Ok. Let’s take a step back

You have companies in Poland. Let’s call them A, B and C.

And we have company D in USA.

One of those A,B,C is a “child” of company D. Other two simply do business with company D.

Company D in they finacial statmet - that is a 3rd party statment that you have no rights to audit in any way, in some cases it want even be avaible to you - claim that they earned $10M from each A, B and C. (This is the “hearsay” becouse it’s an information form outside your bouble of control. You have no way of verifying it. US gov have, but they are 3rd party to you and company A, B and C)

A, B, and C each in their tax reports created for you claim that those $10M is their cost.

In case of one you say “no, it’s not your cost, it’s your profit”.

What specific difference between A, B, C makes you say that? One is similarly named to D? It won’t be, by next tax year. All all registered in Poland. All have polish board. All spand money at company D. What’s the difference? What parameter would you choose to tax one of those but not the other?

Working theory is that you don’t get to his point by having morals.

It’s a one about mental and intellectual development disability.

Edit: Before you replay with a deliberately misconstrued jokey quess, please consider that tiah would still be making a slur-based joke at the possible expense of people with disabilities. It may not be worth those upvotes.

I would argue “rule of law” is not relevant to American oligarchs.

I agree. But it’s relevant to me.

I want my government to work within the rules. I don’t want my government to be able to tax people on "strongly hold opinion"s and "everybody knows"es.

I’m not saying that taxes can’t be improvement. But taxing international companies is extremely complex problem. No one found completely bulletproof solution yet, and it’s almost impossible to do unilaterally without multiple sides collaborating. Everytime someone say “the should just…” it’s a gross oversimplification that present reality where solution is obvious and everyone not implementing it gave bad will or lack competency or gut.

I’m thinking “rule of law”. Is that their terms? You can’t arbitrary tax someone with “I know how much you REALLY earned” alone.

And when you quantify it they will beat it in your own game.

That’s not unreasonable. That’s a law-suit. They will get back all this money with surplus.

Imagine that you have a company A. And you legitimately licens something from 3rd party company B. That’s your cost.

And you license something else from company C… that’s your profit some how?

On paper your relationship with company B and C is identical. There is nothing tangible linking you to company C more than B.

And if you manage to find something, they will shift the structure and change it.

You probably pay higher taxes than some of those companies.

Pirates. Enemies of the human kind.

Company A is in Poland. You regulate law in Poland. Company B is in USA. You don’t regulate a law in USA.

You want to tax company A, based on company B report, that was created for 3rd party government?

If only tax-evasion was so easily solved. The are not shy of restructuring completely just to fit into any gap that law created. On paper “BigBadCorpo US” and “BigBadCorpo Irealand” could be two completely separate entities, with BBCI turning zero to no profits becouse it license brand from BBCUS.

You would think that Worner Bross is a movie making company. It’s not. On paper it’s a company that lend very overprices movie equipment. To shell companies created solely for the purpose of creating one movie…

Taxes are hard and people who employ literal armies of layers have the edge over slow law making.

Yes, becouse quality girls famously hate guys with sense of humor.

I think that surprising amount of them are already located in Ireland for that and other tax related possibilities. Giant corporations are basically pirates sailing on lawless waters.

Why? It’s not like shortage of bourbon, is much more than inconvenience.

I’m just letting you know that your post reads a little off. I understand that I have only the fraction of information and I’m not clear on all the context. But I only have what you provided.

You also, jumped to calling people sheeps very quickly.

deleted by creator

Are you 100% sure, that you’re not the one who’s toxic?

Carbon tax.

Sur. But I personally think thay Brave New Word turned out to be much more relevant to westeners.

I honestly think that approach like this is hurting the movement. You’re dismissive about experience of someone who deleted Microsoft account and canceled most US-based serviced and social media that he was most engaged with. And you’re literally explaining to me how convinient it is to me?

This revolution is way to small, to start eating their own already.

I agree on all points, except on you deciding what I need. I would prefer to be the one making that call.

One could argue that pen and paper is all you need. And it would be just as productive.

Immortaly gained superiority is exactly my initial point.