●Stories
●Firehose
●All
●Popular
●Polls
●Software
●Thought Leadership
Submit
●
Login
●or
●
Sign up
●Topics:
●Devices
●Build
●Entertainment
●Technology
●Open Source
●Science
●YRO
●Follow us:
●RSS
●Facebook
●LinkedIn
●Twitter
●
Youtube
●
Mastodon
●Bluesky
Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!
Forgot your password?
Close
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Load 500 More Comments
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
/Sea
Score:
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
More
Login
Forgot your password?
Close
Close
Log In/Create an Account
●
All
●
Insightful
●
Informative
●
Interesting
●
Funny
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
byeldavojohn ( 898314 ) * writes:
How Google Avoided Paying $60 Billion In Taxes
Yeah, unless you read the article that says:
Such income shifting costs the U.S. government as much as $60 billion in annual revenue, according to Kimberly A. Clausing, an economics professor at Reed College in Portland, Oregon.
That's $60 billion total per year. Not just from Google but from every American business using these tax loopholes (Microsoft and Facebook included). The article clarifies:
Google Inc. cut its taxes by $3.1 billion in the last three years using a technique that moves most of its foreign profits through Ireland and the Netherlands to Bermuda.
Emphasis mine. So you can see that it's on average a billion a year that Google saves doing this. Not $60 billion. Do I still feel like they're shafting me? Yes. But not 15% of their stock market worth. That's just unimaginable. Here's a bigger survey of companies using these loopholes [bloomberg.com]
byPojut ( 1027544 ) writes:
The widespread use of loopholes by companies/"rich" people always really pissed me off. They constantly complain so much of their wealth is being taken, yet they pull crap like this.
I would bet you that if my wife and I tried to do something similar, we would almost certainly be "caught". I don't know if loopholes are due to the complexity of the system, or because the big guys can afford to pay folks who know how to exploit them...but regardless of the reason, it's fucked up.
byMyLongNickName ( 822545 ) writes:
I almost never agree with the parent poster. However, who in the hell marked the parent post "troll"? Some Google fanboy?
byicebike ( 68054 ) writes:
who in the hell marked the parent post "troll"
Perhaps someone who knows how to read and follow the links to the actual story. Google did noting wrong. That money was all earned overseas, and kept overseas and spent overseas.
Its perfectly legal, and they paid all the required taxes in the country where it was earned. No laws were violated.
So what's your beef?
byPojut ( 1027544 ) writes:
Its perfectly legal, and they paid all the required taxes in the country where it was earned. No laws were violated.
So what's your beef?
That was my entire point...it shouldn't be legal, and when a company does this, laws should have been violated.
Was racial discrimination OK back when it was legal?
byicebike ( 68054 ) writes:
Its perfectly legal, and they paid all the required taxes in the country where it was earned. No laws were violated.
So what's your beef?
That was my entire point...it shouldn't be legal, and when a company does this, laws should have been violated.
Ok, lets take your (implied) assumption, that Google should pay taxes on its world wide earnings regardless of the country in which it was earned.
Ok? Sound reasonable so far?
Now, google has to follow the law in every country where they have an office and a corporate structure. So same rules apply to all those countries. Earnings in France, US, Japan, etc, all have to have taxes paid in Britain, and again in Norway, and again in China. Never mind that the money was earned in, and kept in the USA.
Has the flaw
byYakasha ( 42321 ) writes:
Ok, lets take your (implied) assumption, that Google should pay taxes on its world wide earnings regardless of the country in which it was earned.
Ok? Sound reasonable so far?
Considering that is *exactly* what I must do? Yes, sounds reasonable that we should all follow the same rules.
Now, google has to follow the law in every country where they have an office and a corporate structure. So same rules apply to all those countries. Earnings in France, US, Japan, etc, all have to have taxes paid in Britain, and again in Norway, and again in China. Never mind that the money was earned in, and kept in the USA.
That is not what he is saying. Nobody should have to pay taxes on the same income more than once. The problem is explained below.
Has the flaw of your assumption dawned on you yet?
You earn a dollar in the US, and just because you have a post office box in Australia you have to pay their taxes too?
You drove thru another state on your summer vacation. Are you going to file income tax in that state? You used their facilities, roads, etc. How bout paying your fair share?
Any bells going off yet?
Google is using loopholes to pay notaxes on their income. They keep their headquarters in USA, their primary work force is in USA, their primary income source is USA, etc. Not Bermuda. They do not have anything other than a 1 room office with a single janitor in Ber
byicebike ( 68054 ) writes:
They don't transfer "all their money there".
They transfer their foreign earnings from SOME countries there AFTER complying with the tax laws of those countries.
If Ireland doesn't like this, Ireland can change its laws.
But if Ireland is ok with this, then what is your problem?
Should google pay Ireland more money than their tax code requires? How much more? How should they compute it?
Google pays all the US taxes they are obligated to pay. READ THE ARTICLE. This is about earnings overseas, which are kept overseas, not about earnings in the US.
How much additional taxes, above what is required by law, did you contribute last year?
Parent
twitter
facebook
bykoiransuklaa ( 1502579 ) writes:
Look, everyone agrees this is legal. Many are just saying it's not right -- not for people who claim to do no evil at least.
You are looking at the technical details of the tax evasion and concluded that it's perfectly legal, while others are stopping to think "that shouldn't be how it works..."
byicebike ( 68054 ) writes:
Look, everyone agrees this is legal. Many are just saying it's not right -- not for people who claim to do no evil at least.
No, that's not at all what people are saying. Read the replies in this thread.
People are actually suggesting google should pay taxes it is not required to pay, just because they are google. They should just make up some huge number and mail in a check, and never mind what the tax codes in these countries actually require.
What google did is both LEGAL and RIGHT. If it weren't Ireland would be all over google's case. If google just decided to dump huge piles of cash on Ireland their share holders would ha
byYakasha ( 42321 ) writes:
No, that's not at all what people are saying. Read the replies in this thread.
People are actually suggesting google should pay taxes it is not required to pay, just because they are google.
No, I'm suggesting they should pay the taxes because they are no different than any other entity in the united states that pays taxes. Everybody *can* do what Google is doing (I know some independent business owners that don't own a house or car and make less than $25k / year... yet drive a new Mercedes and live in Beverly Hills because their company owns everything, its sneaky, immoral, shouldn't happen, but its legal), but nobody SHOULD.
The very definition of a law "loophole" is something that was not
byicebike ( 68054 ) writes:
lets see, murder, sex organs, Bush, marijuana, off-label drugs,
You forgot Hitler! Surely you can work him in there and go for the Full Godwin?!??
bykoiransuklaa ( 1502579 ) writes:
When Ireland no longer feels its JUST or RIGHT they will change their laws.
And how would they go about changing the law? I would assume that happens by public discussion about what is right -- exactly the thing that's happening here.
You just keep telling everyone we can't have this conversation, so it's a little confusing :)
byYakasha ( 42321 ) writes:
READ THE ARTICLE.
I have. So let me reply with:
UNDERSTAND THE ARTICLE.
I know that won't happen by just saying it, so I'll explain a little.
Google developed and patented their search technology here, in the US. They then sold that property to a wholly owned subsidiary in a foreign country. That subsidiary owns another subsidiary which does all the selling. That 3rd subsidiary then pays royalties to its owner for the rights to the property. The 3rd subsidiaries profits are then near 0, avoiding taxes. Meanwhile, th
There may be more comments in this discussion. Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to turn on Classic Discussion System in your preferences instead.
Slashdot
●
●
Submit Story
It is much harder to find a job than to keep one.
●FAQ
●Story Archive
●Hall of Fame
●Advertising
●Terms
●Privacy Statement
●About
●Feedback
●Mobile View
●Blog
Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
Copyright © 2026 Slashdot Media. All Rights Reserved.
×
Close
Working...
Working...