5 ms·

I wouldn't blame Google (or any multinational corporation) as much as I blame our legislators who failed to prohibit this kind of tax evasion schemes.

by ucha 13y ago

jcampbell1 13y ago
You might as well blame them for creating free trade, and the european union. If legislators had the power to change the tax code, they would. Realistically they can't without doing something awful like currency controls or trade restrictions or something that will get shot down by the WTO. I am not a huge fan of corporate taxation because it is so indirect, but I do think we need some new global rules around IP transfer pricing.
- icelancer 13y ago
  >If legislators had the power to change the tax code, they would. Huh? They absolutely have the power to change tax code. Who do you think does? The IRS just executes the tax doctrine (with varying levels of compliance, of course).
  - jfoutz 13y ago
    The people who donate to legislators campaigns. The senator from Disney is a pretty good example of doing whatever it takes to represent his funder's best interests.
  - jcampbell1 13y ago
    How could legislators in the UK impose higher taxes on Google without violating EU / WTO trade agreements? If there was an easy way to do it, then they would have already. That was my point. Of course the legislators have the power to abandon all free trade agreements, leave the EU, and go Hugo Chavez and attempt to nationalize Google or something.
Zoomla 13y ago
would you blame Google if they gave money to legislators for allowing this kind of tax evasion scheme?
- RexRollman 13y ago
  Not so long as it was done in a legal manner.
  - Zoomla 13y ago
    Because something is legal doesn't make it right... Google it...
daniel-cussen 13y ago
Avoidance, not evasion.
pcurve 13y ago
Legislators are beholden to rich benefactors. Look what happened to estate tax exemption during Bush era. It went from $675k to $3.5million. http://wills.about.com/od/understandingestatetaxes/a/estatetaxchart.htm http://wills.about.com/od/understandingestatetaxes/a/estatet... And rather than letting Bush law expire, Obama boosted the exemption to over $5 million. This was a huge boon to wealthy class, and most people didn't even notice this crappy legislation from going into effect.
- icelancer 13y ago
  >Legislators are beholden to rich benefactors. I think that is ucha's subpoint, if not the main point. We cannot effectively police this kind of stuff.
alphakappa 13y ago
What you are blaming them for is not prohibiting tax avoidance, but for not anticipating that loopholes would be found in existing regulation. It's very likely that if these loopholes were eliminated, some other loophole would be found. At some point, maybe the discussion should be about the spirit of the law, not the letter of it (which can probably be worked around if you can pay for an army of lawyers and accountants in multiple countries)

I wouldn't blame Google (or any multinational corporation) as much as I blame our legislators who failed to prohibit this kind of tax evasion schemes.

by ucha 13y ago

I wouldn't blame Google (or any multinational corporation) as much as I blame our legislators who failed to prohibit this kind of tax evasion schemes.

jcampbell1 13y ago

You might as well blame them for creating free trade, and the european union. If legislators had the power to change the tax code, they would. Realistically they can't without doing something awful like currency controls or trade restrictions or something that will get shot down by the WTO. I am not a huge fan of corporate taxation because it is so indirect, but I do think we need some new global rules around IP transfer pricing.

icelancer 13y ago
>If legislators had the power to change the tax code, they would. Huh? They absolutely have the power to change tax code. Who do you think does? The IRS just executes the tax doctrine (with varying levels of compliance, of course).
- jfoutz 13y ago
  The people who donate to legislators campaigns. The senator from Disney is a pretty good example of doing whatever it takes to represent his funder's best interests.
- jcampbell1 13y ago
  How could legislators in the UK impose higher taxes on Google without violating EU / WTO trade agreements? If there was an easy way to do it, then they would have already. That was my point. Of course the legislators have the power to abandon all free trade agreements, leave the EU, and go Hugo Chavez and attempt to nationalize Google or something.

Zoomla 13y ago

would you blame Google if they gave money to legislators for allowing this kind of tax evasion scheme?

RexRollman 13y ago
Not so long as it was done in a legal manner.
- Zoomla 13y ago
  Because something is legal doesn't make it right... Google it...

daniel-cussen 13y ago

Avoidance, not evasion.

pcurve 13y ago

Legislators are beholden to rich benefactors. Look what happened to estate tax exemption during Bush era. It went from $675k to $3.5million. http://wills.about.com/od/understandingestatetaxes/a/estatetaxchart.htm http://wills.about.com/od/understandingestatetaxes/a/estatet... And rather than letting Bush law expire, Obama boosted the exemption to over $5 million. This was a huge boon to wealthy class, and most people didn't even notice this crappy legislation from going into effect.

icelancer 13y ago
>Legislators are beholden to rich benefactors. I think that is ucha's subpoint, if not the main point. We cannot effectively police this kind of stuff.

alphakappa 13y ago

What you are blaming them for is not prohibiting tax avoidance, but for not anticipating that loopholes would be found in existing regulation. It's very likely that if these loopholes were eliminated, some other loophole would be found. At some point, maybe the discussion should be about the spirit of the law, not the letter of it (which can probably be worked around if you can pay for an army of lawyers and accountants in multiple countries)