gravitas_deficiency comments on Meta strikes deal with Zuckerberg to protect him from California wealth tax

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 12 points 13 hours ago (6 children)

Honestly, there should just be a clause that specifies any financial arrangements intended to effectively nullify the personal wealth tax will be further taxed at 150% of the value of said financial arrangements. I am willing to bet a whole hell of a lot forensic accountants would have a blast with that :)

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 6 child comments

[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 8 points 12 hours ago (3 children)

I think tax avoidance schemes like that should result in basically exile. You don't want to pay your fair share to participate in society? Ok, enjoy no society. Not even jail. Just drop them in international waters. Sorry, food requires roads to be able to transport and those use taxes, so since you don't want to pay your share of taxes you don't get the privilege of anything they supply. Just the one free transport and confiscation of everything else since you don't exist as a person in society.

That's probably a little harsh, but I am just over theses people. What ever happened with the Panama papers? Oh, that's right, nothing. They are ruining society for everyone else and there is just no recourse.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 2 points 12 hours ago* (2 children)

I mean… making a person stateless is actually considered a crime against humanity by the UN.

I think exponentially-compounding fines for hyper-wealthy individuals would be perfectly fine, tbh. Also, we’d definitely need to be a LOT more aggressive in terms of slapping those types down as vexatious litigants - look up the implications of that (in US courts, at least) if you’re not familiar with the term.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 4 points 11 hours ago (1 child)

I was admittedly being hyperbolic. Here's me saying the same thing not too long ago: https://reddthat.com/comment/29539867

It would also be a crime because you're essentially killing them. Being dropped randomly into international waters with no preparation would probably be a bigger concern for them than if their passport is still valid. There are definitely a lot of solutions we haven't tried between our current nothing and state sanctioned murder, I just wish we'd actually implement one.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 3 points 11 hours ago

All that said, it’d be kinda sweet if we could just give these broligarch fuckwits the Napoleon Bonaparte treatment (marooned on St Helena - but these days, probably with a watchdog naval detachment of some sort to detain and similarly incarcerate any broligarch buddies who try to un-exile them with their mega-yachts).

Or, hell, we could even grant Phony Stark his wish: send the fuckers to Mars. Move fast and break things, right guys? That’s what they all say they want, yeah? 😜

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 2 points 9 hours ago* (1 child)

Thats not what happened. People should read the article.

Its a 2 for 1 stock split into voting and non voting shares. He'll sell the non voting shares. Theyre still getting the money from him and no new money is made.

He'll have shares for future taxes as well.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 hours ago

Be that as it may, I’d leave that to regulatory experts to determine. And I do think the punitive scaling that I spitballed would be great, because billionaires shouldn’t exist, and finding creative ways to irretrievably whittle away their grotesque wealth should genuinely be an uncontroversial (outside of the billionaire class) point.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent