|
|
|
|
|
|
by decimalenough
450 days ago
|
|
|
Quoting TFA: What emerges is an outfit that ingeniously exploits the quirks of different jurisdictions to create a charity, dedicated to a somewhat banal cause, that is not only the world's richest foundation, but is at the moment also one of its least generous. The overall set-up of IKEA minimises tax and disclosure, handsomely rewards the founding Kamprad family and makes IKEA immune to a takeover. |
|
|
1) what is banal about helping poor families?
2) The founding family is NOT handsomely rewarded.
3) unlike most charitable organizations, INGKA is set up in such a way to not rely on wealthy donors. They only use a small dividend of their massive fortune for charitable causes. This is financially responsible and is the only way to ensure longevity. Why is this a bad thing?
4) why it would be a bad thing for IKEA to be protected from a takeover, I don’t understand. Would you prefer some billionaire purchased it so they can pocket the profits themselves, instead of supporting poor families?
IKEA is one of the better workplaces. Unlike 99% of all the other corporations out there, IKEA uses their profits to help people in need, not enriching their already wealthy shareholders.