4 ms·

I guess this may be not popular opinion here, but I don't see anything wrong with legally avoiding taxes. It might be wrong that the whole system is convoluted

by krick 9y ago

I guess this may be not popular opinion here, but I don't see anything wrong with legally avoiding taxes. It might be wrong that the whole system is convoluted enough that this would be very hard for your average honest citizen, but easy enough for resourceful corporation, if anything. But avoiding taxes seems only logical, if you think you can manage and allocate resources better than your government. And rest assured: somebody always does. So the reward inequality of the people who make wealth seems a larger concern here. But then, if everybody makes lots of money in capitalistic system -- nobody really does. So, no, I'm pretty sure that system is corrupt in its essence, but is working just as intended too.

robotresearcher 9y ago
> if you think you can manage and allocate resources better than your government. This phrase gets used from time to time to give some moral or net efficiency argument for avoiding taxes. I don't think it's useful. A corporation and government have completely different responsibilities and constituencies. Of course Apple can allocate resources better for Apple than the government would choose to, because Apple has no duty to care about most of the issues the government is tasked with. > And rest assured: somebody always does. We only have to consider the bizarrely inefficient US healthcare system compared to the rest of the developed world to see that 'always' is not true.
- luxuryballs 9y ago
  The other side of the coin is that regardless of who is holding the money the government not being able to spend it could be considered a better allocation just because they are so damn wasteful. Just because the government SHOULD be correct doesn't mean it actually is, and just because a law says money shall be allocated for X doesn't mean any real value is coming out of X, and the work the money is doing by being kept away from the government should also be considered as a loss when paying for X (so more than just the cost of X is spent).
  - robotresearcher 9y ago
    Again, that claim is easily refuted by considering the state of medical spending in the US. Unless by 'government' you mean only the US government. Many other governments are daily demonstrating their ability to deliver more affordable and cost-effective healthcare than the US.
    - briandear 9y ago
      How much medical/pharma R&D spending happens in the U.K.? How much happens in the US? It’s an apples and oranges comparison because The US effectively subsidizes the advances enjoyed by other countries.
    - conanbatt 9y ago
      > Again, that claim is easily refuted by considering the state of medical spending in the US One could argue that the medical system the us has right now is inefficient BECAUSE of the current legislation. It is a very regulated industry, it hasnt gotten to this point because of its unregulated capitalism.
vilmosi 9y ago
> I guess this may be not popular opinion here, but I don't see anything wrong with legally avoiding taxes The problem is that you can legally avoid taxes. Are we so used to this concept that we don't see its own hypocrisy?
- bkohlmann 9y ago
  "Legally avoiding taxes" simply means you are using the law, as written and passed via our Constitutionally mandated legislative process, to minimize your tax burden. The simple fix to this is for the tax code to change to prohibit whatever is currently being done. It's not hypocritical to follow the tax code as written.
azernik 9y ago
Forget "wrong". It is a dysfunctional way for the system to be set up.
throwaway91111 9y ago
Taxes are intended to raise revenue. I don't see how making the tax code nearly incomprehensible enough people assign moralistic qualities to exploiting it fully is a working system.
- briandear 9y ago
  See Milton Friedman’s lecture on the subject of convoluted tax codes. Spoiler: it gives government power because they can play favorites.
  - conanbatt 9y ago
    The one I saw is pretty funny, and he mentioned mostly how the left and right have different goals and fight each other. The left wants higher rates on the rich and the right wants to reduce it so it creates exemptions whenever it can. "The problem with a simple tax code is that the left and the right dont trust each other, and they are both right".

by krick 9y ago

robotresearcher 9y ago

> if you think you can manage and allocate resources better than your government. This phrase gets used from time to time to give some moral or net efficiency argument for avoiding taxes. I don't think it's useful. A corporation and government have completely different responsibilities and constituencies. Of course Apple can allocate resources better for Apple than the government would choose to, because Apple has no duty to care about most of the issues the government is tasked with. > And rest assured: somebody always does. We only have to consider the bizarrely inefficient US healthcare system compared to the rest of the developed world to see that 'always' is not true.

luxuryballs 9y ago
The other side of the coin is that regardless of who is holding the money the government not being able to spend it could be considered a better allocation just because they are so damn wasteful. Just because the government SHOULD be correct doesn't mean it actually is, and just because a law says money shall be allocated for X doesn't mean any real value is coming out of X, and the work the money is doing by being kept away from the government should also be considered as a loss when paying for X (so more than just the cost of X is spent).
- robotresearcher 9y ago
  Again, that claim is easily refuted by considering the state of medical spending in the US. Unless by 'government' you mean only the US government. Many other governments are daily demonstrating their ability to deliver more affordable and cost-effective healthcare than the US.
  - briandear 9y ago
    How much medical/pharma R&D spending happens in the U.K.? How much happens in the US? It’s an apples and oranges comparison because The US effectively subsidizes the advances enjoyed by other countries.
  - conanbatt 9y ago
    > Again, that claim is easily refuted by considering the state of medical spending in the US One could argue that the medical system the us has right now is inefficient BECAUSE of the current legislation. It is a very regulated industry, it hasnt gotten to this point because of its unregulated capitalism.

vilmosi 9y ago

> I guess this may be not popular opinion here, but I don't see anything wrong with legally avoiding taxes The problem is that you can legally avoid taxes. Are we so used to this concept that we don't see its own hypocrisy?

bkohlmann 9y ago
"Legally avoiding taxes" simply means you are using the law, as written and passed via our Constitutionally mandated legislative process, to minimize your tax burden. The simple fix to this is for the tax code to change to prohibit whatever is currently being done. It's not hypocritical to follow the tax code as written.

azernik 9y ago

Forget "wrong". It is a dysfunctional way for the system to be set up.

throwaway91111 9y ago

Taxes are intended to raise revenue. I don't see how making the tax code nearly incomprehensible enough people assign moralistic qualities to exploiting it fully is a working system.

briandear 9y ago
See Milton Friedman’s lecture on the subject of convoluted tax codes. Spoiler: it gives government power because they can play favorites.
- conanbatt 9y ago
  The one I saw is pretty funny, and he mentioned mostly how the left and right have different goals and fight each other. The left wants higher rates on the rich and the right wants to reduce it so it creates exemptions whenever it can. "The problem with a simple tax code is that the left and the right dont trust each other, and they are both right".