[isoskeles]

What I usually don't understand is that when people bring something up like this, the intent feels like it's to make me mad at Amazon. Did Amazon break the law? No. At least not in this case, as far as I know.

If you see a problem with this picture, the problem IMO is an overly complicated tax code that mostly benefits people/businesses with the resources to navigate it.

That aside, if Amazon paying nothing in federal income tax largely has to do with offsetting previous losses, what's the problem? That seems fair, and I would really want someone who has a problem with this to explain why it would be more fair to tax a business' gains one year by ignoring previous years' losses.

[stefan_]

Why on earth should you possibly be able to carry past losses into future years? What is the possible utility or incentive of that?

[isoskeles]

For the same reason we tax profit not revenue.

[stefan_]

They made a profit, this year. All losses of the past are accounted in that.

[pathseeker]

Making a profit in a single year absolutely does not offset losses of the last years. If I record a loss of $10 every year for 10 years, I have lost $100 dollars. If I record a profit of $20 finally, I still have to make a profit of $80 before I even break even.

Honestly, did you not understand that basic accounting or did you just type quickly without thinking.

This is a really good example of why basic economics or even an intro to business accounting needs to be mandatory in high school. Otherwise we end up with people voting on economic policy based on complete ignorance and clickbait like this headline.

[isoskeles]

I don't understand what you mean by "all losses of the past are account in that." My understanding is they made a profit this year means the difference in the money they earned and the spent, starting January 1st 2018 and ending January 1st 2019, was greater than $0.