3 ms·

That sounds incredibly logical and intuitive. It seems so weird that something like that hasn't been proposed for the US (or i haven't heard of it if it was at

• sneak 6y ago
  To me it sounds double subjective, which, in my view, is the opposite of "logical", perhaps not so for "intuitive". I really think if you need complicated (and entirely subjective!) thought experiments like this to apply the law, your law is far too complex and unfair and should probably be scrapped.
  • bostonsre 6y ago
    To me that british tax law that he described is incredibly simple compared to the loop hole filled tangle that the united states has. Companies like google in the posted article wouldn't be able to spend millions of dollars to find these loop holes. I would think that most people would agree that their actions are clearly an effort to dodge taxes and that law would stop this and similar behavior. Relying on a captured congress to intricately craft incredibly complex tax laws where loop holes are left in a way that affords plausible deniability hasn't seemed to work so far.
• bjourne 6y ago
  It is because of a Supreme Court decision that ruled that citizens have the right to do everything in their power to avoid paying taxes. Therefore it is only the letter of the law that can be enforced, not the spirit of the law. This makes tax code different from all other legal domains. It also means that intent is a moot point since tax evasion isn't illegal.
  • bostonsre 6y ago
    Was it this one [1]? It sounds weird that tax law would be interpreted differently than other types of law and would be interested to know their rationale. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregory_v._Helvering https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregory_v._Helvering