5 ms·

Not Google being good - Irish law has been changed such that it's no longer permitted. "The legislation passed in Ireland in 2015 ends the use of the tax schem

Not Google being good - Irish law has been changed such that it's no longer permitted. "The legislation passed in Ireland in 2015 ends the use of the tax scheme for new tax plans. However, companies with established structures can continue to benefit from the old system until 2020." https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/double-irish-with-a-dutch-sandwich.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/double-irish-with-a-dut...

josefx 7y ago
> Due largely to international pressure and the publicity surrounding the use of the double Irish with a Dutch sandwich, the Irish finance minister passed measures to close the loopholes in the 2015 budget. The EU ordered them to collect taxes from Apple after it came out that Apple ran an optimized double Irish with special exceptions (private rulings) granted by the Irish tax office. This law change is the result of them getting caught violating European trade agreements that predate the EU itself.
bagacrap 7y ago
If "being good" means intentionally paying more tax than legally obligated, I don't think any corporation fits the bill.
- jsjohnst 7y ago
  > means intentionally paying more tax than legally obligated You have an unusual definition of “legally obligated” if you feel they were 100% following the law doing this. Sure, it used to be legal in Ireland, but intentionally moving IP to claim revenue in a different tax jurisdiction than where the money was earned was a legal grey area at best.
  - chatmasta 7y ago
    It was explicitly, intentionally legal. Ireland enacted these laws so companies like google would move IP and high paying jobs to Ireland. And the Irish economy benefitted from it. You can’t have a fair discussion of the ethics of this scenario without considering the “tax havens” themselves. Shouldn’t a sovereign country like Ireland have the right to enact laws that benefit its economy? For small jurisdictions like the caymans, what looks like a “tax haven” to outsiders is actually a huge boon to their economy and objectively good for their citizens.
    - jsjohnst 7y ago
      I didn’t claim that it was not legal in Ireland, as that’s not the point. Google (and others like Apple) are multi-national companies which means they might not be following the letter, let alone the intent, of the law in other jurisdictions in which they do business by using this loophole. It’s definitively a legal grey area and everyone skilled in international tax law I’ve read on the topic agree. So saying it’s flat out legal everywhere is glossing over important considerations, and at best comes off naive.
- domador 7y ago
  What if "being good" means "no legal arbitrage" and "no jurisdiction shopping"? What if it means "not really, really going out of your way to find ways to pay less tax, including by buying legislation"?
  - kmlx 7y ago
    what if it means no more taxes to corrupt governments?
- Proven 7y ago
  Being good means paying as little tax as possible. > I don't think any corporation fits the bill. Every employee, including the CFO, is paid to make their company's shareholders better off. For the CFO that means avoiding as many taxes as possible. The less they pay, the better off workers are (and that's not because the company is left with more money, but because the government spends less - you may want to consult economic literature on that).
jiveturkey 7y ago
> Not Google being good That goes without saying. What does need to be said is that anti-Google implications should not be taken from this statement. 1. The prior and new behavior is neither good nor bad. 2. That only Google does this is, and should be singled out, is a bit of pitchfork-ism (to be fair, from the article, not your comment). Lots of companies do this and lots of companies will need to stop doing it. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/06/world/apple-taxes-jersey.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/06/world/apple-taxes-jersey....
- stefano 7y ago
  > 1. The prior and new behavior is neither good nor bad. That depends from which point of view you're looking at it. Technically according to the law? All good. Ethically? Different people will have different opinions, but many would agree that it's bad behaviour. You're a law abiding leech on society, but you're still a leech.
  - jiveturkey 7y ago
    You are still arguing good or bad! I say, it's completely amoral. Google (and the scores of others doing this) are smart, clever, and correct for taking advantage of loopholes like this. If it is in fact legal but unethical, it's easily addressed by Congress. Expecting companies to self-regulate their tax burden is foolish. Google, Apple and the rest are not "public benefit companies" with the declared benefit of maximizing their tax burden. 'Leech' as well is quite a strong word, most unjustified IMHO. ps. It's not Google/Apple/etc themselves that find these loopholes; it's outsourced specialists.

josefx 7y ago

> Due largely to international pressure and the publicity surrounding the use of the double Irish with a Dutch sandwich, the Irish finance minister passed measures to close the loopholes in the 2015 budget. The EU ordered them to collect taxes from Apple after it came out that Apple ran an optimized double Irish with special exceptions (private rulings) granted by the Irish tax office. This law change is the result of them getting caught violating European trade agreements that predate the EU itself.

bagacrap 7y ago

If "being good" means intentionally paying more tax than legally obligated, I don't think any corporation fits the bill.

jsjohnst 7y ago
> means intentionally paying more tax than legally obligated You have an unusual definition of “legally obligated” if you feel they were 100% following the law doing this. Sure, it used to be legal in Ireland, but intentionally moving IP to claim revenue in a different tax jurisdiction than where the money was earned was a legal grey area at best.
- chatmasta 7y ago
  It was explicitly, intentionally legal. Ireland enacted these laws so companies like google would move IP and high paying jobs to Ireland. And the Irish economy benefitted from it. You can’t have a fair discussion of the ethics of this scenario without considering the “tax havens” themselves. Shouldn’t a sovereign country like Ireland have the right to enact laws that benefit its economy? For small jurisdictions like the caymans, what looks like a “tax haven” to outsiders is actually a huge boon to their economy and objectively good for their citizens.
  - jsjohnst 7y ago
    I didn’t claim that it was not legal in Ireland, as that’s not the point. Google (and others like Apple) are multi-national companies which means they might not be following the letter, let alone the intent, of the law in other jurisdictions in which they do business by using this loophole. It’s definitively a legal grey area and everyone skilled in international tax law I’ve read on the topic agree. So saying it’s flat out legal everywhere is glossing over important considerations, and at best comes off naive.
domador 7y ago
What if "being good" means "no legal arbitrage" and "no jurisdiction shopping"? What if it means "not really, really going out of your way to find ways to pay less tax, including by buying legislation"?
- kmlx 7y ago
  what if it means no more taxes to corrupt governments?
Proven 7y ago
Being good means paying as little tax as possible. > I don't think any corporation fits the bill. Every employee, including the CFO, is paid to make their company's shareholders better off. For the CFO that means avoiding as many taxes as possible. The less they pay, the better off workers are (and that's not because the company is left with more money, but because the government spends less - you may want to consult economic literature on that).

jiveturkey 7y ago

> Not Google being good That goes without saying. What does need to be said is that anti-Google implications should not be taken from this statement. 1. The prior and new behavior is neither good nor bad. 2. That only Google does this is, and should be singled out, is a bit of pitchfork-ism (to be fair, from the article, not your comment). Lots of companies do this and lots of companies will need to stop doing it. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/06/world/apple-taxes-jersey.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/06/world/apple-taxes-jersey....

stefano 7y ago
> 1. The prior and new behavior is neither good nor bad. That depends from which point of view you're looking at it. Technically according to the law? All good. Ethically? Different people will have different opinions, but many would agree that it's bad behaviour. You're a law abiding leech on society, but you're still a leech.
- jiveturkey 7y ago
  You are still arguing good or bad! I say, it's completely amoral. Google (and the scores of others doing this) are smart, clever, and correct for taking advantage of loopholes like this. If it is in fact legal but unethical, it's easily addressed by Congress. Expecting companies to self-regulate their tax burden is foolish. Google, Apple and the rest are not "public benefit companies" with the declared benefit of maximizing their tax burden. 'Leech' as well is quite a strong word, most unjustified IMHO. ps. It's not Google/Apple/etc themselves that find these loopholes; it's outsourced specialists.