Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Avoids Washington State Taxes, Gives Nevada Schoolkid A Surface Laptop (seattletimes.com)

theodp writes: The Official Microsoft Blog hopes a letter from a Nevada middle schooler advising Microsoft President Brad Smith to "keep up the good work running that company" will "inspire you like it did us." Penned as part of a math teacher's assignment to write letters to the businesses that they like, Microsoft says the letter prompted Smith to visit the Nevada school to meet 7th-grader Sky Yi in person as part of the company's effort to draw attention to the importance of math and encourage students and teachers who are passionate about STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) education. In an accompanying video of the surprise meeting, Smith presents Yi with a new Surface Laptop that comes with Windows 10 S, a version of the OS that has been streamlined with schools in mind. "Not bad for a little letter," the Microsoft exec says.

Speaking of Microsoft, Nevada, and education, Bing Maps coincidentally shows the school Smith visited is just a 43-minute drive from the software giant's Reno-based Americas Operations Center. According to the Seattle Times, routing sales through the Reno software-licensing office helps Microsoft minimize its tax bills (NV doesn't tax business income) to the detriment, some say, of Washington State public schools.

Microsoft's state and local taxes will drop to just $30 million for the last year (from an average of $214 milion over the previous 14 years) according to the Seattle Times. "A Microsoft spokesman said the decline in 2017 was caused by the company's deferring taxes on some income to future years and the winding down of the company's smartphone business."

72 comments

  1. I especially like how Bill Gates lobbies... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ... for a personal income tax on everyone else in Washington State, so the rest of us can pick up the slack dropped by his former company.

    1. Re:I especially like how Bill Gates lobbies... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ... for a personal income tax on everyone else in Washington State, so the rest of us can pick up the slack dropped by his former company.

      Wrong Bill Gates. It was his dad, Bill Senior, that was behind the income tax initiative.

      Even though the tax fell only on people making $200k or more, it was voted down, because voters (likely correctly) figured that, once in place, it would eventually be extended to tax many more.

    2. Re:I especially like how Bill Gates lobbies... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Wrong Bill Gates. It was his dad, Bill Senior, that was behind the income tax initiative.

      Confusing post. Do you mean his grandfather, Bill Senior, or his father, Bill Junior? The father of William Gates III is not William Gates Senior.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  2. Uh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft President Brad Smith

    Who?

  3. two unrelated stories smashed together by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shitty summary, shitty editors, shitty moderators, shitty users, shitty Linux OS.

  4. Complete history of Smith, MSFT Tax Dodging by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://crosscut.com/2014/08/where-money-k-12-washington-just-ask-microsoft/

  5. This gives me an idea! by mfh · · Score: 2

    Hey Tesla! Great work on pushing the electric car mandate forward like you have. Please continue to do awesome stuff.

    ((Crosses fingers))

    --
    The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
  6. Re:Thanks Odumba by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

    Useful clue: The President has no power to change State and Local Tax laws. Which, if you'll read TFS, is what this is about.

    Note also the distinction between "avoidance" and "evasion". Hint: the first is legal, the second isn't. An example of tax avoidance might be you taking the Standard Deduction (or itemizing deductions, for that matter) on your Federal taxes - since NOT taking it would require you to pay more taxes, you are doing "tax avoidance" whenever you do so....

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  7. Deferring taxes to future years... by MangoCats · · Score: 2

    Hell, sounds like a great strategy... I'll pay all my taxes starting in 2100, you can even accrue penalties and interest if you like, just let me continue about my business unimpeded in the meantime. I promise, I'm good for the balloon payment.

    1. Re: Deferring taxes to future years... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah why can't I do that without the IRS sending me a nasty letter?

      Oh right, because I'm a citizen not a corporation almost too big to fail

      #GovernmentCrimes

  8. Re:Thanks Odumba by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    Note also the distinction between "avoidance" and "evasion". Hint: the first is legal, the second isn't.

    On our next episode, the difference between legality and morality.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  9. Expect Microsoft to pay taxes? by Bruce66423 · · Score: 1

    Next you'll expect them to be good citizens...

    1. Re: Expect Microsoft to pay taxes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody likes a poor thief.

  10. Re:Thanks Odumba by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

    Another way to avoid taxes is to do less, or no, business in that jurisdiction, which is what Microsoft is doing. For instance, I avoid Laotian and Sudanese taxes by doing business in California, and not Laos or Sudan. Is what wrong? If not, then how is it different from what Microsoft is doing?

    There are plenty of good reasons to criticize Microsoft, but this is just stupid. Washington has no "right", either morally or legally, to collect sales tax on something that is neither made, nor sold, nor delivered in Washington.
     

  11. Billionaires are made on the backs of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the little kids in Washington (state).

    And remember, ketchup is a vegatable! (RR)

  12. Re: Thanks Odumba by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ahhh... yes... the immorality of taxing income.

  13. Except... by xlsior · · Score: 2, Informative

    ...Windows 10 S is not "a version of the OS that has been streamlined with schools in mind", it's really "a version of the OS that is artificially restricted from installing 'normal' windows programs outside the windows app store, forcing misguided customers who didn't know any better to shell out an additional $100 after the fact to upgrade to a 'normal' version of windows that's half-way usable"

    Windows 10S is Microsoft's attempt at becoming a walled garden gatekeeper like apple, skimming 30% of the top of any application purchase. They do NOT have your best interest at heart, not even in the slightest.

    1. Re:Except... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, like Apple. Like Teh G. Only, you can avoid it by going Pro.

    2. Re:Except... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you're also locked into edge and bing. Then again, I'd gladly pay $100 to get rid of that edge/bing infestation!

    3. Re:Except... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like smartphones, yes (not that I think it's ok). But here we're NOT talking about a phone. OS X, Linux, BSD, other versions of Windows and such never had that.

    4. Re:Except... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, what you're describing is something that *would* be a good fit for schools, because students can't fuck with it in a million different ways by severely restricting what you can or cannot do with it.

      Ever heard of ChromeOS? *That*'s what Windows 10S is competing with.

  14. Windows 10 S is streamlined by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Because the ability to run software just slows down an ad platform.

  15. Re:Who? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 0

    Well he said he wishes he could date his daughter, and she's Jewish...

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  16. Re: Thanks Odumba by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    Ahhh... yes... the immorality of taxing income.

    Of course it's immoral to tax a portion of personal income, the portion needed to actually survive. Luckily, most tax systems recognize this, and don't tax people until they are above the poverty line.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  17. Ooooh, aaaah by roman_mir · · Score: 0

    Oh, wow, and you know what? Washington residents cross to Oregon for sales tax free purchases as well.

    Guess what, people do not want to pay taxes and rightly so and they should avoid and evade them everywhere and they do.

  18. Surface not recommended by Consumer Reports by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 2

    Smith presents Yi with a new Surface Laptop

    Microsoft Surface Laptops and Tablets Not Recommended by Consumer Reports

    The four laptops losing their previous recommended status are the Microsoft Surface Laptop (128GB and 256GB versions) and Microsoft Surface Book (128GB and 512GB versions). Microsoft is relatively new to the hardware business, and this is the first year CR had enough data to estimate predicted reliability for the company’s laptops.

    Microsoft’s estimated breakage rate for its laptops and tablets was higher than most other brands’. The differences were statistically significant, which is why Microsoft doesn’t meet CR’s standards for recommended products. The surveys are conducted annually.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    1. Re:Surface not recommended by Consumer Reports by Noishkel · · Score: 1

      Awesome idea! Avoid paying your taxes by disposing of hundreds upon hundreds of tons of toxic E-waste by giving it to children in Nevada to play with.

    2. Re:Surface not recommended by Consumer Reports by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      And? Still recommended by many others. The problem with the recommendation based only on breakage is that it ignores a very streamlined system for replacing broken items.

      *Posted from my second Surface Pro 3.

    3. Re:Surface not recommended by Consumer Reports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fairly week as your trolling goes. Go back to sleep, you're still boring.

  19. Government greed never ends by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slashdot editors think the only role anyone should ever have is to pay taxes to serve some government overlords.

  20. Re:Thanks Odumba by whoever57 · · Score: 1

    For instance, I avoid Laotian and Sudanese taxes by doing business in California, and not Laos or Sudan. Is what wrong? If not, then how is it different from what Microsoft is doing?

    You don't benefit from anything provided by the governments of Laos and Sudan. Microsoft benefits from infrastructure, educational opportunities, etc.. provided to it and its employees.

    That wasn't hard was it?

    --
    The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
  21. Re:Thanks Odumba by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Those employees also pay taxes, as does Microsoft, for the past several decades, benefitting the state of Washington.

    Was that hard? Or are you just a fucking idiot.

  22. Re: Thanks Odumba by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even then, people should only be taxed for what they use.

  23. Not this shit again by Snotnose · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The problem is the tax laws, not the companies taking advantage of them. Do you claim every and all deduction you can? Guess what, companies do the same. Do you pay an accountant $300 to convert your $2400 tax bill to $1200? Guess what, this is what companies do on a much larger scale.

    The solution is streamlining the tax laws to make it clear who pays and who doesn't.

    My solution? Members of congress, the president, and congressional staffers are not allowed to use any outside tax service to figure out their taxes. No Turbotax, no tax accountants. These assholes get to do their taxes, by hand, on paper. That will simplify the tax code overnight in under a year.

    Don't even get me started on Wisconsin and Foxconn. That right there is some truly retarded bullshit.

    1. Re:Not this shit again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Similarly, if it's technically legal for me to shoot you when trespassing on my property, even if the trespassing was inadvertent and you pose no threat--if I shoot you, the problem isn't me, it's the laws.

      Except a few things:

      Morality and legality aren't the same thing.

      The law will always have "loopholes" allowing for immoral behavior. "Fix that" is a recipe for contentedness with it never being fixed.

      False Dichotomy fallacies are a real thing, and sometimes the answer is "both".

    2. Re:Not this shit again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem you are neglecting is WHY it is like that. And that is because the donors of the politicians who make these laws want the loopholes in them.

      That is why they companies are given so much along with any tax breaks they get at local levels and why the rich have their own personal ways of getting their income at a relatively low tax rate to what a normal person would have if they actually got paid anywhere near that level if it was an actual paycheck.

      You want the tax laws changed to be something superior, you have to get the companies who benefit from them (Along with PACs, Unions and even individual donations) from paying them to do so. Get the money out of politics.

      You can't really say that you can't blame the companies for taking advantage of them when those companies are also the companies who lobby and donate to have those laws put in place and to keep them there.

  24. Re: Thanks Odumba by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're depriving the Laotian and Sudanese governments of revenue who arguably need it more than California.

  25. I couldn't get past this in the title... by Cornwallis · · Score: 1

    "...Gives Nevada Schoolkid A Surface Laptop"

    Who the fuck cares except the MS shill who posted this?

    1. Re:I couldn't get past this in the title... by theurge14 · · Score: 1

      Every day now on Slashdot. But I'll be marked as a troll again for saying so.

  26. Not Just Any Laptop by boudie2 · · Score: 1

    "Hang onto that laptop kid. That's the very one that Bill Belichik threw in the garbage during an NFL game. Should be worth a tidy sum one day."

  27. Re:Thanks Odumba by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft is definitely doing less. Look at a summary of their last four annual statements.
    MSFT Income Statement

  28. Re: Thanks Odumba by dougdonovan · · Score: 1

    good job brad

  29. Re:Thanks Odumba by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

    Microsoft benefits from infrastructure, educational opportunities, etc.. provided to it and its employees.

    Microsoft pays payroll taxes on those employees, and the employees pay sales taxes when they spend their salaries. If that isn't enough, then Washington should raise those taxes. It is absurd to expect Microsoft's customers, who mostly live elsewhere, to pay sales taxes to Washington for sales that did not occur there.

  30. Just a 43-minute drive by PPH · · Score: 1

    Reminds me of the beater I used to drive.

    (Oblig. bad car analogy)

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  31. VAT by JBMcB · · Score: 1

    How about this, charge corporate tax at the point of use instead of the point of production, which can be moved nearly anywhere. This is, essentially, what VAT is. A lot of people don't like it but it's really the only way to prevent these kinds of shenanigans. Get rid of corporate and personal income tax, do a reverse income tax for the poor, and slap a VAT on everything sold. It would be a pain to set up, but once done it would be *far* easier to maintain than the convoluted mess we have now.

    --
    My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
    1. Re:VAT by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      By "pain", you mean "illegal under the terms of the Constitution". I quite agree that something approximating a federal sales tax would greatly simplify matters, but such a thing isn't possible without both amending the Constitution and substantially changing the relationship between the federal and state governments.

    2. Re:VAT by Koby77 · · Score: 1

      I thought most of Europe was operating from a VAT tax, and yet several EU countries are complaining that several tech companies are avoiding taxes?

      Examples:
      https://9to5mac.com/2017/07/04...
      https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0...

      It seems to me that even if you introduce a VAT tax, that the government can't resist other forms of taxation as well. A VAT tax just becomes a second tax, and the complaints continue. I would personally like to see a switch to a consumption-based VAT tax if all other forms of taxation could be eliminated, however, the that sort of thing probably will never happen.

    3. Re:VAT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      VAT fraud occurs, and you would probably need to mandate new point-of-sale methods for all VATable transactions, and also catch all online ones, and ensure private sales were not used as a cover for commercial ones. With income tax you can accept some lost VAT, but not so easily if all tax eggs are in one basket. It might work out, but there would be some risk.

      Reverse income tax could work if done simply as a percentage of income up to a certain level.

    4. Re: VAT by senatorpjt · · Score: 1

      Why wouldn't a national sales tax fall under "regulating interstate commerce" like pretty much everything else the federal government does?

    5. Re:VAT by JBMcB · · Score: 1

      Because they have a VAT AND a relatively high corporate income tax. The Scandinavian countries, which generally don't have this problem, have a corporate income tax in the mid 20% range. France, which DOES have this problem, has a corporate income tax rate of 33%. For comparison, the top US corporate income tax rate is 39%.

      --
      My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
    6. Re: VAT by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      Because all of those other areas have at least a pretense of interstate activity. With product sales, however, too many of them are done entirely intrastate, particularly once you start getting to the places like California, Florida, and Texas that can grow their own food and have fairly self-sufficient markets. There's no way to establish a pretense of intrastate activity with those sorts of things.

  32. Re:Thanks Odumba by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Washington has no state income tax. That is immoral.There are over 1million immoral people in Washington state.

  33. Yet another reason why... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We should not have a federation (we should be a unitary democracy instead).

  34. "Not bad for a little letter" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not surprised to hear such self-important pompous shit

  35. Re: Thanks Odumba by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Social structure is complex and there are lots of things people do not personally use but affects their lives, for example a park, or public education (providing educating people that will more likely to help you in case of need) or street signals that help other Amazon to deliver your packages or the healthcare coverage for people that could help you in other ways...

    As a society we are supposed to foster social behaviour but I see that is more prized to be wealthy or famous no matter the costs.

  36. E-waste by tepples · · Score: 1

    The problem with the recommendation based only on breakage is that it ignores a very streamlined system for replacing broken items.

    Who pays for e-waste disposal? I mean the whole cost.

    1. Re:E-waste by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Who cares about e-waste disposal?

      FTFY. Unless you're an employee of Greenpeace the odds of you actually looking up on e-waste policies or giving enough of a crap to even type e-waste into Google is close to 0%.

      But FYI, Surfaces devices are refurbished and either used in fast trades to replace other broken devices or sold through the Microsoft store at a discount. ... Depending on the level of damage of course.

  37. Re: Thanks Odumba by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's been settled law for decades that MS owes the taxes for work done in Washington.

    If they wish to use our courts and our infrastructure, then they need to pay our taxes.

    I don't pay taxes to numerous nations and I don't benefit from their services either.

  38. Re: Thanks Odumba by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Social structure is complex and there are lots of things people do not personally use but affects their lives

    Nonsense, I don't use tanks, bombers, prisons or police ammunition, so I shouldn't have to pay for that. Ditto for fire trucks. I don't live by the border so no border patrol is needed either. My one dimensional thinking is clearly best.

  39. Re:Who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I love how the evangelicals "love him" even though he raised a daughter who not only isn't a devout Christian, or a passive atheist, but actively went out of her way to deny the divinity of Jesus and signed up for believing in an out of date magic book.

  40. Re:Thanks Odumba by Koby77 · · Score: 1

    Washington charges a gasoline tax to pay for its roads, and property taxes to pay for schools. We can see through your tax deceptions: no tax is ever enough. Paraphrasing from Margaret Thatcher, "The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money". You think you're clever and have found a solution by taxing from an ever-widening tax base (kind of like how a pyramid scheme works!). If the local taxpayers are insufficient to pay for your big government boondoggle, then you'll attempt to tax people nationwide. But leftists get mad when business flees the state, and paying customers are prioritized over the interests of government. This is the power of tax competition.

  41. ripped off by senatorpjt · · Score: 1

    > new Surface Laptop that comes with Windows 10 S

    He should have kept the piece of paper, at least it doesn't require that you buy a pen from Microsoft to write on it.

  42. MS is an amature at this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MS is an amature at this.,

    They should look at Google and the absolute master at tax avoidance, APPLE.

  43. Corporate taxes are a dumb idea by iamacat · · Score: 1

    Tax individuals who make up the company. People choose to live in a place for many reasons besides taxes, so mass evasion is less likely. See how many choose to in CA? If you use money wisely and create a nice place to live, that's more important than take home pay to many.

    For companies it's just business. They shift operations in whichever way is optimum for shareholders. But the process is wasteful and hurts economy / employment in general and in US in particular.

    1. Re:Corporate taxes are a dumb idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering that those corporations can use the courts and other benefits of the government as unique individuals, it's only fair they foot the bill for those services.

  44. Why by JThundley · · Score: 1

    Why would Microsoft do that to the poor kid?

  45. Re:Thanks Odumba by whoever57 · · Score: 1

    Paraphrasing from Margaret Thatcher, "The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money"

    I bet you think you are smart for (incorrectly) quoting that, but context is important. When she said something like that, she was not yet Prime Minster and the top marginal tax rate in the UK was 98% (on investment income). So it's not remotely comparable to the situation today.

    Washington schools are not funded by property taxes. Schools are funded at the state level. Property taxes provide some funding, indirectly to schools. So that's another thing you got wrong.

    What is going on is that another state is acting as a parasite. Offering a loophole to a large company such that it can reduce its overall tax burden.

    Schools have to be built, teachers paid, roads built, etc.. In particular, Washington State has many highway bridges that are in desperate need of repair. Yet people like you seem to think that all of this is possible, irrespective of how low tax rates are. Go and look at how that worked out in Kansas.

    --
    The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!