4 ms·
Bullshit. I'm sick of hearing this myth to justify immoral behaviour of corporations. The owners of a corporation can freely define its purpose. There is no leg
by Hermel 13y ago
Bullshit. I'm sick of hearing this myth to justify immoral behaviour of corporations. The owners of a corporation can freely define its purpose. There is no legal obligation to maximize profits. And in most countries (I can't speak for the Anglo-American system), it would not be possible to sue the management for not doing tax-avoidance unless the shareholders very specifially required the management to do so at a general assembly.
- grecy 13y ago(Sorry, I don't know the exact definitions here) Couldn't the shareholders dismiss the Board of Directors if they deem they are making decisions that are not in the best interest of the share price?
- Hermel 13y agoThey do not need a reason to dismiss the board, a majority vote suffices. The shareholders own the company, so they can install whatever board they like for whatever reason they like. I'm not aware of any board that got dismiseed for not aggressively optimizing taxes. Similarily, shareholders rarely complain about philantropic programmes of large corporations, for example this: http://www.exxonmobil.com/Corporate/community.aspx http://www.exxonmobil.com/Corporate/community.aspx
- grecy 13y agoThanks. Let's be honest, if Facebook decided to give back their $430 million tax credit and pay 40% on their $1.1 billion of profit, their share price would take a major dive. Do you think the board would not be dismissed? (Same goes for Apple, Google, etc. etc.) http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2013/02/19/tax-increases-why-facebooks-billion-dollar-income-isnt-taxed-at-all-by-irs/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2013/02/19/tax-increa...
- oijaf888 13y agoProbably not since I think Zuckerberg et al controls the board.