5 ms·

I don't understand why the US constantly interferes in the internal affairs of other countries like this

by ptah 7y ago

ryeights 7y ago
Spain has very few large technology companies relative to the US. This tax is effectively a tariff on US technology companies operating in Spain, making it no longer an internal affair.
- megous 7y ago
  Last time I checked, comapnies are subject to the laws of countries they operate in.
  - rat9988 7y ago
    Indeed, the tariffs here aren't about spanish exports to Belgium.
  - ryeights 7y ago
    Obviously. That doesn't mean the US has to like those laws or cooperate with them
  - _Understated_ 7y ago
    Not trolling, but is there anything that says they're breaking the current laws in Spain? (I'm from the UK, so no dog in this fight althought I can see our gov implementing it at some point I reckon) Sure, they're taking advantage of tax loopholes I'd bet but in themselves, they're not necessarily against the law. They're probably paying all the tax in Spain they're currently, legally obliged to pay at the moment. Just my £0.02 Edit: Just thought of something? Is there a google.es? If this is what they are talking about, would it not be easier for Google just to bin that one and for Spaniards to be automatically redirected to another Spanish-speaking version, like one of the South American ones?
    - pc86 7y ago
      There's no such thing as a tax loophole. It's the law, and is written specifically the way it is for a reason. "Loophole" by definition implies that it's a mistake, and with the amount of money at stake that's incredibly unlikely.
      - _Understated_ 7y ago
        I upvoted your comment but I respectfully disagree: If a country has a law that says "you pay X tax using this law/method but Y tax using this other law/method" Google are perfectly within their rights to say, "Let's use Y". Who in their right mind would say "you know what, I'm going to pay more tax"? Have you seen the size of modern tax laws?[1] They're utterly gargantuan! [1]https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/feb/13/britain-tax-code-17000-pages-long-dog-whistle-very-rich https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/feb/13/britai...
        pc86 7y ago
        It sounds like you agree with me. That's not a loophole. That's a conscious decision on the part of whomever wrote that section of law to basically say "pay the lesser of these two methods."
        _Understated_ 7y ago
        Not really. The way I explained it wasn't clear. Usually a loophole is more complicated like the Double Irish with the Dutch Sandwich which requires some complex maneouvering on the part of the company to pay minimal tax. I run a small business and that kind of thing is beyond my capabilities and would also cost too much but not for Google. That's what I assumed you meant by loopholes... my explanation of the process was a bit too simplistic. To me, a loophole is looking through all the laws and saying, "ooh, if we put our money here, then declare this thing, we can show a loss that allows us a rebate on a particular tax" or something... it's a symptom of excessive complexity in our tax systems. I don't blame organisations for doing it.
      - 7y ago
  - rhino369 7y ago
    And Spanish companies can enjoy operating under America’s new tariff (law).
- ptah 7y ago
  they will have to be registered as companies in spain or eu to operate there, so this does not affect the US legal entity at all
rat9988 7y ago
The us is protecting its own interests. It doesn't care about right or wrong, nor does any other country. Wether the current action is morally right, and wether countries should behave outside the boundaries of ethics is an exercise left to the reader.
- lucb1e 7y ago
  If that is true, why do countries spend money on development aid? Isn't that caring about what's right? Or to take a more extreme example, why do we give a lifelong salary for nothing in return to people who are unable to work for the rest of their lives? Surely killing them would be more efficient. I do think states should, can, and do care about right and wrong to a certain extent. That's the difference between us and governments like the Chinese.
  - idontknowbout 7y ago
    > If that is true, why do countries spend money on development aid? Isn't that caring about what's right? Maybe to recruit most of the people who can question the exploitation of these places? like in Africa? Why are there little aid to helping to develop economic corridors/systems but billions to treat diseases are mostly side effects of poverty that won't be issues if said places are not so poor
  - baq 7y ago
    > If that is true, why do countries spend money on development aid? 1) so people from benefiting countries don't want to immigrate to the paying country (or to put it differently - aren't as motivated to leave because the differences are smaller) 2) so the paying country has somebody to sell their stuff to
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
Nasrudith 7y ago
Because they aren't internal - they are impacted by it with broad reach. There have been many stupid attempts to target Google in the past from vested interests (snippet tax, link tax) - but this one isn't very objectionable. The main legitimacy to the complaint is that even though nation neutral it is defacto targetted by industry concentration because of the lack of international Spanish internet companies. A flimsier one but there. The second is the populist rhetoric to sell it caused offense by targetting their companies. Plus countries in international relations are best anthropoisized as a bunch of hypocritical petty bastards. A flatter 3% corporate tax rate wouldn't have those grounds but would piss off the local corporate interests and possibly ideologe powers abroad still.
- ptah 7y ago
  to operate in spain they would have to have registered spanish or eu companies edit: spain is merely taxing legal entities within their jurisdiction not in US

I don't understand why the US constantly interferes in the internal affairs of other countries like this

by ptah 7y ago

I don't understand why the US constantly interferes in the internal affairs of other countries like this

Spain has very few large technology companies relative to the US. This tax is effectively a tariff on US technology companies operating in Spain, making it no longer an internal affair.

megous 7y ago
Last time I checked, comapnies are subject to the laws of countries they operate in.
- rat9988 7y ago
  Indeed, the tariffs here aren't about spanish exports to Belgium.
- ryeights 7y ago
  Obviously. That doesn't mean the US has to like those laws or cooperate with them
- _Understated_ 7y ago
  Not trolling, but is there anything that says they're breaking the current laws in Spain? (I'm from the UK, so no dog in this fight althought I can see our gov implementing it at some point I reckon) Sure, they're taking advantage of tax loopholes I'd bet but in themselves, they're not necessarily against the law. They're probably paying all the tax in Spain they're currently, legally obliged to pay at the moment. Just my £0.02 Edit: Just thought of something? Is there a google.es? If this is what they are talking about, would it not be easier for Google just to bin that one and for Spaniards to be automatically redirected to another Spanish-speaking version, like one of the South American ones?
  - pc86 7y ago
    There's no such thing as a tax loophole. It's the law, and is written specifically the way it is for a reason. "Loophole" by definition implies that it's a mistake, and with the amount of money at stake that's incredibly unlikely.
    - _Understated_ 7y ago
      I upvoted your comment but I respectfully disagree: If a country has a law that says "you pay X tax using this law/method but Y tax using this other law/method" Google are perfectly within their rights to say, "Let's use Y". Who in their right mind would say "you know what, I'm going to pay more tax"? Have you seen the size of modern tax laws?[1] They're utterly gargantuan! [1]https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/feb/13/britain-tax-code-17000-pages-long-dog-whistle-very-rich https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/feb/13/britai...
      - pc86 7y ago
        It sounds like you agree with me. That's not a loophole. That's a conscious decision on the part of whomever wrote that section of law to basically say "pay the lesser of these two methods."
        _Understated_ 7y ago
        Not really. The way I explained it wasn't clear. Usually a loophole is more complicated like the Double Irish with the Dutch Sandwich which requires some complex maneouvering on the part of the company to pay minimal tax. I run a small business and that kind of thing is beyond my capabilities and would also cost too much but not for Google. That's what I assumed you meant by loopholes... my explanation of the process was a bit too simplistic. To me, a loophole is looking through all the laws and saying, "ooh, if we put our money here, then declare this thing, we can show a loss that allows us a rebate on a particular tax" or something... it's a symptom of excessive complexity in our tax systems. I don't blame organisations for doing it.
    - 7y ago
- rhino369 7y ago
  And Spanish companies can enjoy operating under America’s new tariff (law).
ptah 7y ago
they will have to be registered as companies in spain or eu to operate there, so this does not affect the US legal entity at all

rat9988 7y ago

The us is protecting its own interests. It doesn't care about right or wrong, nor does any other country. Wether the current action is morally right, and wether countries should behave outside the boundaries of ethics is an exercise left to the reader.

lucb1e 7y ago
If that is true, why do countries spend money on development aid? Isn't that caring about what's right? Or to take a more extreme example, why do we give a lifelong salary for nothing in return to people who are unable to work for the rest of their lives? Surely killing them would be more efficient. I do think states should, can, and do care about right and wrong to a certain extent. That's the difference between us and governments like the Chinese.
- idontknowbout 7y ago
  > If that is true, why do countries spend money on development aid? Isn't that caring about what's right? Maybe to recruit most of the people who can question the exploitation of these places? like in Africa? Why are there little aid to helping to develop economic corridors/systems but billions to treat diseases are mostly side effects of poverty that won't be issues if said places are not so poor
- baq 7y ago
  > If that is true, why do countries spend money on development aid? 1) so people from benefiting countries don't want to immigrate to the paying country (or to put it differently - aren't as motivated to leave because the differences are smaller) 2) so the paying country has somebody to sell their stuff to

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

Nasrudith 7y ago

Because they aren't internal - they are impacted by it with broad reach. There have been many stupid attempts to target Google in the past from vested interests (snippet tax, link tax) - but this one isn't very objectionable. The main legitimacy to the complaint is that even though nation neutral it is defacto targetted by industry concentration because of the lack of international Spanish internet companies. A flimsier one but there. The second is the populist rhetoric to sell it caused offense by targetting their companies. Plus countries in international relations are best anthropoisized as a bunch of hypocritical petty bastards. A flatter 3% corporate tax rate wouldn't have those grounds but would piss off the local corporate interests and possibly ideologe powers abroad still.

ptah 7y ago
to operate in spain they would have to have registered spanish or eu companies edit: spain is merely taxing legal entities within their jurisdiction not in US