Yeah it's so frustrating when he makes a valid point but it's so transparently self-serving that it minimizes the actual issue. He doesn't give af that they're not paying taxes.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Trump accuses Amazon of hurting 'tax paying retailers'
- Thread starter Zolo
- Start date
Yeah it's so frustrating when he makes a valid point but it's so transparently self-serving that it minimizes the actual issue. He doesn't give af that they're not paying taxes.
There are legitimate concerns about Amazon's methods of limiting how much tax they pay (as with many companies). That's not what Trump was talking about, however.
He was specifically talking about sales tax in the US, and he was 100% wrong, as he was the last time he made the same complaint. At least he's consistent in his idiocy.
He was specifically talking about sales tax in the US, and he was 100% wrong, as he was the last time he made the same complaint. At least he's consistent in his idiocy.
Which they ALL take advantage of. That is nothing unique to Amazon. What you were arguing is that Amazon should be punished for having less overhead. That is nonsense.
Charles Brandon
Member
I though he hadn't referred to anything specifically, just that they don't pay enough
Spirit of Jazz
Banned
Hey, Trump doesn't comment on subjects until he has all the fact. Give the guy a bit more credit.
He said Amazon is doing great damage to tax paying retailers. Towns, cities and states throughout the U.S. are being hurt - many jobs being lost!
If he were more competent then we could give him the benefit of the doubt that he understands Amazon makes customers pay sales tax (even though he was wrong about it a month or two ago) and that his argument is a more subtle one about the downsides of a massive retailer shrinking the market for competitors.
Personally, if the choice is between him being wrong again or being subtle, nuanced, and correct I know which way I'm leaning.
legacyzero
Banned
Well maybe those retail stores should step the fuck up and try to compete. I went into my local mall (which is slowly dying) to see what's going on in there a few days ago. Was a fucking ghost town. Sears and JC Penney were just plain empty of customers looking at the price tags for shit, it was unreal.
So not only are they not doing anything to get people in there door, especially Millennials, the prices are outrageous.
Same reason Blockbuster died and more local movie stores survived. They weren't willing to do anything different.
So not only are they not doing anything to get people in there door, especially Millennials, the prices are outrageous.
Same reason Blockbuster died and more local movie stores survived. They weren't willing to do anything different.
Charles Brandon
Member
Define ALL. Not ALL companies have the means to set up complicated systems which route their profits through low tax jurisdictions such as Luxembourg through incredibly complex multi-corporate, multi-jurisdictional structures. Very few companies have the means to do this. Those that do, should be hounded about it. This is a thread about Amazon, so I am discussing Amazon. I assure you that there are not many companies that approach Amazon in terms of the scale of their tax dodging but for the few that are in the same league, they should all be attacked, repeatedly.
This has got nothing to do with having less overhead, unless you mean less tax overhead.
Well it's what's kept him relevant for 30 years, sooo... I guess it makes sense to him.
Charles Brandon
Member
But he could also be referring to the ability of amazon to charge less due to having less tax to pay, even including sales tax.
Having said that, I do have a great deal of sympathy with your final remark.
GifGafIsTheBestGaf
Member
he is just probably jealous
Didn't they just last week celebrate giving Foxconn big tax breaks to open a factory? The gop doesn't care about repatrioting overseas money. They could do that easily if they wanted. This is just trump trying to hurt Amazon's worth via Twitter so that bezos will push the post will write less negative shit about how shitty a human bag of shit he is. It's not even that though. Trump isn't that smart.
Which retailers took advantage of the outdated rules of Quill to not collect sales tax?
I do and that's where your thinking is flawed. Amazon is providing a service that is helping redefine retail. That doesn't mean they are angels by any stretch of the imagination but to call them out as priority number one as you did is what is counterproductive. They should all be called out at the same time otherwise all it does is give the competitors a chance to take advantage without doing anything new. That doesn't help customers, it only hurts.
Wolfgunblood Garopa
Member
This. People want to go to stores and shop but retail thinks they can just keep doing the same things and get business.
Camp Freddie
Member
This is a weird one. Both sides can be arseholes.
Trump's kinda right, since Amazon use a huge web of holding companies to avoid tax. While most multinationals do this (and gaming companies are terrible at the artificial IP license fees double-dutch tax dodge), Amazon is a particularly egregious offender (see Project Goldcrest). It goes way beyond just relocating to Luxembourg for a low corporate tax rate.
On the other hand, Trump's just having a go at the Wash.Po. and Bezos. I doubt he'd be saying this about a prominent republican business (I expect Big Oil companies are at least as bad as Amazon).
Also, while I didn't defend Amazon, it's pretty much inevitable that large companies will dominate retail in the age of the internet due to the economies-of-scale.
Lastly, if Trump is serious, then why doesn't he make any effort to change it? He leads the largest economy on Earth, so if anyone can change corporate tax liabilities it's him.
Trump's kinda right, since Amazon use a huge web of holding companies to avoid tax. While most multinationals do this (and gaming companies are terrible at the artificial IP license fees double-dutch tax dodge), Amazon is a particularly egregious offender (see Project Goldcrest). It goes way beyond just relocating to Luxembourg for a low corporate tax rate.
On the other hand, Trump's just having a go at the Wash.Po. and Bezos. I doubt he'd be saying this about a prominent republican business (I expect Big Oil companies are at least as bad as Amazon).
Also, while I didn't defend Amazon, it's pretty much inevitable that large companies will dominate retail in the age of the internet due to the economies-of-scale.
Lastly, if Trump is serious, then why doesn't he make any effort to change it? He leads the largest economy on Earth, so if anyone can change corporate tax liabilities it's him.
Charles Brandon
Member
Amazon does not have any real competitors though, the other companies that do this stuff are in other markets, although there may be some crossover.
Amazon has less tax overhead because they take advantage of "loopholes" that are not available to any but the biggest corporations on earth. These loopholes are legally dubious but that can only be settled by a court. The IRS has gone after them and lost earlier this year, the EU are going after them at the moment.
The fact that the IRS lost does not mean they should not continue to attack them and if they cannot be successful, then they should legislate.
Useful summary:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-amazon-com-irs-idUKKBN16U36B
edit: agree with man above me
Amazon has less tax overhead because they take advantage of "loopholes" that are not available to any but the biggest corporations on earth. These loopholes are legally dubious but that can only be settled by a court. The IRS has gone after them and lost earlier this year, the EU are going after them at the moment.
The fact that the IRS lost does not mean they should not continue to attack them and if they cannot be successful, then they should legislate.
Useful summary:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-amazon-com-irs-idUKKBN16U36B
edit: agree with man above me
I don't know about the UK but they have competitors elsewhere. It's true they take advantage of loopholes, I'm not saying they don't but they have less overhead to tax because they do not need the large physical presence retail outlets do. Their purchase of Whole Foods may change that but as of now they don't.
Charles Brandon
Member
Yes all that is true but in addition to those points they also do all that other stuff I posted about.
Savings related to small premises footprint and economies of scales are within the scope of fair corporate behaviour (arguable I suppose)
Savings related to tax avoidance structures are unfair.
Savings related to small premises footprint and economies of scales are within the scope of fair corporate behaviour (arguable I suppose)
Savings related to tax avoidance structures are unfair.
Alex_Mexico
Member
Didn't the Post publicated that Trump's dad was arrested in a KKK rally in the 1920s or something? Trump is so petty and transparent that I could swear to you this tweet is in retaliation for that (since Amazon and the WP are owned by the same billionaire).
Rran
Member
hahhaha seriously, what the hell, Trump? Who are you talking to? He holds the highest office in the country (and didn't he castigate Hillary in one of the debates for not changing the tax laws while she was a fucking senator (even though she did vote in favor of one of the bills addressing the tax issue)?). With that said, he's also stated numerous times how he's smart for paying as little as possible, sooooo are we to surmise that Amazon, as a business, is also smart for paying as little as possible in their taxes, or is Trump indirectly saying he should be paying more as well?
I disagree with Trump's statement, and think it's likely based on the inaccurate belief that they're no longer requiring customers to pay sales tax. but Amazon having jobs does not disprove the notion that they're leading to fewer retail jobs overall. Amazon is famous for its efficiency and low overhead with heavy use of robotics and automation to help streamline its warehouses. If $1 billion dollars of goods are sold at other retailers that will almost certainly require more jobs/people than Amazon handling $1 billion dollars of goods.
The flip-side is that lower costs are good for many people and allow people to save more money.
Yeah, that is absolutely arguable no,ifs ands or buts. You continuously miss the point that Amazon is competing with the likes of Walmart, Target, Costco, etc. who ALL want a piece of that online pie yet Amazon should be called out first while they those reailers take advantage? No I disagree with that. Those retailers are just as much tax cheats as Amazon but because they have more physical space it seems unfair when it's not.
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
So? Unless they physically selling it to Amazon, it's not amazons job to collect taxes that by law they aren't required to collect even if they did outright buy it as stock for their warehouse. They charge sales tax for "fulfilled by" orders for companies in the same state.
They shit on Trump all the time.
Charles Brandon
Member
Well, no, to my knowledge they are not just as much tax cheats as Amazon. That is the point. Very few companies are. Some that spring to mind are Apple, Starbucks and Vodafone. AFAIK (and I may be wrong I suppose) none of the companies listed have structures on anything like the scale of the one operated by Amazon. If I am wrong and they do the same thing, then they should be targeted too. I don't have a vendetta against Amazon, I don't like companies gaining an unfair advantage by the use of tax schemes.
edit: Apparently the big seven for this sort of thing are Amazon, Google, Apple, Gap, Ikea, Starbucks and Microsoft
It's really not true. I don't think WalMart, Target, Costco, etc. can use the intangible software licensing trick. They also were forbidden from enjoying the benefits of the Quill decision, which Amazon enjoyed for 23 years and Amazon has started collecting taxes just as the courts are starting to overturn Quill.
So, if they want to store products, take orders/payment, and ship orders on behalf of a third parties, they should collect taxes too. Maybe they're aren't legally required to but they should be.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2015/06/17/walmart-tax-havens/28857753/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/peterjreilly/2012/12/02/is-costcos-jim-senegal-a-hypocrite/#3018d8c57c62
http://money.cnn.com/2016/02/14/news/companies/ikea-tax-avoidance-europe/index.html
Well they are, you're welcome.
They sure were at one time on online sales or at least I know Walmart was anyway.
Charles Brandon
Member
I am happy to include Walmart, based on that article, in my rogues gallery and I already edited in Ikea. The Costco thing though, does not merit inclusion based on that article alone, that's small beer by comparison.
You can take my remarks about amazon and apply them to Walmart and the other companies listed, with my best wishes.
You can take my remarks about amazon and apply them to Walmart and the other companies listed, with my best wishes.
The WalMart story is just about holding companies and not licensing of intangibles. It really is nothing special. You are still generally subject to Subpart F taxation unless those holding companies are engaging in substantive business activities.
Costco paid out a dividend right before individual income tax rates rose--how is that cheating the system?
Nobody mentioned Ikea because they aren't similar to these other retailers. It is easy for a company that is selling its own products (Ikea, Apple, etc.) to benefit from transfer pricing structuring.
You are incorrect. Please show me a source that says WalMart took advantage of Quill. The only potential situation is where they shipped items to locations without WalMart stores.
In other words it's okay to cheat as long as you do it the right way.
If you are subject to Subpart F taxation, you haven't cheated on taxes. In fact, you are being taxed for holding money in a shell company.
How is deciding to pay a dividend cheating in any sense?
Fine I concede Costco. Point is the major retailers are cheating the gov't left and right. The shell game is a fancy way of diverting taxes like welfare for the rich. It's not illegal but neither is what Amazon does.
Charles Brandon
Member
So...shouldn't that be stopped?
And_Gignac
Member
He is not wrong. Amazon's low prices are not organically created.
witchedwiz
Member
No mom and pop shop can compete with amazon price cut, news at 11...
Trump criticizing amazon is kinda funny...
Yes? We were talking about Amazon being picked first.
FantasticMrFoxdie
Mumber
Nintendo's Witch
Member
Populism at its finest.
He's right tho.
He's right tho.
HammerOfThor
Member
I mean, how does Trump not realize that whenever he talks shit like this is just fuels the Post to dig up more dirt on him.
Also, the teapot is really calling the kettle black here. Like, bigly.
Also, the teapot is really calling the kettle black here. Like, bigly.
Charles Brandon
Member
Whether or not Amazon is picked first is not of particular interest. They have already been picked anyway, as have all the others probably. The IRS have swung and missed and the EU are coming up to bat. The IRS need to get back in the game and go after them again, and the others. It is no concern of mine which of them is target number one. Who cares?
I've already explained why I think it's wrong to single out just Amazon first. If you don't buy that argument, fine. I'm not rehashing it.
Actually he is. I pay tax on everything from Amazon, and any tax breaks Amazon enjoys are enjoyed by Trump and his cronies as well. And if he really didn't like those tax breaks he is President so you know, change them.
And for someone that was supposedly all about creating jobs he sure failed to notice them doing that. Amazon just opened a center here in Jacksonville creating thousand or so jobs. They even added bus routes and who knows what more ripple effects.
Similar threads
- Locked