13 ms·

Fraud != Paying the amount of taxes you're required

• notahacker 5y ago
  You're not "required" to relocate part of your business to a tax haven, invent a royalty that part of your business owes to another part of your business to zero that business's profit or declare that the sales to local businesses your local account managers are paid commission on are actually completed in a different office overseas. Doing so is every bit as much of a conscious choice as pretending your blood testing product actually works or that the funds for Peter's ROI don't come from Paul
  • whitepaint 5y ago
    You have the duty to your shareholders to increase the profits as much as possible within the legal framework. So, yeah, you are required to do so if it means it's profitable.
    • notahacker 5y ago
      A statutory duty to increase profits as much as possible within the legal framework "requires" you to come up with strategies to artificially decrease recorded profits to pay less corporation tax? Rrrrright.... I mean, there are literally millions of companies worldwide that aren't even remotely tax efficient never mind inventing artificial royalties to shell companies in tax havens which they could if their directors wanted to... why are they not being sued by their shareholders? Could it be because actual company law allows management an enormous amount of discretion in how they run the company, except in cases of obvious conflict of interest or failure to care? And not deploying aggressive tax avoidance strategies isn't considered to be conflict of interest or failure in a duty of care anywhere?