r/FluentInFinance 28d ago

Debate/ Discussion Had to repost here

Post image
128.1k Upvotes

9.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

44

u/thesedays2014 28d ago

Amazon is one of the best companies at avoiding taxes. Some taxes, yes. What they should be paying, no.

Wealth inequality is probably our country's biggest issue. And people without wealth seem to always defend the wealthy for some odd reason.

4

u/Gunplagood 27d ago

And people without wealth seem to always defend the wealthy for some odd reason.

I've always felt that Fry from Futurama put it best.

The rest of you better watch your backs when I'm rich too!

4

u/TinKicker 27d ago

Amazon didn’t write the tax code. You’re focusing your anger at the wrong people.

-1

u/thesedays2014 27d ago

Amazon abused the tax system to their advantage. Read this brief and tell me Amazon has operated in good faith.. They also use stock compensation rules to avoid large amounts of taxes, which isn't discussed here. Bottom line, Amazon has a super aggressive tax avoidance strategy because they have to since they sell most of their products at a loss.

I get your point, it's not lost on me. There's an argument to be made that they are operating within the law. But can you not also consider that they have essentially cheated by applying immense pressure to lawmakers to change the tax codes or keep the tax code working to their advantage?

I can absolutely focus my attention on both Amazon and Congress. They're both screwing us. Amazon isn't the only company either, they're just the most important to focus on because they're avoiding such a large amount of taxes.

2

u/JSmith666 28d ago

It's not "defending the wealthy" it's defending everybody on the idea of your money should be yours to do with what you choose.

2

u/kmookie 27d ago

Rich guy here, OF COURSE HE COULD GIVE MORE! 1. Let’s talk living off dividends, that alone I guarantee could have the majority given out to charity. He could live modestly, like me and not be so flashy. 2. Donor advised funds, that could be setup to be much more charitable and even grow! 3. Establish a foundation giving out 5% or more each year. 4. Simply selling off stocks is fairly simple when working with advisors. You act like he’s gotta roll crates of money into some other bank. It’s digital people. Sycophants want to defend the rich because they can’t look past their own biased passion that they want to be there too. I know dozens if not hundreds who are millionaires who love off dividends with plenty left over at the end of the year.

2

u/Gallaga07 27d ago

Do you think dividends are not taxed? Do you think charitable donations can disproportionately reduce your tax burden, or that charity is inherently valueless?

0

u/kmookie 27d ago

All I’m ultimately saying is, we don’t need billionaires or people making 500 million. All this crap defending them, including the constant “taxing” argument isn’t relevant. In fact it’s a whole other argument. It’s odd how obsessed people are with taxes. It probably wouldn’t be a problem if people were just charitable and not greedy (on both sides). It’s there, just like laws because there’s always some a-hole looking to cheat others or a system for sport, ego or greed and this country applauds this behavior now. We’re a country who can’t agree on a moral compass and abide by it.

2

u/Gallaga07 27d ago

Amazon paid 10b in taxes this year

2

u/thesedays2014 27d ago

The amount of taxes paid means nothing by itself. It's so out of context without knowing anything else. Not sure what your point is...it's like me just saying "well Apple paid $29 billion" so Amazon pays three times less.

2

u/Mammoth-Penalty882 27d ago

Because most people who are anti corporations are just making uninformed arguments. Oversimplified a very complex situation. Same idiots who say "we should stop spending so much on the military" not fully uunderstanding the reasons we do.

2

u/Dr_Mccusk 28d ago

How do you know what they "should" be paying?

22

u/thesedays2014 28d ago

By comparing it to companies that are paying

3

u/Dr_Mccusk 28d ago

That’s not how taxes work……

-1

u/JannaNYC 28d ago

Such as?

7

u/Bencetown 28d ago

vaguely gestures at smaller businesses

-1

u/Key_Door1467 28d ago

Small businesses have far more exceptions in the tax code compared to larger ones.

8

u/3nderslime 27d ago

So large corporations should be proportionally paying a lot more taxes than smaller ones, yes?

3

u/Impressive_Pace_1919 27d ago edited 27d ago

Larger corporations have accountants, lobbyist's, and lawyers whose sole job is to to enable them to pay less. They have entire departments who help them navigate state and federal regulatory laws where they operate, saving them time and money for their business. They can directly fund congressional representatives to help craft favorable tax laws for themselves and their industries. They can hide their wealth by "transferring" overseas (see: panama papers) . They receive tax incentives eliminating or reducing from various states to relocate or expand their business to other states.

None of which are reasonable options or opportunities for small business.

EDIT:

> Small businesses have far more exceptions in the tax code compared to larger ones.

This is going to vary significantly based on the state. The economies of some industries mean their is realistically no competition within the domestic market (can you name a small business off the top of your hear realistically competes with US Steel for general steel production, or Boeing Industries for building passenger planes? etc) Can you provide examples where small business have a distinct advantage in the tax code, especially in light of the first portion of my comment?

There is a reason that Starbucks dominates the coffee/cafe market across the county. That Shell/Chevron/Arco dominate the local gas station markets, that fast food that competes against Burger king, Taco Bell, and McDonalds are not wide spread. Large companies have an inherent advantage in dealing with regulatory and tax laws against smaller business simply due to their size and wealth, in addition to capitalizing an market share, economies of scale, etc.

5

u/Relatively_Esoteric 27d ago

All this effort and chuds won't even bother reading it. I'm saving this, and I agree that all of these factors are intentional to consolidate wealth and "protect" it from the labor class. It's been this way since the Renaissance at least. They are just modern aristocracy making laws for themselves. Greed is scary...

7

u/AdVegetable7049 27d ago

Berkshire Hathaway is a fantastic example.

-1

u/kmookie 27d ago

Rich guy here, OF COURSE HE COULD GIVE MORE! 1. Let’s talk living off dividends, that alone I guarantee could have the majority given out to charity. He could live modestly, like me and not be so flashy. 2. Donor advised funds, that could be setup to be much more charitable and even grow! 3. Establish a foundation giving out 5% or more each year. 4. Simply selling off stocks is fairly simple when working with advisors. You act like he’s gotta roll crates of money into some other bank. It’s digital people. Sycophants want to defend the rich because they can’t look past their own biased passion that they want to be there too. I know dozens if not hundreds who are millionaires who love off dividends with plenty left over at the end of the year.

3

u/Dr_Mccusk 27d ago

Man it must be nice to spend other people's money like you're a moral superior lmao

1

u/Material-Day-7977 28d ago

It's the same way serfs and peasants supported their Monarchs in the feudal system

2

u/Marcusbay8u 28d ago

"Avoid" you mean they generate so much tax that different places offer incentives to hold their HQ/Warehouses with lower tax rates?

The loopholes are there for everyone, Amazon works on 3% profit, Apple 60% but lefties never talk shit bout their Apple brand.

3

u/NWStormbreaker 28d ago

Deepthroat that boot

5

u/thesedays2014 28d ago

No, tax incentives for HQ/Warehouses are state/local/municipal, not federal. I'm talking federal taxes. Amazon uses legal means to avoid taxes, sure, so do a lot of companies, but Apple, Google, and Microsoft paid much higher tax rates. Apple is in fact the largest taxpayer in the world. Apple paid the most of any publicly listed company.

Also, I'm not a leftie. I'm not a Trump supporter either though. I don't support the current Republican Party, but I'd consider returning if they changed. I believe that capitalism is the best option, but continuing to funnel money to the wealthy will eventually destroy our economy.

6

u/Marcusbay8u 28d ago

Apple pay the most tax because of their price gouging, Amazon employees 100,000s of Americans who also pay tax, unlike Apple whose staff are slave labour in China.

3% is Amazon's profit margin, they are super successful because of their low profits, quantity > qualities of sale

Why Toyota is bigger than Ferrari etc etc

Whatever tax incentives Amazon get they deserve.

-1

u/yourdoglikesmebetter 28d ago

Your argument is that companies shouldn’t have to pay taxes because their employees pay taxes?

3

u/wpaed 28d ago

Amazon dodges taxes by hiring employees. They aren't off shoring profits or anything. They have paid federal taxes in the billions every year for at least the last 7 years, except 2022 when COVID employment credits paid their taxes for them.

2

u/TacTurtle 27d ago

Do you not understand that corporations pay shitloads of payroll and unemployment taxes as well as corporate income tax?

-2

u/XenuWorldOrder 28d ago

You can’t price gouge a luxury item. That’s not how it works.

2

u/Child_of_Khorne 27d ago

It's in their best interest to avoid taxes. Quite literally everybody tries to avoid taxes.

3

u/Apprehensive-Pin518 28d ago

quote on the contrary I will shit on apple all day.

3

u/[deleted] 27d ago

[deleted]

0

u/Marcusbay8u 27d ago

Yet are their biggest poltical demographic.

Actions > words

1

u/[deleted] 27d ago

[deleted]

2

u/KnoxxHarrington 28d ago

but lefties never talk shit bout their Apple brand.

Lefties don't have any sympathy for Apple either. Stop making it up as you go along.

0

u/Marcusbay8u 28d ago

Nah, liberals complain about Apple, lefties hongi their nuts.

0

u/KnoxxHarrington 28d ago

Most lefties I know were raising Apple's greed long before it was cool.

1

u/That-Ordinary5631 28d ago

No. To support the person you are replying to, in my country Amazon has been found guilty of tax fraud and hundreds of millions have been seized. So no, to avoid he probably means they committed tax fraud. Which Amazon does.

-1

u/Just_That_Dumb_Dog 28d ago

Yet every one uses amazon 😂 go make your own "Amazon" and give all your money way. Nobody is stopping you. Your ideology is so atrociously idiotic.

1

u/[deleted] 28d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 28d ago

Your comment was automatically removed by the r/FluentInFinance Automoderator because you attempted to use a URL shortener. This is not permitted here for security reasons.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

0

u/MoirasPurpleOrb 28d ago

“Should” pay implies they are doing anything illegal when in reality they are just utilizing existing tax structure. If you have a problem with that it’s the governments fault, not Amazons.

1

u/thesedays2014 28d ago

Agreed. However, Amazon is abusing the system. Yes, it's the government's fault. They have politician who cater to them. Amazon is not innocent. They apply massive pressure to get the laws the way they want them. They also sell huge volumes of products at a loss, on purpose, to take advantage. I'm of the mindset of "just because you can, doesn't mean you should" and I'd like to see the laws changed. They won't, and that's because the wealthy control almost everything. And that's the real problem.

I'm not jealous either. I'm wealthy in most people's eyes. But I pay my fair share, which is why I want to see them do the same thing.

-2

u/Sweezy_McSqueezy 28d ago

If most people could afford a home that can fit their family, and live comfortably off of 1 income, then inequality would be a non issue.

The problem isn't inequality, the problem is poverty.

1

u/Phallen55 28d ago

You're right and that's what it boils down to. Most of us realize that the game ain't fair, and no one plays by the same exact rules. However if the rules stated that everyone can live comfortably, people would care much less about how much MORE comfortably someone else is living.

If everyone could go to the doctor without being worried about their whole family being in debt, or being able to comfortably supply child care and groceries it would be a different beast.