Sanders: 'Your $8.99 Netflix subscription is more than the company paid in federal income taxes

Feb 2006
14,493
3,020
California
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) targeted Netflix in a tweet, accusing the company of paying less in federal income taxes than the cost of a monthly subscription.

“Your $8.99 Netflix subscription is more than the company paid in federal income taxes last year (nothing),” he tweeted. “We are going to make massive corporations finally pay their fair share.”

The presidential candidate has taken aim at large corporations and the wealthy during his campaign for the White House, criticizing President Trump’s tax bill for letting “wealthy corporations” off the hook of paying their share of taxes.

Trump’s tax bill that went into effect in January 2018 gave a $1.5 trillion tax cut to U.S. corporations.

A Netflix spokesperson told The Hill it is "untrue" the company paid no federal income tax in 2018.

"Globally, we paid $131M in cash taxes in 2018 - including a portion to the US federal government," the spokesperson said in a statement.

CBS reported in April that Netflix had an estimated negative income tax for fiscal 2018, meaning it reported a $22 million tax rebate and paid nothing. A report from WUSA9 investigated Netflix’s form 10-K, which showed the company spent $133,146,000 in foreign taxes but nothing in federal and state taxes in fiscal 2018.

Sanders also condemned the news that FedEx didn’t owe anything in taxes in fiscal 2018, as reported by The New York Times on Sunday.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Clara007
Dec 2018
4,830
1,334
New England
A report from WUSA9 investigated Netflix’s form 10-K, which showed the company spent $133,146,000 in foreign taxes but nothing in federal and state taxes in fiscal 2018.
This is where the Sanders crowd gets absolutely stupid. In their narrow-mindedness they cannot see beyond their own policy objectives and thus fail to understand that multi-nationals like Netflix can shop for tax jurisdictions. They just can't get it through their feathery heads these are not really American companies. They are global entities and will shop for the best tax deal.

Far better we become a tax destination for these companies rather than one that sends their dollars running.
 
Dec 2018
4,830
1,334
New England
What's the point of being a tax destination if you have to set it so low it's effectively worthless.
It wouldn't be, but do you really believe countries like Ireland and Switzerland setup favorable tax systems because it's "worthless" to them?
 
Jun 2018
6,649
1,545
South Dakota
What's the point of being a tax destination if you have to set it so low it's effectively worthless.
Being a tax destination company means they stay in the US and hire people in the US. People pay taxes. If they're forced to raise rates because of more taxes they'll move offshore to remain competitive.
 
Dec 2018
4,830
1,334
New England
Being a tax destination company means they stay in the US and hire people in the US. People pay taxes. If they're forced to raise rates because of more taxes they'll move offshore to remain competitive.
Nope. You can operate in the US, hire people in the US, and pay your income taxes elsewhere. Many companies do it, and it's all quite legal.
 
Dec 2018
2,555
1,547
Unionville Indiana
Nope. You can operate in the US, hire people in the US, and pay your income taxes elsewhere. Many companies do it, and it's all quite legal.
Are you in favor of fixing the problem? If so, here is an easy remedy:
  • Rules to protect the U.S. corporate income tax base (that is, to ensure that corporate earnings are indeed subject to taxation), known as subpart F, have been weakened over the past several years by legislative and rule changes, shrinking the corporate income tax base and reducing revenue raised from corporate taxes.
  • About 60 percent of multinational corporations’ foreign-source earnings and profits come from countries in which the firms have little business activity, evidence that these MNCs are using tax havens to avoid paying the U.S. corporate income tax.
  • Fixing the problem of corporate income taxation does not require deeply complex reform that touches on every part of the tax code; instead it largely can be achieved simply by ending deferral. Ending deferral would move the U.S. closer to a pure worldwide system and could significantly increase corporate tax revenue, reduce profit shifting, increase investment in the U.S. by American multinational companies, and simplify the corporate income tax system.
  • Ending deferral could increase corporate tax revenue by over $50 billion per year, or $500 billion over 10 years. The additional revenue could be used for education funding, infrastructure improvements, and other investments in America’s future.
... The Simple Fix to the Problem of How to Tax Multinational Corporations — Ending Deferral

But guess what: most Republicans, like you, would oppose it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clara007
Dec 2018
4,830
1,334
New England
Are you in favor of fixing the problem? If so, here is an easy remedy:
  • Rules to protect the U.S. corporate income tax base (that is, to ensure that corporate earnings are indeed subject to taxation), known as subpart F, have been weakened over the past several years by legislative and rule changes, shrinking the corporate income tax base and reducing revenue raised from corporate taxes.
  • About 60 percent of multinational corporations’ foreign-source earnings and profits come from countries in which the firms have little business activity, evidence that these MNCs are using tax havens to avoid paying the U.S. corporate income tax.
  • Fixing the problem of corporate income taxation does not require deeply complex reform that touches on every part of the tax code; instead it largely can be achieved simply by ending deferral. Ending deferral would move the U.S. closer to a pure worldwide system and could significantly increase corporate tax revenue, reduce profit shifting, increase investment in the U.S. by American multinational companies, and simplify the corporate income tax system.
  • Ending deferral could increase corporate tax revenue by over $50 billion per year, or $500 billion over 10 years. The additional revenue could be used for education funding, infrastructure improvements, and other investments in America’s future.
... The Simple Fix to the Problem of How to Tax Multinational Corporations — Ending Deferral

But guess what: most Republicans, like you, would oppose it.
You'd have an easier time trying to shape water in a ball.

Ending deferrals will not make more money taxable (or if it does, not very long). These companies will simply use on of several others methods for keep their money out of your confiscatory hands.
 
Dec 2018
2,555
1,547
Unionville Indiana
You'd have an easier time trying to shape water in a ball.

Ending deferrals will not make more money taxable (or if it does, not very long). These companies will simply use on of several others methods for keep their money out of your confiscatory hands.
Confiscatory? Many pay nothing now... LoL So, according to you there is no alternative to multinationals corporations paying nothing in taxes? ( Thomas L. Hungerford should be as smart and worldly as 'NatMorton') You are a loyal Republican!
 

RNG

Forum Staff
Apr 2013
40,188
28,050
La La Land North
This is where the Sanders crowd gets absolutely stupid. In their narrow-mindedness they cannot see beyond their own policy objectives and thus fail to understand that multi-nationals like Netflix can shop for tax jurisdictions. They just can't get it through their feathery heads these are not really American companies. They are global entities and will shop for the best tax deal.

Far better we become a tax destination for these companies rather than one that sends their dollars running.
Nat, in the US they paid zero. In some other countries they paid $133 B if IC's figure is correct. How much better a tax jurisdiction can they hope for than zero? Should the government pay for them to be in the US?

THAT'S SOCIALISM.