[pulse7]

"Microsoft fully appreciates the importance of addressing the President’s concerns. It is committed to acquiring TikTok subject to a complete security review and providing proper economic benefits to the United States, including the United States Treasury." => So US Treasury will give MS money to buy TikTok (US market only)? And they have limited time to make this deal? So US Treasury will effectivelly own the US TikTok... and NSA will record every move on it and process it with BigData...

[maffydub]

I read "providing proper economic benefits to the United States, including the United States Treasury" as just meaning Microsoft will make money (and hence pay tax) on this. Am I being naive?

[czzr]

Apparently yes:

A transaction of the type the president envisions could also prove more expensive than the one Microsoft described on Sunday. Trump said Monday that part of the amount paid to buy TikTok would have to come to the U.S. Treasury Department because it would be making the deal possible.

“It’s a little bit like the landlord/tenant; without a lease the tenant has nothing, so they pay what’s called ‘key money,’ or they pay something,” Trump said. “But the United States should be reimbursed or should be paid a substantial amount of money, because without the United States they don’t have anything, at least having to do with the 30%.”

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/03/president-trump-might-be-eas...

So, to summarise: the president of the United States is openly advocating applying illegal real estate extortion/bribery practices to major M&A deals with geopolitical implications.

[pjc50]

> So, to summarise: the president of the United States is openly advocating applying illegal real estate extortion/bribery practices to major M&A deals with geopolitical implications

Well, yes, because he's spent his entire career doing that and now he's President. See the case the NY AG is building against him.

[londons_explore]

Is it any different than just having a tax on purchasing foreign companies?

It's the same as a tax on purchasing foreign goods, which is already in place for goods from China in the form of tariffs.

[InitialLastName]

Tariffs aren't a tax on purchasing foreign goods. I can buy as many tons of steel as I'd like in China while paying no money to the US Government (as long as I can export the money, which is a different issue). Tariffs are taxes on importing foreign goods. That would only even conceivably be comparable if Microsoft were planning to relocate TikTok to the US; as it sounds like they're planning to relocate it to London, that wouldn't apply.

[rsynnott]

I mean, if such a tax existed, sure (though such a tax would probably not be a great idea...). However, there is no relevant tax.

[pjc50]

Forgive me if I'm not familiar with the process, but aren't taxes set by Congress?

[1f60c]

> Am I being naive?

Possibly.

Axios[0] quotes Trump as saying: “A very substantial portion of that price is going to have to come into the Treasury of the United States. Because we’re making it possible for this deal to happen. Right now they don’t have any rights, unless we give it to them. So if we’re going to give them the rights, it has to come into this country. It’s a little bit like the landlord/tenant”.

Make of that what you will, but it doesn’t sound like he’s talking about just taxes to me.

[0]: https://www.axios.com/trump-tiktok-banned-microsoft-fd45748d...

[mcintyre1994]

I'm probably being stupid, but how is that not absolutely terrifying for US companies? The deal seems to be that all acquisition of foreign companies has to have a kickback to the treasury because they could always just ban the company you bought otherwise?

[puranjay]

This entire thing saddens me a great deal. It seems that you can just whip people up into a frenzy - even th HN crowd - simply by shouting "national security" and providing no proof to back it up.

Has everyone really forgotten Saddam's WMDs so quickly?

[jacobush]

Not really. We know private data is being weaponised, it’s just that we as a society have turned a blind eye to it when it’s domestic companies doing it. Right or wrong, possibly because we believe in the checks and balances here. When it comes to China, partly because of prejudice I guess, but also because of the evidence. There you get thrown into forced labour when electronic surveillance indicates you should be.

We are not quite that bad here. (Yet, I guess, if we don’t turn the tide.)

[puranjay]

> We know private data is being weaponised

How? What security risks does the DM inbox of a 16 year old possess?

[xvector]

I too was surprised that the HN crowd supported Trump’s and Microsoft’s actions so much. The people here are fairly intelligent and tend to have a good education. We are no stranger to history. We know that “national security risk” has been used to justify terrifying programs like PRISM and the Patriot Act.

And despite having this in mind, so many folks here just openly supported what is effectively a hostile and coercive takeover of a foreign corporation.

If some of the most educated people in this country can fall victim to populist xenophobia then I don’t have much hope for us overall.

[FooBarWidget]

People are normally skeptical of the US media and of government claims. Yet when it comes to China-related topics, people eat it all up, with minimal critical thinking, and even amplify them. China is not without problems, but people react so strongly to China-related issues that the subject is the perfect distraction, the perfect propaganda tool.

[treis]

Trump's a blow hard. What he says means little compared to what he actually does. MS probably won't end up paying an acquisition fee. At worst it will be some tax pre-payment or some other nonsense that Trump can claim as a victory.

[rsynnott]

I mean, I suspect that most companies will take the view that this is Trump talking nonsense like usual, and that no such tax actually exists. Given Trump's history, companies are unlikely to jump to "argh, the US is the new Russia; divest immediately!" That said, you can imagine there could be problems if this sort of rhetoric continues.

[cookie_monsta]

Trump seems to have some idea about the US being like a landlord in this deal, it's been widely reported:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/video/2020/aug/04/tru...

[paganel]

At least that partially confirms my long-held suspicion that Skype's acquisition by MS was also made for "national interests", only that they (the US Administration of that time + MS itself) used to cover it up better. The same goes for FB's acquisition of WhatsApp.

And people were laughing at Putin in 2012-2013 when he was saying in an interview that the Internet was CIA-controlled, not to mention the derogatory Western press headlines of when Putin's cronies took over control over VKontakte the same way as the US military-industrial complex is taking over control over the parts of TikTok they care about right now.

[jacobush]

MS got gov money to buy Skype, it’s sort of an open secret if you follow the money. The web wasn’t as woke then though and didn’t connect the dots.

[pulse7]

I guess that Russia has taken control over Telegram - because it is not banned by them anymore...