Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by varunsrin 5014 days ago
Every once in a while, a publication will run something like this about major companies [1][2]. It seems to be standard practice among large corporations. As a company, if you are allowed to save large amounts of money by using existing loopholes (read: things that are within the scope of the law), wouldn't you be silly not to?

[1]http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_44/b42010431...

[2]http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/business/apples-tax-strate...

[Disclaimer: I work for Microsoft]

1 comments

If you work for a public firm and know that the 'loophole' exists, I wonder if share holders could take action against you if you did NOT utilize it.
On the flip-side, how is it that publicly elected officials are not indicted or held responsible for creating these loopholes after being lobbied and end up costing their shareholders - the public, some real coin. I think of the whole thing as a closed loop ecosystem and somebody has to be losing, if a group of shareholders is gaining.
This is actually a valid question. Surprisingly, in business you can argue your incompetence shields you. The "business judgement rule"[1] says basically you are allowed to make "mistakes". But you're not allowed to be "negligent", act bad faith or whatever.

[1] In the USA, viz: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_judgment_rule