3 ms·

It is legal, yet it is still tax evasion, even if one uses euphemisms like "tax optimization" and so on.

toyg 5y ago
Talking about the distinction between tax evasion and tax avoidance was when I really understood the power of controlling language, and why the ruling classes strive for getting their kids educated since the dawn of time.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
HPsquared 5y ago
There are two terms because they are different things: one is illegal and generally involves other illegal things such as fraud, while the other is legal 'gaming the system'. Gaming is not the same as cheating.
- ohgodplsno 5y ago
  Go on, play games with your friends and abuse the tiniest rules and tell them "ah ah, it's not cheating". See how long you last. Not respecting the spirit of the law is illegal in most of europe, and it's merely a matter of money being thrown around, preventing any legal action. But every time it happens, Google is found guilty. See their latest 5 billion fine, see what happened with Ireland. It's "legal" because noone can spend the money to investigate them on their crimes.
- jacquesm 5y ago
  The difference seems to be mostly the amounts of money involved.
MadeThisToReply 5y ago
Sorry, but you don't get to decide what words mean. "Tax evasion" is illegal by definition. "Tax avoidance" is legal. According to Wikipedia, the term "tax noncompliance" (or "tax avoision"... bleargh) can be used as a general term to refer to both of those things https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_noncompliance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_noncompliance
- dredmorbius 5y ago
  Curiously, the interests which literally bankroll the making of laws and electing of legislators do get to define what words mean. "U.S. Policies Favor The Wealthy, Interest Groups, Study Shows" Gilens and Page analyzed 1,779 policy issues from 1981 to 2002 and compared changes to the preferences of median-income Americans, the top-earning 10 percent, and organized interest groups and industries. "Not only do ordinary citizens not have uniquely substantial power over policy decisions; they have little or no independent influence on policy at all," the researchers write in the article titled, "Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens." Affluent Americans, however, "have a quite substantial, highly significant, independent impact on policy," Gilens and Page write. Organized interest groups also "have a large, positive, highly significant impact upon public policy." https://www.huffpost.com/entry/government-wealthy-study_n_5154879 https://www.huffpost.com/entry/government-wealthy-study_n_51... Though this particular study is specific to the US, the relationship doubtless exists elsewhere. See also: "Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens" (2014) https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/testing-theories-of-american-politics-elites-interest-groups-and-average-citizens/62327F513959D0A304D4893B382B992B https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-poli... Alphabet Inc. (Google LLC's parent corporation) spent $27.4 million in contributions and $12.8 million in lobbying (2019) according to OpenSecrets. That's slightly more than I've managed, personally. https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/alphabet-inc/summary?id=d000067823 https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/alphabet-inc/summary?id=d00... Alphabet (Google), Facebook, and Microsoft are the three top spenders in EU lobbying: https://www.reuters.com/technology/google-facebook-microsoft-top-eu-lobbying-spending-study-2021-08-30/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/google-facebook-microsoft...
- LinuxBender 5y ago
  And to help people remember the difference, here is a video of David Mitchell explaining his thoughts on the matter [1] [1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2q-Csk-ktc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2q-Csk-ktc [warning, language]
- xphx 5y ago
  Sorry, but Wikipedia also doesn't get to decide what words mean, nor you or I, at least not authoritatively. Linguistically, tax evasion is: evasion of taxes. I can use the words to describe any action taken to evade paying a tax. The words simply do not imply a state of legality. That there are domains that overload the terms with extended restrictive meaning is by definition arbitrary and has no priority over natural language. Usually Wikipedia indicates this by explicitly naming the domain, e.g. "In US tax law, tax evasion is ...", but fails to do so here.

toyg 5y ago

Talking about the distinction between tax evasion and tax avoidance was when I really understood the power of controlling language, and why the ruling classes strive for getting their kids educated since the dawn of time.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

HPsquared 5y ago

There are two terms because they are different things: one is illegal and generally involves other illegal things such as fraud, while the other is legal 'gaming the system'. Gaming is not the same as cheating.

ohgodplsno 5y ago
Go on, play games with your friends and abuse the tiniest rules and tell them "ah ah, it's not cheating". See how long you last. Not respecting the spirit of the law is illegal in most of europe, and it's merely a matter of money being thrown around, preventing any legal action. But every time it happens, Google is found guilty. See their latest 5 billion fine, see what happened with Ireland. It's "legal" because noone can spend the money to investigate them on their crimes.
jacquesm 5y ago
The difference seems to be mostly the amounts of money involved.

MadeThisToReply 5y ago

Sorry, but you don't get to decide what words mean. "Tax evasion" is illegal by definition. "Tax avoidance" is legal. According to Wikipedia, the term "tax noncompliance" (or "tax avoision"... bleargh) can be used as a general term to refer to both of those things https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_noncompliance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_noncompliance

dredmorbius 5y ago
Curiously, the interests which literally bankroll the making of laws and electing of legislators do get to define what words mean. "U.S. Policies Favor The Wealthy, Interest Groups, Study Shows" Gilens and Page analyzed 1,779 policy issues from 1981 to 2002 and compared changes to the preferences of median-income Americans, the top-earning 10 percent, and organized interest groups and industries. "Not only do ordinary citizens not have uniquely substantial power over policy decisions; they have little or no independent influence on policy at all," the researchers write in the article titled, "Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens." Affluent Americans, however, "have a quite substantial, highly significant, independent impact on policy," Gilens and Page write. Organized interest groups also "have a large, positive, highly significant impact upon public policy." https://www.huffpost.com/entry/government-wealthy-study_n_5154879 https://www.huffpost.com/entry/government-wealthy-study_n_51... Though this particular study is specific to the US, the relationship doubtless exists elsewhere. See also: "Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens" (2014) https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/testing-theories-of-american-politics-elites-interest-groups-and-average-citizens/62327F513959D0A304D4893B382B992B https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-poli... Alphabet Inc. (Google LLC's parent corporation) spent $27.4 million in contributions and $12.8 million in lobbying (2019) according to OpenSecrets. That's slightly more than I've managed, personally. https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/alphabet-inc/summary?id=d000067823 https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/alphabet-inc/summary?id=d00... Alphabet (Google), Facebook, and Microsoft are the three top spenders in EU lobbying: https://www.reuters.com/technology/google-facebook-microsoft-top-eu-lobbying-spending-study-2021-08-30/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/google-facebook-microsoft...
LinuxBender 5y ago
And to help people remember the difference, here is a video of David Mitchell explaining his thoughts on the matter [1] [1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2q-Csk-ktc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2q-Csk-ktc [warning, language]
xphx 5y ago
Sorry, but Wikipedia also doesn't get to decide what words mean, nor you or I, at least not authoritatively. Linguistically, tax evasion is: evasion of taxes. I can use the words to describe any action taken to evade paying a tax. The words simply do not imply a state of legality. That there are domains that overload the terms with extended restrictive meaning is by definition arbitrary and has no priority over natural language. Usually Wikipedia indicates this by explicitly naming the domain, e.g. "In US tax law, tax evasion is ...", but fails to do so here.