Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment can't taketh away (Score 0) 277

There's more to it than just employee retention.

1) You'll notice that many of the companies that offered the bonuses were also companies that inverted. They're bringing cash back from overseas and have to do something with it.

2) Corporations were collectively buying popularity of the tax bill in order to get it to pass. They know that long term they will come out way ahead with the new tax plan vs the one time investment in their own staff. A little good PR never hurts either.

3) If the corporate rate is hiked again, there will be hell to pay economically. Companies will cut staff and wages, and the market will also respond negatively. If there is a change in 2020 it will be the first thing dems try to attack.

Comment Re: wonder why (Score 0) 688

I'm a software engineer for a VERY LARGE tax company. All of this makes perfect sense.

He's trying to avoid the government paying out EIC (earned income credit) to people who already don't owe taxes and are getting a refundable credits in excess of what they actually paid in. This is VERY widely abused.

The marriage penalty is commonly thought of around our office as unconstitutional as it does undermine marriage. People have a reason to not get married because one spouse's income greatly exceeds that of another. When this happens the withholding of the lower income person is not enough to account for the higher tax bracket they are pushed into when they file jointly. Unless one or both of them had additional money withheld from their paycheck, then the couple likely has an amount due to the IRS.

15% is better than 0% after inversion.

Lastly, I die and leave everything to my only child. It's in excess of $1.5M in value and is now considered taxable. My child has to sell the farm ground he inherited just to pay the taxes. He/she cannot continue on farming and must find a new career and leave their home.

Comment Hard to charge sites that don't subscribe (Score 1) 332

So what would Verizon do if say...Google refused to accept incoming connections from them? No more gmail, Google Apps or any of their numerous APIs. Then M$ follows suit, no more Windows Updates. Next Apple, no more iTunes, and possibly no more iPhone for Verizon subscribers. Then shared hosting providers like GoDaddy refuse service, or financial institutions like BofA... I could go on, but I'm sure you get the point. It would just be a bad business model for any carrier. The result? Hello Google Fiber nationwide and tons of others like it spring up. Lastly (and most amusing), good luck billing trojans and botnets.

Comment Re:You think that is bad?? (Score 1) 178

Sounds familiar. I worked for a publicly traded company where the CIO was submitting invoices (approved by him) to accounting from a regular vendor. What they (accounting) didn't catch was the remit to address was on occasion different. They assumed it was to a local office of the vendor, not it's national HQ. Come to find out, the CIO had setup a corporation and bank account under the same name, just as a legal entity in a different state.

Apparently, one day there were a few guys in suits waiting for him at the bank. When things got a little weird at the counter when he went to deposit a check, he bolted out of there. Minutes later, he bolts into the office grabs his laptop and a stack of papers and runs out off the office as fast as he could. He left skidmarks in the company garage as he left. Next day, the CFO has a staff meeting with IT and explains all of this.

At the same time, a huge merger was pendinig between the company and it's competitor. Now, this part is rumor...but apparently the FBI never showed up to the court proceedings. He apparently got away clean and became a CIO for some other company a few states away.

Slashdot Top Deals

The F-15 Eagle: If it's up, we'll shoot it down. If it's down, we'll blow it up. -- A McDonnel-Douglas ad from a few years ago

Working...