3 ms·

The entirety of the tax code that allows them to pay under 20% of their profit in taxes.

by ashelmire 8y ago

umanwizard 8y ago
Can you cite any specific sections? Just one example!
- ashelmire 8y ago
  I don't like to engage with such obvious trolling. I'm not a tax accountant (thankfully), so I don't memorize the tax code, nor am I familiar with Amazon's tax filings. Sure, I could spend several hours looking through their filings and the federal codes to cite specific examples, but I have better things to do. But I think a company that earns $10B in profit should be paying taxes. Period. And I bet most Americans would agree with me. And I will vote for those who agree with me. I'd rather see a flat tax with no exemptions on income.
  - umanwizard 8y ago
    Actually I am being serious, not trolling. To make my point more clearly -- I think accounting is too complicated to reduce to simple populist sound-bytes like "companies with X income should pay Y tax". I also think it's plausible that there are good reasons for some or all of the deductions Amazon is taking advantage of. That might not turn out to be the case, but it's impossible to know in advance without knowing what those deductions are.
    - ashelmire 8y ago
      Corporate income tax accounts for a whopping 9% of federal taxes for 2017. It's projected at 7% for 2019. Pathetic. Historically, this tax as a percentage of GDP is pretty low: https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/corporate-income-tax-share-gdp-1946-2015 https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/corporate-income-.... Those "good reasons" appear to be "because our representatives like to keep their paychecks coming and fashion the tax code in a way favorable to corporations". You can complain about "populist sound-bytes" all you'd like, but it's absurd for a company to use so many public resources and pay nothing.
    - komali2 8y ago
      I think the very fact that it is complicated is unfair. I want one of the following 1. An education system so absurdly stellar that our 18 year old high school graduates have the legal and fiscal expertise to navigate the tax code as expertly as a HSBC financial advisor, or 2. A tax code so simple it can be read and understood, verbatim, by every US citizen.
      - Sohcahtoa82 8y ago
        > 2. A tax code so simple it can be read and understood, verbatim, by every US citizen. Not possible considering one-fifth of adults don't understand percentages. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/mar/07/a-fifth-of-uk-adults-have-forgotten-how-to-do-fractions-or-percentages-mathematics-english-science https://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/mar/07/a-fifth-of... Yeah, the article refers to adults in the UK, but considering how terrible the education system is in the USA, do you think it'd be any better?
  - tptacek 8y ago
    Asking for an example isn't trolling, and claiming otherwise is uncivil.
- tptacek 8y ago
  The deductibility of employee stock compensation would be the obvious answer here.

The entirety of the tax code that allows them to pay under 20% of their profit in taxes.

umanwizard 8y ago

Can you cite any specific sections? Just one example!

ashelmire 8y ago
I don't like to engage with such obvious trolling. I'm not a tax accountant (thankfully), so I don't memorize the tax code, nor am I familiar with Amazon's tax filings. Sure, I could spend several hours looking through their filings and the federal codes to cite specific examples, but I have better things to do. But I think a company that earns $10B in profit should be paying taxes. Period. And I bet most Americans would agree with me. And I will vote for those who agree with me. I'd rather see a flat tax with no exemptions on income.
- umanwizard 8y ago
  Actually I am being serious, not trolling. To make my point more clearly -- I think accounting is too complicated to reduce to simple populist sound-bytes like "companies with X income should pay Y tax". I also think it's plausible that there are good reasons for some or all of the deductions Amazon is taking advantage of. That might not turn out to be the case, but it's impossible to know in advance without knowing what those deductions are.
  - ashelmire 8y ago
    Corporate income tax accounts for a whopping 9% of federal taxes for 2017. It's projected at 7% for 2019. Pathetic. Historically, this tax as a percentage of GDP is pretty low: https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/corporate-income-tax-share-gdp-1946-2015 https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/corporate-income-.... Those "good reasons" appear to be "because our representatives like to keep their paychecks coming and fashion the tax code in a way favorable to corporations". You can complain about "populist sound-bytes" all you'd like, but it's absurd for a company to use so many public resources and pay nothing.
  - komali2 8y ago
    I think the very fact that it is complicated is unfair. I want one of the following 1. An education system so absurdly stellar that our 18 year old high school graduates have the legal and fiscal expertise to navigate the tax code as expertly as a HSBC financial advisor, or 2. A tax code so simple it can be read and understood, verbatim, by every US citizen.
    - Sohcahtoa82 8y ago
      > 2. A tax code so simple it can be read and understood, verbatim, by every US citizen. Not possible considering one-fifth of adults don't understand percentages. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/mar/07/a-fifth-of-uk-adults-have-forgotten-how-to-do-fractions-or-percentages-mathematics-english-science https://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/mar/07/a-fifth-of... Yeah, the article refers to adults in the UK, but considering how terrible the education system is in the USA, do you think it'd be any better?
- tptacek 8y ago
  Asking for an example isn't trolling, and claiming otherwise is uncivil.
tptacek 8y ago
The deductibility of employee stock compensation would be the obvious answer here.