Slashdot Mirror
Google Shifted $23 Billion To Tax Haven Bermuda in 2017, Filing Shows (reuters.com)
schwit1 shares a report: Google moved 19.9 billion euros ($22.7 billion) through a Dutch shell company to Bermuda in 2017, as part of an arrangement that allows it to reduce its foreign tax bill, according to documents filed at the Dutch Chamber of Commerce. The amount channeled through Google Netherlands Holdings BV was around 4 billion euros more than in 2016, the documents, filed on Dec. 21, showed. For more than a decade the arrangement has allowed Google owner Alphabet to enjoy an effective tax rate in the single digits on its non-U.S. profits, around a quarter the average tax rate in its overseas markets. The subsidiary in the Netherlands is used to shift revenue from royalties earned outside the United States to Google Ireland Holdings, an affiliate based in Bermuda, where companies pay no income tax.
4 and a half walls?
Yep, this "tiny" amount you are saying it is, is much more than Trump is asking for a wall. The DNC would rather have illegals killing US citizens and cops and are willing to keep the government shut down for weeks/months in order to allow that to keep happening. Don't worry, the illegal that killed Kate Stynle wasn't convicted and is still out free and in a sanctuary city so he is free to kill again. But its more important to put Trump in his place than protect citizens.
Vote Tyranny, vote DNC.
For the avoidance of any doubt I do not condone arson, larceny or other illegal/antisocial actions.
That said, I would dearly love the following scenarios to play out:
A major fire to break out at an Amazon warehouse or Google office. When they call the (taxpayer funded) fire services they get told "oh we only operate the phones here - you'll have to source the water from Ireland, the crews from Luxembourg, the appliances from Bermuda... after all that's where you operate isn't it? You don't want to get involved with civil society - well provide your own protection through self funding then!"
Similarly for break-ins/vandalisation at Facebook's offices ... "here's a crime number for your insurers... we'll get back to you when we've dealt with incidents affecting those who do engage with civil society and contribute to the common good".
Or roadworks right outside the offices of Vodafone, Oracle, Microsoft - started and then de-prioritised to serve ordinary folk who pay their way - "yes, we'll get back to fixing your road in due course...".
After all disrupting these organisations wouldn't be a big loss because they don't pay much into society now anyway.
The "I'll keep whatever I can and get everyone else to cover externalities and emergencies" rejection of paying the same taxes as others do should come back to bite them when they discover they're neither all powerful nor an island sufficient unto themselves.
Now, whether the government provides good levels of service for the taxation raised is a separate debate; certainly there are many areas where it could do better. Enriching yourselves by demanding the same benefits as everyone whilst doing everything to avoid the common obligations is the behaviour of an antisocial bully.
Ignore chatter. Here is the end game: if they paid more taxes, this would not reduce borrowing one iota, as this would give politicians a few more billion to spend.
There is no "fair share" since that presumes some fixed level of spending. But spending is tied to what they can get away with to buy votes. It will always increase even as times get better and better.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
"Trump at least has started North Korea talking seriously with its neighbors" LOLOLOLLLL keep going world's dumbest retard, this is hilarious shit you're spinning. Let me write this comedy gold down...
Proving that they're progressive about your life and your money and the choices you should be allowed/denied. When it comes to what's good for Google, all that progressive dogma falls away and they might as well be a bank or a drug company or an oil driller. All that progressive dogma is just a show to trick the rubes. Hope none of you were gullible enough to take it seriously.
He found a gun under a public bench that was stolen from a police vehicle, and being an idiot he played with it, it fired, a ricochet hit off the ground and struck Steinle who died tragically. Saying "he shot her" is typical lying by GOP omission.
Also he was not arrested for violence or a serious crime, which he would be reported to ICE if he had been. That's the difference. A violent criminal he is not.
When Republicans lie, all you have to do is state the actual facts to show how dishonest and craven the faggots have allowed themselves to become, for politics.
Because people have this mistaken belief that taxing corporations means you're not taxing people, and so it somehow decreases the tax burden on people if you tax corporations.
Corporate profit is taxed. The remaining profit is then distributed to shareholders as distributions. If you increase corporate taxes, the shareholders get less money as distributions. If you decrease corporate taxes, the shareholders get more money as distributions. So a tax on corporate profit is the same a tax on shareholder distributions. Likewise, a tax on corporate revenue is the same as a tax on sales to customers or wages to employees.
The problem with tax enforcement comes about because corporations can exist in multiple locations simultaneously. This makes it trivial for them to shift money from one tax jurisdiction to another to evade taxes, and you end up playing a game of whack-a-mole. People can't do that - they can only exist in one country at a time, so can't shift money around as freely between countries. Once you realize the fallacy of the notion that taxing corporations is somehow "better" than taxing people, the solution is simple. Eliminate corporate taxes and convert them into taxes on shareholder distributions instead. If you're worried that the shareholders mostly reside in a different company from where the company is doing most of its sales, then just use sales and income taxes instead - that extracts money from the corporation at the point of sale or from employees working for the corporation in your country.
When you tax a financial transaction, it doesn't matter which side of the transaction you tax it. Whether you tax the giver or the recipient of the money, the net result is the same. The giver (be it a customer or corporation) gives x dollars. y% of it becomes tax revenue. The recipient (whether it be a corporation, shareholder, or employee) gets to keep x dollars minus y%.
America ducked a very large bullet — a reboot of the Obama administration under Hillary Clinton. Although President Obama had a more “presidential style” in some respects than Mr. Trump, he was a disaster. Hillary would have been more of the same.
Here are a few other things that Mr. Trump has done:
Appointed Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch and more than 75 other constitutionally sound federal judges, 30 of which are serving.
Reinstated an expanded Mexico City Policy blocking foreign aid from being used for abortions.
Cracked down on illegal immigration and “sanctuary cities.” As Attorney General Jeff Sessions put it: “The lawlessness, the abdication of the duty to enforce our laws, and the catch and release policies of the past are over.”
Issued an order killing two federal regulations for every new one. In actuality, 16 were cut for every new one in his first year, saving billions.
Engineered a historic tax cut that will save money for more than 80 percent of American households.
Withdrew the U.S. from the Paris Climate Agreement, ending the threat of U.S. governance by international bureaucrats.
Reversed onerous Obama environmental rules that gave the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ham-handed authority to destroy the coal industry and abrogate landowners’ rights.
Kick-started America’s energy sector by curtailing regulations, facilitating the Keystone XL Pipeline and opening up vast federal areas to oil and gas exploration.
Presided over an economic and stock market boom, lowered unemployment and brought manufacturing jobs back to America from overseas.
Rebuilt the nation’s military, destroyed ISIS and faced down North Korea’s “Rocket Man.”
Issued an order enforcing First Amendment protections for religious liberty.
Restored the freedom of military chaplains to espouse biblical morality, and essentially reversing Mr. Obama’s transgender military policy.
Revoked the Education Department’s order that public schools allow gender-confused males access to girls’ restrooms and locker rooms.
Cracked down on sex trafficking. President Trump signed a law allowing states to move against sex-ad Internet sites, and the Justice Department on April 6 seized and shut down Backpage.com, which carried ads for prostitution, including trafficked children.
Overhauled the mismanaged Veterans Administration and giving veterans more health care choices.
Replaced Obamacare incrementally, beginning with a repeal of the individual mandate.
Imposed sanctions on Venezuela’s socialist dictatorship and revising Mr. Obama’s deals with communist Cuba.
Recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and repairing damage that Mr. Obama did to the U.S.-Israel relationship.
Worked with Central American nations to crack down on MS-13 gangs.
OK, let’s stop here, though it only scratches the surface.
A question for Mr. Trump’s conservative critics, including some well-meaning evangelicals who rightly express concern over character: Would you really prefer to have a “more presidential” chief executive who promotes socialism, open bordeers, abortion, sexual anarchy and the criminalization of Christianity?
Here are just a few likely outcomes had Mrs. Clinton won:
An explosion in government funding for abortion.
The LGBT political agenda on steroids, with the Justice Department attacking Christian business people who won’t bow to Baal.
Tax increases — not a tax cut — to fund a vast expansion of nanny government.
Obamacare morphing into a single-payer, socialist government monopoly.
Federal agencies like the EPA and the IRS re-weaponized against pol
Tax dodging. Define it as incorporating (directly or indirectly via a parent/holding/etc. corporation) in a nation in which the CxOs, board members, etc. and their immediate families do not physically reside for at least 51% of the year or in which they do not claim citizenship, or in a nation whose individual (citizen) and incorporated investors do not control a plurality of voting shares of the company.
Thus, to incorporate in a country you must have all the higher ups and their families LIVING in that country as CITIZENS for most of the year, and all voting stock must be held within that country. No shell games either. Google gets the most restrictive set of rules and highest tax rates that would apply to Google OR Alphabet OR any of its "holding companies" OR anything like Google China.
You know, the same kind of shit a regular person working/living across state/national borders has to deal with.
Holy shit. You are as bad as the fucking extremist assholes in any third world country. Way to celebrate the US going back to the fucking stoneage.
No matter how smart you are in thinking you can close up the loopholes there are armies of accountants and lawyers who are WAAAY smarter and can figure out a way around it.
Sick of this quote. It is easy to close the loopholes. It is just not a good move politically as you would be painted as introducing something "unfair" (or some other smear campaign).
Remember Dodd-Frank? It was one of those attempts to close a bunch of loopholes in the banking industry, and to an extent it worked and made the financial sector less risky.
It also made the big banks bigger and the small banks smaller.
The problem is to close loopholes you need lots of rules, and if you have lots of rules then businesses need lots of people to ensure they're following those rules, and the bigger the business the more people you can afford.
One of the reasons that Google and Apple are so dominant is there are a lot of rules meant to prevent companies exploiting loopholes, and it's the biggest companies who are best able to invest in circumventing those rules.
Try to close more loopholes and you might end up giving Apple and Google even bigger shares of the economy.
First easy solution: You pay the greater of X% on profit with existing rules OR Y% on gross revenue.
Gross revenue of what? A company from the Netherlands makes a phone in China and sells it in the US for $500.
Which countries deserve to collect which taxes?
I stole this Sig