3 ms·
"I'm talking about the spirit of the whole thing, not the law." Well, that's the problem. You asked a question about why one is acceptable and another is not
by turc1656 9y ago
"I'm talking about the spirit of the whole thing, not the law."
Well, that's the problem. You asked a question about why one is acceptable and another is not and the reason is legality.
What it sounds like is that you want tax reform or to do away with loopholes, which is fine. There's a lot of shady/questionable/unethical things that the law allows and corporations take advantage of them whenever they can. And let's be serious - you would, too, if you had the resources become a multinational conglomerate and have the best accountants and tax attorneys that money could buy. We all would, especially if we were CEO/CFO of one of these firms with a responsibility to look out for shareholders. If you can deliver more money to them and you don't, you're probably going to be out on your ass real fast. The solution is to change the law because you are never going to convince people to not use it to their advantage. If I had a company and people told me I could make an extra 200k a year just by restructuring the company and making a few adjustments that would be frowned upon by society but would not land me in jail, the odds of me not doing it are slim to none.
- supergeek133 9y agoYes, again, I'm talking the spirit vs the letter of the law. Of course everyone who learns the can "legally" circumvent the law, will. That's clear with every large company in the US.