6 ms·
Legal /=/ moral
by devwastaken 7y ago
Legal /=/ moral
- throwaway07Ju19 7y agoBut making them equal is the goal. When they are unequal we create moral hazards. Moral hazard like this has to be least appealing part of having shareholders.
- kup0 7y agoDo you mean in all areas of life or specifically companies / shareholders? A person cheating on their spouse would pretty commonly be considered to be doing something "immoral" Yet it would be ridiculous to make something like that illegal I think the attempt to make moral and legal always align creates plenty of hazards itself Especially if the moral code the law is based on something external and nowhere near universal (like religious sources, which disagree with each other, etc)
- FDSGSG 7y agoOne could argue that they have a moral obligation to their shareholders to minimize their tax burden. I can't even imagine a moral obligation to pay excess taxes, that's simply not how taxes work.
- bredren 7y agoThat would be a business or contractual obligation. There is nothing personal about that relationship.
- FDSGSG 7y agoThere's nothing personal about my relationship with the tax authorities.
- jayd16 7y agoBy phrasing it as excess taxes you've already begged the question. You could also phrase it as paying your share or pulling your weight.
- FDSGSG 7y agoExcess taxes, i.e. taxes not required by the law.
- Scoundreller 7y agoIt's a problem for shareholders too: When the money is "stuck" ex-US and can't be brought back to the US to pay its shareholders. If your money is in a shell that you cannot reach/touch, do you really have it? And if you can't, why is it on the balance sheet as if it were cash that you could reach?
- FDSGSG 7y agoThis is about money that was already outside the US. I'm not convinced that shuffling euro money around hurt the shareholders.
- Scoundreller 7y agoI can't admit I understand exactly what's going on in this case, but usually the story is that companies claim they have no US tax liability on revenue kept in a non-US subsidiary. And the same companies stuff all the non-US revenue into a low-tax subsidiary, even when it's effectively earned in high-tax ex-US jurisdictions to avoid their taxes too.
- FDSGSG 7y ago> I can't admit I understand exactly what's going on in this case That's exactly the problem! These are extremely complex situations where there usually doesn't exist any clear answer. If there did, large corporations almost certainly would not take these steps. If there were clear laws, then taking these steps could be criminal tax fraud. Blame the regulators. There's nothing stopping nations from writing clearer tax laws.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- rolltiide 7y agowhich applies whether the stated tax rate is 1% or 75%, so a practically useless response unless the idea is that any written tax rate is moral if it comes from the government, which also means any legal means to mitigate the tax rate is also moral because it comes from the government
- jayd16 7y agoMorality exists outside of what the law states. You're suggesting that because you can imagine both a too strict and too lenient law, morality is an impossible concept?
- pixl97 7y agoI believe everyone having the same morality is an impossible concept.
- jayd16 7y agoI'm not sure that's relevant to whether you personally find it moral. This conversation could exist from a personal perspective of what you find moral. That said, even if we all have different morals it seems they're mostly compatible.
- rolltiide 7y ago> You're suggesting that because you can imagine both a too strict and too lenient law, morality is an impossible concept? no, not enough information has been provided to make that decision and that grandparent-OP should elaborate on their stance
- thekyle 7y agoThere is nothing immoral about legally minimizing your tax liability. This is like saying that it's immoral for me to contribute to my Roth IRA.
- devwastaken 7y agoBlizzard takes significant advantage of the product of taxes massively disproportionate to any individual. They have an obligation to pay into it how they use it, and they have the money but purposefully are going around it. There is a lot immoral about it.
- throwaway07Ju19 7y agoThe tax law is written to incentivize desired behavior. We all benefit when you save for retirement so that you aren't a burden to society later. But loopholes are different. If you discovered a loophole that made it so your landlord can not enforce rent collection, would you stop paying rent ? That's basically what these companies are doing.
- jnwatson 7y agoOne's person loophole is another person's well-lobbied IRS rule. Many, many people would believe it is just fine if they found a loophole that set their personal taxes to 0%. Even more would be fine with a loophole that reduced their taxes by 50%. Nearly everyone would be fine with loophole that reduced it by 5%. There's only one way to handle this large moral gray area: pass laws and IRS rules to close the loopholes that experts deem excessive.
- matz1 7y ago> If you discovered a loophole that made it so your landlord can not enforce rent collection, would you stop paying rent I certainly would. Thats why you have to be clear with the law and enforcement.
- andrewprock 7y agoIf you do it legally, there is nothing illegal about it. If you do it illegally then it's illegal. If you are doing it in such a way as to violate the social contract, then regardless of legality, I think a case could be made that it is immoral.
- HNisCurated 7y agoConsidering blizzard kills less humans than the United States government, legal and moral?