6 ms·

“This significant penalty [...]" is it really a significant penalty when Google has deep coffers?

• Silverback_VII 4y ago
  if you open those coffers you may be surprised at how many mindless worms are eating away their precious content.
• deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
• spoonjim 4y ago
  It is when pretty much every country without a tech economy does this to the big players every few months
  • mvc 4y ago
    If the "tech economy" is going to hoover up consumers from all over the world, it should expect to contribute it's fair share of the costs of maintaining civilisation in those societies. Maybe if they didn't restructure their organizations so as to avoid taxes in all but the lowest tax jurisdictions, they wouldn't be fined by places where they actually make the money.
    • spoonjim 4y ago
      “Deserve ain’t got nothing to do with it.” Both tech companies and governments are doing what they are doing because they can.
    • cscurmudgeon 4y ago
      > If the "tech economy" is going to hoover up consumers from all over the world, it should expect to contribute it's fair share of the costs of maintaining civilisation in those societies. How is this not different from how a mafia operates?
      • paulryanrogers 4y ago
        Who is being compared to the mafia? Outsized, international conglomerates, accountable only to shareholders or governments representing the public?
        • cscurmudgeon 4y ago
          Really? If they were accountable only to shareholders would you even have the post here where they have to pay fines? Governments represent public. Sure. But they are slaves to other corporations https://reason.com/2021/02/18/everybodys-wrong-about-the-facebook-murdoch-standoff-in-australia/?amp https://reason.com/2021/02/18/everybodys-wrong-about-the-fac...
          • paulryanrogers 4y ago
            The problem appears to be that the fines are a wrist slap, so cost of doing business once entrenched. Regulatory capture is also a problem. I prefer governments with less corruption, debilitating fines, companies less powerful than nation states, and robust antitrust enforcement to maintain healthy competition.
    • drstewart 4y ago
      >Maybe if they didn't restructure their organizations so as to avoid taxes in all but the lowest tax jurisdictions, they wouldn't be fined by places where they actually make the money. So to be clear, these fines aren't legitimate but instead are backdoor taxes meant to compensate for the government's inability to capture the taxes they've established? Is that your position here? And you're insinuating this is a good thing?
      • spoonjim 4y ago
        It’s more like an import tariff in disguise. Countries other than the US, China, and Sweden have been under-successful in tech so they tax the exporters who supply their markets with these fines.
      • mvc 4y ago
        The good thing would be for the companies to report profits where they make them but apparently we can't rely on their good nature to do that. I don't have a problem with governments resorting to tactics like this in order to get market participants to pay their fair share. But then, I'm not a billionaire and never will be so it aint ever gonna affect me.
  • simion314 4y ago
    Could be the issue that big players do illegal things? If some organization brings this issues in front of a judge what should a judge do? He must apply the law. I assume Google had competent lawyer present so this is legal, if you are a US tech company and don't like this laws (that protect consumers)then I suggest don't sell your products/services in this countries or follow the laws.
• boomboomsubban 4y ago
  No, but it might send a message to other digital platforms like the quote says. Google won't even notice this, everyone smaller will now worry about receiving their own $60M fine which would ruin them.
  • enlyth 4y ago
    I don't understand what's so hard on doing fines based on % revenue or something similar, that would solve such issues.
    • boomboomsubban 4y ago
      The size of the fine likely is somewhat revenue based, that's why they used Google to scare others.
      • 37 4y ago
        >The size of the fine likely is somewhat revenue based What? Says who? It's just a number that the ACCC and Google both agreed upon. FTA: The ACCC and Google jointly submitted to the Court that a penalty of $60 million against Google LLC was appropriate, and that no separate penalty against Google Australia Pty Ltd was necessary, in circumstances where the Australian company was not responsible for the preparation of the screens which the Court found were misleading.
        • boomboomsubban 4y ago
          >It's just a number that the ACCC and Google both agreed upon. Both groups agreed on it being fully aware of Google's revenue, and if Google had the revenue of an average company it's likely neither side would have suggested the amount. Somewhat revenue based.
          • 37 4y ago
            >Both groups agreed on it being fully aware of Google's revenue, and if Google had the revenue of an average company it's likely neither side would have suggested the amount. Somewhat revenue based. It says absolutely nothing of the sort in the article. Seems like yet another assumption you are making. By the same logic, both groups are fully aware that Google starts with the letter G, therefore the size of the fine is based on the fact that Google starts with the letter G. I'm really not trying to be an asshole here, but please don't go around saying things that you don't know to be true.