Tax Accounting Evil at Google?

theodp writes "In its annual report, Google said it's done no tax-accounting evil, but the search giant acknowledged that both the IRS and SEC are taking a look at the way in which it accounts for income tax. Google is one of a number of U.S. companies that have come under fire for allegedly practicing 'profit laundering', i.e., moving book profits offshore to evade millions and even billions in taxes to the country where it really operates. In past SEC filings, Google has credited its Irish subsidiary for reducing its effective tax rate."

Comments

Seems a little contrary.

[kodyjoe]

Google's employees and founders have been unflinchingly supportive of Democrat candidates and policies. Those candidates and policies generally favor higher tax rates and oppose tax cuts "for the rich", and favor greater government spending on social programs. But now they're going out of their way to launder their money to avoid those same taxes. Is it evil? No. Taxes are evil. Is it hypocritical? Yep. You get to say all the right things to your pinko NoCal, silicon valley buddies, while avoiding the punitive policies you want to impose of everybody else and pocketing some extra cash for yourself. Lovely.

Remember the difference

[gmcraff]

As told to me by my ex-IRS tax accountant:

TAX AVOIDANCE is a patriotic thing to do. It does no good to give the government money in excess of what it needs to do its job, and what it has been lawfully authorized to collect.

TAX EVASION is illegal. That's what they got Al Capone on when then couldn't nail him for any other crimes.

Re:definitions

[chill]

Sorry, you're wrong.

"A taxpayer need not arrange its affairs so as to maximize taxes as long as the transaction has a legitimate business purpose." --
Judge Cornelia G. Kennedy in the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, April 20, 1992, aff. of the Tax Court holding in Proctor & Gamble v. Commissioner

Or...

"There is nothing sinister in so arranging one's affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everybody does so, rich and poor; and all do right, for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands." -- Justice Learned Hand

The government wrote the law, Google is just playing by the rules. Don't like it? Change the rules, but don't whine about companies (or individuals) that do what is legal to minimize taxes.

Deductions

[Harmonious Botch]

I'm getting my balls ripped off. Why? I started my small company on a shoestring 5 years ago, and have invested every cent that I don't spend on food and a rat-hole apartment back in my business (created 10 full time jobs with health insurance in the meantime). I still get taxed on all of that re-investment. What does that mean? It means that literally I pay out more in "income" taxes than I actually take home and spend (I pay about 4 times more in taxes than I actually pay myself). I (and people like me) get raped for re-investing in our businesses. Before I ran into this problem, I always wondered why some small businesses (and large) simply don't re-invest back in the businesses. You know the kind of place... if it's retail, then they don't even change the lightbulbs, or re-paint the building... ever. Now I understand why. If you're gonna get taxed anyway, it makes more sense from a comfort standpoint to spend the profits on a stupid HDTV than it does on lightbulbs for the business. As a business owner also, I sympathise with your damaged anatomy, but I disagree with your conclusion. IRS form 1040 schedule C has a line labeled 'maintainence'. Anything on that line is subtracted from the pre-tax total. I have no problem buying paint or bulbs or other materials because the majority of the cost is essentialy paid for by the IRS and state income tax agency.