4 ms·
There is no reason he would have actually taken the $3m, then redistributed it. Sure, you can make that assumption but it is the least likely event happening p
by wtvanhest 14y ago
There is no reason he would have actually taken the $3m, then redistributed it. Sure, you can make that assumption but it is the least likely event happening possible.
- larrys 14y ago"he would have actually taken the $3m" Story implies he received the money. "Rather than stuffing that big bonus away in his own bank account"
- biot 14y agoFortunately, this story was written for average people to read and took liberties in the wording used, resulting in a possibly ambiguous interpretation. Had it been written in the precise language of tax accountants, such ambiguities would not be present and we would have been spared an entire thread of mental masturbation over the tax implications of such a disbursement.
- wtvanhest 14y agoThe story doesn't necessarily reflect reality. It is always safe to assume what you know is probably true rather than trust an author who's job is to write quick and get hits on their site. Like I said, it is extremely unlikely he put the money in his bank account, then sent it to employees.