9 ms·
Tesla's Musk Paid at Least $593M in Income Taxes in 2016
- econner 10y agoWow. That's a yuge amount of income.
- neaanopri 10y agoA narrow and literal reading of events makes Musk the richest african american. It's pretty depressing the richest african american is white
- bekimdisha 10y agoWhy is that depressing? ...
- snowpanda 10y agoYou haven't gotten the memo? Racism is ok if it's against whites.
- drewrv 10y agoSilicon Valley employs so few blacks that even our Africans are white.
- niroze 10y agoA lot of Africans are white, especially ones settled and controlled by Brits at some point.
- Cyph0n 10y agoNot to mention North Africans (Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya) and Egyptians. I'm a Tunisian-American, but I obviously select "white" in demographic questionnaires. I heard that the U.S. Census Bureau is planning to introduce a Arab/Middle Eastern category in the near future.
- natoliniak 10y agooh man, human "race" is such a complicated concept....as an example, Zidane who is Algerian descent by all means would be considered "white" in the USA...but then he is also an African who was born and grew up in Europe. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/XII_Prix_Di%C3%A1logo_%2818485723248%29_%28cropped%29.jpg/250px-XII_Prix_Di%C3%A1logo_%2818485723248%29_%28cropped%29.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/XI...
- Theodores 10y agoIn the UK there are lots and lots of people from South Africa, Zimbabwe and other places where things may have been good for their 'baby boomer' parents that got rich in deeply racist times, but for kids today? If you are in your 20's or 30's or even 40's then having white skin in South Africa has not had the same advantages as before, there has been government legislation to make the place a bit more equal opportunity, which means to the younger people in South Africa that, if you are white, it is time to claim some type of UK passport (maybe based on some grandfather that was Scottish). I am no defender of Apartheid but the ruling baby boomer white class essentially retired and threw their own children under the bus.
- gotodengo 10y agoI'm not trying to deny the (until very recently legally enforced) class difference between whites and blacks in South Africa, nor the social issues causing hiring discrepancies in the States. However, it's not a narrow reading of events. Musk is African. Head a bit out of the way in South Africa and you'll find white kids who spend all day running around with black friends with the whole group speaking fluent Zulu. They've grown up there and their families have been there for generations.
- adventured 10y ago> Musk is African Actually, since we're being technical about it, he's American-Canadian-African. How else to define it? One could say African born, certainly. He has lived in the US longer than he lived in South Africa at this point. He hated South Africa according to his brother, and sought to flee as soon as he could. He considers himself an American and has stated so on numerous occasions.
- bmmayer1 10y agoThe problem here lies with the imprecise term 'African American', a designation which, according to customary usage, includes many native-born Americans who have never been to Africa, as well as excludes many native-born Africans (like Musk) who are also Americans.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- gla8 10y agoAs a thought experiment, if you define Americans as those with natural rights, then every human being on Earth could be considered African American. Although I've met a surprising number of intelligent people who somehow do not believe we are all descended from Africa. Which I suppose is related to people failing to understand that all individuals have innate inalienable rights, regardless of their citizenship.
- bmmayer1 10y ago
- blahman2 10y agoit is even more depressing to read what racists like you have to say everywhere
- snowpanda 10y agoAgreed, some people need to make everything about color.
- joatmon-snoo 10y agoImagining this scaled down to options that someone might get for joining a startup early... wow.
- submeta 10y agoOn the other hand this: "Elon Musk's growing empire is fueled by $4.9 billion in government subsidies" http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-20150531-story.html http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-2015...
- marricks 10y agoSounds like money better spent to me than the 5 trillion dollars in global fossil fuel subsidies in 2015, or 500 billion just in the US[1] That 5 billion number for Musk I think is a grand total of all subsidies, spanning all time. [1] http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X16304867 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X16...
- kolbe 10y agoI don't have to click any like to know that the US did not spend $5t on fossil fuel subsidies. I'm pretty sure the US only spent like $5t total in 2015, and most of that is in medicare and social security.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- gpetukhov 10y ago"GLOBAL fossil fuel subsidies"
- adventured 10y agoThat $5 trillion figure isn't actually spending at all. It's entirely an invented figure, meant to supposedly cover all estimated environment damage for example. Really what it's meant to do, is be massive enough to enable people to throw it around when arguing in favor of obliterating the fossil fuel industry. Why does the invented aspect matter? Because it's comical. It leads to the premise that over just the next 10 years, the subsidies are a likely cumulative ... $56 trillion or so (about 20%-25% of all wealth on earth). Aka, greater than the combined profit of every oil company in world history going back ~140 years.
- engx 10y agoThe video clip seemed unusually harsh. The reporter said he'd announced the Hyperloop to "thrill and confuse"? Followed by several skeptical tones and questions all while contrasting it with saying he'd done things no one else had.
- SEJeff 10y agoNot sure about everyone else, but I'd love to have this problem. Oh I have to pay $593 million in taxes? Boo hoo, let me cry all the way to the bank to write the check.
- user5994461 10y agoImagine that you are a GAFA CEO 2 years before you IPO and you are asked to pay 593 millions based on the estimated value of your shares.
- omginternets 10y agoYes, and? Am I supposed to feel sorry for people with hundreds of millions in liquid assets?
- paulddraper 10y agoAbsolutely not. Stick to "Justice for Most"
- accountyaccount 10y agoI keep trying to imagine it, but I can't get past the part where I'm excited about having hundreds of millions of dollars.
- throwaway999a 10y agoJust having hundreds of millions of dollars wouldn't be particularly exciting once the novelty wore off. The exciting part is earning hundreds of millions of dollars via the immense success that it implies/requires.
- wl 10y agoFunny enough, the IRS won't take a check that large. He'd have to write six of them. Definitely a problem I wish I had. > No checks of $100 million or more accepted. > The IRS can’t accept a single check (including a cashier’s check) for amounts of $100,000,000 ($100 million) or more. If you are sending $100 million or more by check, you’ll need to spread the payment over 2 or more checks with each check made out for an amount less than $100 million. This limit does not apply to other methods of payment (such as electronic payments). Please consider a method of payment other than check if the amount of the payment is over $100 million. https://www.irs.gov/instructions/i1040gi/ar01.html#d0e35370 https://www.irs.gov/instructions/i1040gi/ar01.html#d0e35370
- tdehollain 10y agoThat's $593M taxes on $1.34B earnings on exercising stock options...44% tax rate is pretty harsh!
- tunesmith 10y agoI got interested in the utility of money a while back and how the "value" of money is roughly logarithmic as it goes up. I found a couple of thought experiments regarding a "logarithmic flat tax". Anyway, going by that I think it's about right - it might still be a little bit high, though. Depending on how you calculate it those plans can be configured so that he should have paid more in the 35-40% range. Basically, you take revenue, divide it by the poverty level (he's got six kids, so around $45k - $50k), take the log base 10, and multiply by some constant that would be the same for everyone to match the government spending level - that constant these days is probably around 9 or 10. The result is your fair tax rate.
- matt_wulfeck 10y agoSounds like reasonable policy but incredibly obtuse. All taxpayers should be able to calculate and file their own taxes. The more complicated the easier to game and manipulate. I'll go as far as to say simplicity should be the driving motivation, not equality.
- hsod 10y agoThe proposed system seems a whole lot simpler than the existing one to me.
- enthdegree 10y agoIt's implemented as a literal table lookup anyway, so it wouldn't be any different from the taxpayer's standpoint.
- Fomite 10y agoThis proposal, given it can be described in a single HN post, is vastly simpler than the present tax code. It would similarly be trivial to make a calculator for this and present it on the IRS site for those who don't feel like calculating it.
- submeta 10y agoI wonder how much the founders of Google paid. Or the CEO of Apple. Or Uber's founder. Or for instance Mr Trump.
- r_smart 10y agoIt really depends on the year. The people who top income tax payments one year will generally not be anywhere near it on subsequent years because they don't draw a steady income, but instead cash out periodically. So while none of the people you've listed are likely to be in this years top earners, at some point in the years prior, or in the years to come, you'll likely see their names pop up. And when they do, they'll have paid some massive amount of money in taxes.
- jkchu 10y agoThe article mentions that he kept the remaining shares (as opposed to selling them as well). I wonder what is the general strategy for founders to cash out their stocks? Of course holding the shares for 1 or 2 years to get short/long-term capital gains tax breaks makes sense. But outside of that I imagine there is a balancing act of not selling so many shares to raise investor's eyebrows, but also freeing up money to diversify your assets.
- throwaway999a 10y agoIt's very strange how people now seem to feel like they are entitled to see the tax returns of public or well-known figures. Tax returns are nobody else's business! Would you demand to see their medical records as well? The implicit subtext (especially with highly successful people like Musk) is that we do this to "make sure they pay their fair share". Here's the reality: the top 1% of US tax filers pay nearly half of all US income taxes[1]. The bottom 80% of filers (by income) pay only 15% of all taxes. This myth that the rich don't pay taxes is completely, utterly false. It is a myth promulgated for political purposes. 1. http://www.cnbc.com/2015/04/13/top-1-pay-nearly-half-of-federal-income-taxes.html http://www.cnbc.com/2015/04/13/top-1-pay-nearly-half-of-fede...
- jonlucc 10y agoSure as a percentage of total taxes paid, but they generally pay less as a percentage of their income or worth. Which is a better measure is certainly a reasonable discussion, but saying that one is unequivocally politically motivated while the other isnt, is odd.
- accountyaccount 10y agoI think people care that the rich pay a smaller proportionate rate[1] than the poor. People who make under $19k a year pay twice the rate of those making $470k+ Comparing total of taxes paid and leaving it at that is generally a tactic to distract from the proportion problem. 1.http://www.itep.org/whopays/full_report.php http://www.itep.org/whopays/full_report.php
- youdontknowtho 10y agoI personally think that after the first 1.5 million that they tax rate should be 100%. That's still an incredibly large amount of money. After that we need the resources to tackle problems and we can't if people hoard them. I know that it sounds simple, and lots of people on this site will disagree, but I'm having trouble justifying this kind of extreme wealth to myself anymore. There are so many people in poverty and ignorance. What's it for any way if people are starving and illiterate? I'm really not looking forward to some of the responses to this comment, but I find myself thinking more and more about the morality of letting people accumulate massive sums when the resources that wealth could muster go unused by the people that need them most. I don't know. I'm genuinely interested in hearing what other people here have to say if you can keep from being condescending or mean. Please be nice.
- seattle_spring 10y ago> I personally think that after the first 1.5 million that they tax rate should be 100% Not that I'm anywhere close to this problem, but I would simply stop working after hitting that mark. Why would I work for free?
- youdontknowtho 10y agoThat's a valid question, but I think that people would do the things that interest them. After earning 1.5 million in a year, what would be wrong with not working?
- jcsnv 10y ago>I personally think that after the first 1.5 million that they tax rate should be 100% Remember, Elon funded SpaceX and Tesla with the wealth he generated from the sale of Paypal. Where would the funding have come from for those entities if he was taxed at 100% after 1.5mm?
- youdontknowtho 10y agoTo be fair, he has raised money from investors to start those companies. I'm not advocating for the end of banking, so people would still be able to borrow money and invest. I'm also not talking about taxing wealth, but income. SpaceX is interesting because we could be doing that stuff at NASA if it were funded well. I get what you are saying though, it would have an effect on investment and speculation. Maybe we don't need as much of those things. I'm also not saying that this is particularly well thought out.
- Alir3z4 10y ago$593M could be used for developing the company and its products.
- Archio 10y agoWhat is the point of this comment? I initially misread "company" as "country" - and in that interpretation I wholeheartedly agree.