3 ms·
So you are saying that since Amazon paid no taxes they made absolutely no money on the sales? Arranging the company structure so that billions in profits are se
by satokausi 4y ago
So you are saying that since Amazon paid no taxes they made absolutely no money on the sales? Arranging the company structure so that billions in profits are seen as losses in the bottom line is ridiculously easy and makes the whole corporate taxation system a joke.
- cercatrova 4y ago> they made absolutely no money on the sales They made money, sure. That's revenue. If I sell a widget that costs 1 dollar for 2 dollars, I made 2 dollars in revenue and 1 dollar in gross profit. But if I spend that 1 dollar towards the construction of a new factory, I made 0 dollars in net profit. So why should I get taxed on money that I didn't get to keep or profit from? Amazon is not a profitable company, if you want to see how, just look at their yearly earnings reports, they're a public company so anyone can look.
- poulpy123 4y agoAre you seriously believing that Amazon, the third largest company in the world, with enough revenue to dwarf the economy of many country, owned by a the second richest person in the world, who capitalist in a capitalist country is not profitable ?
- BugsJustFindMe 4y ago> But if I spend that 1 dollar towards the construction of a new factory, I made 0 dollars in net profit You have net profited $1-worth of factory. New assets don't magically stop being profit. Not even if they depreciate, because cash depreciates too. The only thing one needs to ask is whether corporate tax makes sense in principle at all when one could instead "just" tax human use of assets owned by corporations as personal gain. Everything else gets taxed at the personal income or property side already anyway.