[loeg]

You can't just throw revenue in the denominator, though. Business tax is assessed on income. If you're going to make a claim about tax rate using an unconventional metric, you need to be explicit about what you've done; Reich isn't.

[gojomo]

If you're Robert Reich, you can! You can make up anything, and someone will submit it to HN to waste everyone's time!

[Refreeze5224]

Yeah, screw Robert Reich! Always looking out for the workers who make up the majority of this country. Why won't he look out for the poor multi-national corporations, who have no one to advocate for them or their tax rates?

[loeg]

Hey, he can advocate for whatever causes he likes. I just think honesty makes a more compelling argument than lies.

[thunky]

> Always looking out for the workers

How is spreading misinformation looking out for the workers?

[bryan_w]

If anything it hurts the workers because now people won't listen to him anymore

[MichaelZuo]

I thought there were systems designed to effectively negate users that submit too many misleading posts.

[latexr]

Your parent post isn’t suggesting it’s always the same user submitting, just that users submit a lot of posts from this person.

Can’t say I agree, though. I don’t recall ever having seen one of his posts on HN, and a cursory search suggests they’re not even upvoted that much. Highest I found was under 30 points. But my methodology is flawed, as I basically searched for the name.

[samrus]

It was income you dicks. Someone above crunched the numbers. Why do you hate rob reich so much your willing to make shit up and get mad at him about it?

[TrainedMonkey]

Sure, and there are a ton of ways to shifting income around. For example selling a subsidiary in lower tax jurisdiction patents and then paying for their usage. Another example is Hollywood accounting where productions pay exorbitant rates for equipment and catering to affiliated companies. This inflates the costs so the movies end up unprofitable despite smashing box office.

[shevis]

Income != profit. Income is revenue. It sure would be nice if businesses were taxed on income, given that’s how people are taxed and all. Aren’t corporations supposedly people now thanks to citizens united?

[loeg]

You're mistaken. Income is net of expenses. https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/122214/what-differe...

[pinkmuffinere]

I appreciate your polite corrections with well sourced info! Being a bit silly, I’ll say you’re a shiny beam of knowledge in a dark expanse of confusion

[quietbritishjim]

> Business tax is assessed on income.

Income (in a business) is another word for revenue. I think you meant: business tax is assessed on profit.

[Maxatar]

In the U.S. income is defined as revenue minus expenses:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_(United_States_legal_de...

[quietbritishjim]

Interesting, it seems like this might be a UK vs US thing. All the non-dodgy UK results for "income" I found agree with what I thought e.g. "Income less Costs = Profit" [1]

The one exception is HMRC (UK equivalent of IRS) which, for the purposes of corporation tax only, defines income like profit [2] (with some technical differences, but the same spirit). But for other purposes (e.g. personal income tax) even they use it to just literally mean cash received without subtracting off outgoings.

Using it in this net sense seems very odd to me, but maybe that's because I'm British. "Income" and "outgoings" look to me like symmetrical terms, and no one would consider outgoings to be after subtracting off money coming in (would they?!)

[1] https://www.cheapaccounting.co.uk/blog/index.php/income-prof...

[2] https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/company-taxation-ma...

[loeg]

No, my usage was correct and unambiguous. Describing income as revenue is incorrect. https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/122214/what-differe...

[quietbritishjim]

That page says that "net income" message the sense you meant it and "gross income" means the sense I understood it.

It does say that unqualified "income" means the net version but it's a push to say that makes it unambiguous. (And, at I said on a sibling comment, this seems to be a US convention.)

[loeg]

Meta is a US company and Reich is a US citizen offering commentary on US domestic policy. "Income" is unambiguously net income in the US.

[beezle]

This is incorrect as anyone who has looked at a financial statement or taken a first level accounting class will know - Revenue is the top line, the gross income and lastly net income, the two reflecting the removal of various costs/expenses as per GAAP.