that rate.

gaius 11y ago

Companies like Google should be taxed on revenue, if they hide their profits.

skybrian 11y ago

What would you think of a tax accountant who didn't try to save you money on your taxes (legally)? Probably you'd wonder why they have that job if they're not good at it. For this sort of professional, their customers come first.

gozur88 11y ago
And, as a shareholder, what would you think of a CEO who didn't hire a tax accountant to make sure you paid as little tax as possible? It's not like shareholders don't have to pay taxes on capital gains and dividends.
enraged_camel 11y ago
>>What would you think of a tax accountant who didn't try to save you money on your taxes (legally)? It wouldn't be up to the tax accountant to make this type of decision. It would be the CEO going to them and saying, "hey guys, I know you have tried to minimize taxes in your past jobs, but we do things a bit differently here..." re: downvotes. You gotta understand that tax accountants' job is more than just to minimize taxes.

flthrieu 11y ago

That's cute. Why don't you set a good example for Google by sending the government double what you owe in income taxes this year? Just call it a gift, because you couldn't correctly call it a "civic duty." In fact, you're in a better position than Google to do so. Any publicly-traded company like Google would be immediately sued for dereliction of duty to shareholders to minimizing taxes if they decided to start giving away extra money (shareholders' money) to the government. By the way, in 2010 Google paid $2.3 billion federal tax on income of $10.8 billion.

lavezzi 11y ago
Why would he pay double his income taxes to set an example? No doubt he is already paying the government what he legally owes in that respect. Google on the other hand aren't, are they?
- JoshTriplett 11y ago
  If your tax preparer tells you that, thanks to deductions written into tax law, you only need to pay half as much tax, do you tell them "no, leave the deductions off, I want to do my civic duty"? In this case, the UK government disagreed with the interpretation of those deductions, leading to a dispute that this article reports the resolution of. But that doesn't seem like any reason to claim that it's the "civic duty" of anyone, person or corporation, to pay more tax than they absolutely have to.
  - olau 11y ago
    The fallacy here is that when you look at the numbers, they're not just using ordinary deductions - they can't because then they couldn't arrive at these results. These kind of things work by deliberately setting up perverse virtual organizational structures to take advantage of complex loop holes. It is abusive, in the strict term of the word. Using your analogy, would what you say if your tax preparer told you that if you proforma-married a woman in country X and used her name to set up a non-existing company in country Y, because then you'd qualify for certain deductions?

sandworm101 11y ago

Because they are a US publicly-traded company. By law, Google only exists for the benefit of its shareholders. Everything else Google does, good or evil, is simply a means to that end. That's how US corps work.

joosters 11y ago
But since its management own a large amount of google shares, this argument is not very convincing.
- sandworm101 11y ago
  Because these managers put personal preferences above shareholder value? They won't remain managers for very long at that rate.