3 ms·

Blackmail the Government and You Can Pay Less Tax – Twitter Style

11 points by camz 15y ago

fleitz 15y ago
If you crowd sourced the problem you could probably make it work. Call it MoveOn.com, a group of people thinking about moving to another municipality get together sign some sort of binding contract forcing them to move to another municipality or not, the MoveOn representatives then canvass the two governments for the best incentives to stay / move, the company takes a percentage of the incentives negotiated. It could be instrumental in improving neighborhoods, schools and the general community, not to mention providing a much needed tax base to impoverished neighborhoods that could benefit from a better tax base. I'm sure with the state of legislation post-Kelo you could make it work with some helpful developers.
- camz 15y ago
  Wow that's an amazing concept. I never thought of something like that. I think that with the proper idea for the "MoveOn.com" platform to work would be a great way for the average joe to "lobby" like the big guys. GE worked the hell out of the system when they got congress to pass their "green or re-usable energy credits." The energy credits often had more than 50% of the tax savings going to the company.
tzs 15y ago
Blackmail means threatening to reveal someone's secrets unless they do what you want them to do. I see nothing in anything the article alleges, or in anything I've read elsewhere, that even hints that Twitter has blackmailed any government, or blackmailed any non-goverment for that matter.
- camz 15y ago
  Actually, blackmail is the coercion of a benefit derived from the act of a threat. Twitter clearly threatened the city along with a number of other startups in the SF area to move the jobs and tax revenue to another local town or city if SF didn't abate their payroll taxes. Thus, blackmail is a justified and correct term for such an act. But, I will concede that coercion is an equal substitute. While I don't fault twitter for their business decision. I do find it fair to call the kettle black when it is true. I generally don't have a problem with companies tax planning within the means of the law to achieve their tax goals, but simply flat out threatening the community that created you doesn't seem 100% fair either.

11 points by camz 15y ago

If you crowd sourced the problem you could probably make it work. Call it MoveOn.com, a group of people thinking about moving to another municipality get together sign some sort of binding contract forcing them to move to another municipality or not, the MoveOn representatives then canvass the two governments for the best incentives to stay / move, the company takes a percentage of the incentives negotiated. It could be instrumental in improving neighborhoods, schools and the general community, not to mention providing a much needed tax base to impoverished neighborhoods that could benefit from a better tax base. I'm sure with the state of legislation post-Kelo you could make it work with some helpful developers.

camz 15y ago
Wow that's an amazing concept. I never thought of something like that. I think that with the proper idea for the "MoveOn.com" platform to work would be a great way for the average joe to "lobby" like the big guys. GE worked the hell out of the system when they got congress to pass their "green or re-usable energy credits." The energy credits often had more than 50% of the tax savings going to the company.

tzs 15y ago

Blackmail means threatening to reveal someone's secrets unless they do what you want them to do. I see nothing in anything the article alleges, or in anything I've read elsewhere, that even hints that Twitter has blackmailed any government, or blackmailed any non-goverment for that matter.

camz 15y ago
Actually, blackmail is the coercion of a benefit derived from the act of a threat. Twitter clearly threatened the city along with a number of other startups in the SF area to move the jobs and tax revenue to another local town or city if SF didn't abate their payroll taxes. Thus, blackmail is a justified and correct term for such an act. But, I will concede that coercion is an equal substitute. While I don't fault twitter for their business decision. I do find it fair to call the kettle black when it is true. I generally don't have a problem with companies tax planning within the means of the law to achieve their tax goals, but simply flat out threatening the community that created you doesn't seem 100% fair either.