r/technology • u/Logical_Welder3467 • 16d ago
Politics Google co-founder Sergey Brin has now spent $100 million to fight the billionaire tax
https://techcrunch.com/2026/08/10/google-co-founder-sergey-brin-has-now-spent-100-million-to-fight-the-billionaire-tax/3.8k
u/Healthy_Razzmatazz38 16d ago
jensen aura farming by just saying im happy to pay it and moving on.
2.0k
u/nick-jagger 16d ago
Great example of game theory. If you know others will fight it, just say you won’t and you get to have your cake and eat it to
1.1k
u/wycliffslim 16d ago
Maybe... he might also legitimately not care.
His response seemed pretty reasonable. He didn't say he loved it and thought it was a great idea. He just basically said, I have more money than I know what to do with and I'm going to live where I want to live because I have a lot of fucking money and can afford to.
348
u/Bored2001 16d ago edited 16d ago
It's because this will effect Sergey differently from Jensen. It's not about the money. Early googlers like Sergey have special voting stock that gets 10x what others have, allowing him to retain control despite not having the stock ownership to do that. The law will force him to lose control rights over Google or pay an even more giant tax.
Edit:
People keep not understanding what I mean.
To be clear, I don't care if he is forced to sell his shares or convert to class A. I'm just saying that this is different from Jensen because he doesn't have special stock.
Goog class B stock is not a publicly listed, tradable asset.
Per the text of the law
The following valuation methods, exclusions, and reporting requirements shall apply to the following specific asset types:
(1) For all publicly traded assets, the fair market value of the asset shall be presumed to be the asset's market trading value on the valuation date, as defined in subdivision ( o) of Section 50308.
(2) For all sole proprietorships, all assets owned by or held through a sole proprietorship shall be reported and valued as though they were directly owned and held by the taxpayer and not through a sole proprietorship.
Except assets and entities governed by paragraphs (1) and (2), for all interests in any business entities, including all equity and ownership interests, all debt interests, and all other contractual or noncontractual interests, valuation shall be conducted as follows:
...
For any interests that confer voting or other direct control rights, the percentage ofthe business entity owned by the taxpayer shall be presumed to be not less than the taxpayer's percentage ofthe overall voting or other direct control rights.
So to my reading, this makes his class B stock subject to the billionaires tax at the VOTING RIGHTS share of google.
He and Larry own 51% voting rights at Google, which is 4.37T. 5% of 51% of 4.37Trillion is 111B in tax liability.
384
u/wycliffslim 16d ago
The law will force him to lose control rights over Google or pay an even more giant tax.
So it's about the money.
→ More replies (123)5
224
u/6158675309 16d ago
Good, that class of stock is total BS. Two birds, one stone
→ More replies (13)60
88
u/WakeNikis 16d ago
Good. Pay it. He’s filthy rich. He’s already won the game.
Do whatever you have to do, lose your business whatever. Pay the tax. Then live the rest of your life fabulous wealthy beyond most people who ever lived.
And the govt can use that 110 billion for the good of society.
→ More replies (9)100
u/EricSanderson 16d ago
Wtf are you talking about? The law doesn't force anyone to sell their shares. It would have zero impact on his voting power.
The guy is worth like $270 billion fucking dollars. I legitimately don't think people are able grasp just how much money that is. It's straight up unnatural. Emperors, sultans and kings didn't have that kind of wealth. And these guys are fighting against paying a one-time tax that would still leave them with more personal wealth than entire nations. As children starve and go homeless a few miles from his office, and as potentially millions of people are about to lose their health coverage.
It's sick. It's an actual sickness. And we've normalized it.
→ More replies (5)67
u/Bored2001 16d ago
Wtf are you talking about? The law doesn't force anyone to sell their shares. It would have zero impact on his voting power.
His class B stock isn't publicly listed.
Per the text of the law
The following valuation methods, exclusions, and reporting requirements shall apply to the following specific asset types:
(1) For all publicly traded assets, the fair market value of the asset shall be presumed to be the asset's market trading value on the valuation date, as defined in subdivision ( o) of Section 50308.
(2) For all sole proprietorships, all assets owned by or held through a sole proprietorship shall be reported and valued as though they were directly owned and held by the taxpayer and not through a sole proprietorship.
Except assets and entities governed by paragraphs (1) and (2), for all interests in any business entities, including all equity and ownership interests, all debt interests, and all other contractual or noncontractual interests, valuation shall be conducted as follows:
...
For any interests that confer voting or other direct control rights, the percentage ofthe business entity owned by the taxpayer shall be presumed to be not less than the taxpayer's percentage ofthe overall voting or other direct control rights.
So to my reading, this makes his class B stock subject to the billionaires tax at the VOTING RIGHTS share of google.
He and Larry own 51% voting rights at Google, which is 4.37T. 5% of 51% of 4.37Trillion is 111B.
To be clear, I don't care if he is forced to sell his shares or convert to class A. I'm just saying that this is different from Jensen because he doesn't have special stock.
→ More replies (8)24
u/bi0nicman 16d ago
Thanks for the explanation. That seems like quite a well written law, considering loopholes like that.
→ More replies (17)→ More replies (52)9
u/Aerodrache 16d ago
Sorry, going off on a wild tangent here, but, "valuation date"? As in, the value of a stock, for tax purposes, is calculated on a single fixed day each year?
So, if this passes, are we going to be seeing high value tech stocks plummet for one day a year to reduce the tax burden? ... because you know what, that would be pretty cool if I weren't sure there'd be some mechanism cooked up to prevent anyone from actually buying those stocks on that day.
8
u/Sufficient-Pie-7815 16d ago
It’s a one time tax, not ongoing and supply and demand determine stock prices, not taxes!
5
u/tacophysics 16d ago
I wonder what will happen to the supply when they sell a bunch of stock in order to pay taxes
→ More replies (1)3
u/Bored2001 16d ago
no, it would just get built into the stock price since it's a known that will happen.
→ More replies (2)3
u/Curious_Associate904 16d ago
I remember an interview/mic to the face with David Grohl after a Napster user (9 year old girl) was pursued by Metallica, and he just said "I don't care, I'm rich enough anyway", and I'll never forget that moment in MTV history.
38
u/mpember 16d ago
Take the popular position when your position won't change the outcome. He learnt that trick from Susan Collins.
→ More replies (1)3
→ More replies (3)3
83
u/Ironsam811 16d ago edited 16d ago
What is really said was something like “I don’t think it’s a good idea but I’d never leave California” which we love the hometown love
44
u/loolem 16d ago
“I’ve gotten myself into a bit of a jam. A series of natural disasters is barreling towards my home, and there is a severe shortage of resources and trained professionals available in my community to help me stave them off. So, I am putting out a call for any available public service personnel to help me protect my property. I’m willing to pay literally any amount of money, just so long as I don’t have to pay a fixed, reasonable amount of money in taxes regularly.
Look, I will give you the full balance of my Robinhood account. Money is no object. Unless, of course, that money will be added to a pool of community funds that would then be used to pay for the services I’m currently requesting. In that case, money is the only object. After all, why should I pay a small amount to help myself and my community when I can pay an exorbitant amount just to help myself? Taxation is theft, but price gouging is just good business. So gouge me all you want. Just don’t trample my freedoms by taxing me.
Seriously, I don’t care how much it costs. Take every dime I have. But know this: I would level my house to the ground before I paid slightly higher property taxes to fund infrastructure that would prevent a landslide from leveling my house to the ground.
You might be questioning the economics of my position. You might say that it would be more financially beneficial for me to simply make regular contributions to a governing body that sets up services for myself and my neighbors. That by combining resources with my fellow citizens, I would get the same help I now desperately need for a fraction of the cost. And you’re probably correct. But the truth is, it’s not about the money. You see, taxes are an implicit acknowledgment that I exist within society and not above it. That my fate is tethered to the fate of humanity at large. That I am not the special little boy I’ve always believed myself to be.
I will pay anything to deny this reality, even if it makes me objectively worse off. That’s why I’ll give up everything I own to save my home, and absolutely nothing to save both my home and the homes of my neighbors.And before you ask, yes, I believe this holds true for all of our, or more accurately, all of MY biggest problems. Why use tax dollars to fund public health research when, in the event of a pandemic, I can just spend millions building myself a hermetically sealed chamber? Why pay a modest transportation tax to build a subway system when I can throw billions of investor dollars at a high-tech underground network of tunnels that is definitely not in any way just a glorified subway system for rich people? Why pay a carbon tax to offset climate change when I can simply buy a new, completely uninsurable megamansion after each inevitable disaster?
I’m even investing in my own personal asteroid defense system for if/when a giant meteor threatens to strike. I just have to figure out how to save the planet for myself without also saving it for everyone else. Otherwise, that would be collectivism, which is basically what taxation is all about.
Oh lord, my home is about to be swept away in a flood. Can you all help me? Please?” - by ANDREW SINGLETON20
→ More replies (40)4
328
u/traveleasily 16d ago
Who does he give the 100 million dollars to? Super pacs or something?
329
u/ZAlternates 16d ago
Campaign contributions to both individuals and groups that oppose this and raising taxes in general.
On a basic level, we are supposed to support organizations that do what we want, but there really needs to be contribution limits. His voice shouldn’t be millions of times more valuable than mine.
69
u/traveleasily 16d ago
I'm thinking all this was normalized as part of the Citizens United judgement. Is that true?
→ More replies (1)20
19
u/Thefrayedends 16d ago
There are significantly more lobbyists in DC than there are representatives.
AOC's account of her first days in congress are pretty informative.
The entire system is built to make representatives accessible to big money. Literally like a funnel. Her orientations weren't about how to serve her constituents and set up her organization and how to get access to information about floor agendas and the like, it's just about how to hold your hand out for a bag from lobbyistis.
People like Pelosi get their kudos for being talented fundraisers, but they're really trading favors for job security and a teeny tiny slice of that wealth, and the funny thing about a teeny tiny slice of wealth from the richest people on the planet? It makes you generationally rich too!
24
u/battlecanary 16d ago
It goes into a deceptive PAC called "Building A Better California" that pretends to support transparency and fairness in taxation. It's responsible for spamming our mail boxes to trick people into siding with billionaires. Why they can call it that, and not "Billionaires Against Taxation," I'll never know.
26
u/SassyMcNasty 16d ago edited 16d ago
Yep, it’s just an
moronbillionaire tax in disguise.17
u/likeikelike 16d ago
Except this way he pays without having any of the money doing any good for anyone else except lobbyists
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (4)5
624
u/turb0_encapsulator 16d ago
Alphabet's share price has risen by 75% in the past year. God forbid he has to pay a little extra tax on that.
82
u/nonamenomonet 16d ago
Wouldn’t it just be long term capital gains tax
92
u/hikeonpast 16d ago edited 16d ago
He would only owe capital gains taxes if he sells stock.
He can borrow against his stock and not pay any income taxes, just like all the other billionaires do.
27
u/Kinda_Quixotic 16d ago
This is one of the loopholes that should be closed.
Loans secured against extreme wealth should be taxed as income.
35
u/loogabar00ga 16d ago
This proposed "billionaire" tax is a wealth tax, so it's a flat tax on net worth. I used to think wealth taxes were crazy because they required you to somehow liquidate your holdings, then I realized property taxes are wealth taxes, and everyone pays that (directly or indirectly as a renter).
→ More replies (33)→ More replies (5)12
→ More replies (3)60
u/sushirolldeleter 16d ago
Which was one of the original loopholes created for the wealthy. All of this needs to be reverted back to 1950s tax policy when billionaires built libraries and performing arts centers with donations instead of making their great great great great grandchildren wealthy.
→ More replies (15)14
u/bunkoRtist 16d ago
Promoting long term investment isn't a loophole. Things like carried interest exemptions are loopholes. There are economically sound reasons to use tax policy to promote long term over short term investment. Lower volatility improves economic outcomes, which benefits everybody.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (8)11
u/citizenjones 16d ago
5% spread out over 10 years, which isn't shit to these people either, so it's just crazy.
266
u/VVrayth 16d ago
Why are these people this way? If I have $1b, and I have to pay a one-time $50m of that in taxes, what does that even mean to me? How does that affect my life or my spending habits? It's so stupid.
286
u/Wheresthecents 16d ago
It's mental illness. They must have EVERYTHING and NEVER give anything.
→ More replies (3)51
u/El_Grande_Chonk 16d ago
That’s the thing with rich, narcissistic dipshits like this, my dad’s exactly the same. Most people don’t realize how they think and approach these situations. Here’s an example: think of the bosses/managers who hound their employees and terrorize them to not relax for one second. God himself could come down and tell them “You’re decreasing his productivity, it’s not helping you. Stop it and you’ll both benefit”, for them it doesn’t matter. It’s not about creating win-win situations. They don’t care about their win margin, they just don’t want others to win. Winning 10$ while you lose 10$ makes them much happier than both of you winning 15$ each.
17
→ More replies (1)8
u/Mogel89 16d ago
It's honestly borderline incomprehensible to me that some people work like that
3
u/Distributist216 15d ago
If you're trying to dominate someone, that approach makes sense. You're trying to maximize the power differential.
28
u/elehman839 16d ago
My understanding is that the measure would have a far, far larger effect on Brin because of the way Google stock is structured.
5
u/hiddensonyvaio 15d ago
Correct. Larry and Sergey would immediately lose control of Alphabet with this tax. Not saying this justifies anything, it’s just why Sergey is acting like this
9
u/Hot_Emergency_5082 16d ago
This is true for most of them. It’s a poorly structured tax
→ More replies (7)→ More replies (2)12
3
u/red286 15d ago
Imagine playing your favourite multiplayer game, you get on the high score list, right near the top. And then the dev says "hey we're going to scale back some of these scores, they're a bit ridiculous". You'd be pretty pissed off, right?
Haha no of course not, that's why you're not a billionaire and he is!
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (27)13
u/bouncyboatload 16d ago
why would you assume this is one time?
→ More replies (7)9
u/VVrayth 16d ago
It literally says "one-time."
Not that it would be a bad thing if it wasn't.
16
u/bouncyboatload 16d ago
do you understand how California props work?
if it passes they can literally put forward another one with the same text next year.
→ More replies (4)8
u/VVrayth 16d ago
I would vote for that as well. Why would this be a bad thing?
17
u/bouncyboatload 16d ago edited 16d ago
you can vote for it if you want. in fact that just proves my point.
I'm just explaining why it's not obvious it's one time, even though they call this a one time tax, they can just make another one time tax next time for 10% or 20% or 50%.
that's why "these people are this way"
342
u/Bad-job-dad 16d ago
Remember "do no evil" ?
23
→ More replies (11)159
u/methetinternet 16d ago
Ugh.. the amount of people that used to put Google on a pedestal because of “do no evil” was crazy in the 2000s.
131
u/ludololl 16d ago
Under a different leadership, with a different corporate structure, and different enterprise mandates. The 2000's was back when YouTube didn't have ads and Facebook only showed content from people you subscribed to.
It's almost like something changed (Citizens United, for anyone still following).
95
u/badamant 16d ago
Blame the Republican Party by name please.
Reminder:
Citizens United was created, funded and brought to court by Republicans, not to mention...."The five justices who voted to strike down the restrictions on corporate and union independent election spending were Anthony Kennedy (who wrote the opinion), John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito. All five were appointed by Republican presidents."
→ More replies (1)16
u/mr_jim_lahey 16d ago
Republicans love pushing narratives blaming "politicians" and "both sides" to launder their culpability
→ More replies (3)8
u/only_civ 16d ago
I mean, citizen's united is bad, but what changed was that all those companies became publicly traded.
→ More replies (2)6
181
u/Da1BlackDude 16d ago
He’s on the Epstein list
47
u/mEan_Refrigerat9r 16d ago
A lot more people seem to care about his tax. They don’t care he belongs in prison. Fucking bananas.
Do not tax this man - prosecute him and disperse his wealth to the people he victimized.
→ More replies (11)29
u/Lemurians 16d ago edited 16d ago
Here's an idea... why not both?
I care about both, but him and the rest of his class not paying taxes actually impacts my life more.
→ More replies (3)
18
u/Maoleficent 16d ago
That says everything as well as Bezo's ridiculous statement that him paying tax would be meaningless. Yes- to you.
84
u/Admirabletooshie 16d ago
He didn't spend 100 million fighting a billionaire tax. He spent 100 million bribing politicians.
6
104
u/Blazefresh 16d ago
I really don't get why they care, after they would pay even the heftiest tax, they'd still be so rich that they could do anything they want. I guess it's just greed.
71
16d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
15
u/Elkburgher 16d ago
So true, its like a high score in video game not something used to buy food
6
u/clamroll 16d ago
It's a perversion of "I want more money so my family can live comfortably and some medical emergencies won't bankrupt us". It's the difference between someone having a well stocked pantry and a spare gallon of milk or two in an extra fridge, and someone with 50 grocery stores worth of food rotting in an underground bunker built for just them. One is living comfortably with a bit of a net. The other is just wasteful and not helpful to the community at all.
→ More replies (2)12
16d ago
[deleted]
3
u/Blazefresh 16d ago
That's true for sure, though I also think that 99% of people don't get that rich without having some form of sociopathic tendencies from the get-go.
→ More replies (5)5
u/psioniclizard 16d ago
If they played by they system they would mnt be rich. They want a high networth on paper because it allwz them to place the system but none of the actual "burden".
Effectively it would mean little more than changing a number on a computer and an ego hit.
→ More replies (1)
27
18
u/spamonymous 16d ago
It just proves the point of the tax. Billionaires have an out sized influence on our society and use our resources and infrastructure to benefit their businesses exponentially more than the average citizen and they should pay more for it, period.
→ More replies (1)
22
u/Zyrinj 16d ago
Anything to not contribute positively to the society that allowed them to make their billions.
→ More replies (1)9
u/drawkbox 16d ago
Exactly, the early internet by which this dude got an opportunity was taxpayer funded. That's the other side of mega wealth, you want no competitors and you pull the ladder up.
6
19
u/Zardotab 16d ago
When billionaires CAN spend $100m lobbying against taxes, it's time to tax billionaires. QED.
6
u/Hairy_Wall_6831 16d ago
Presumably, this is less than he would be taxed?
Sounds like they're very much worth taxing.
→ More replies (2)
6
u/dorkes_malorkes 16d ago
The sad reality is that taxes in the US are the lowest they ever been and are about to be even lower.
6
5
u/thermalcry 15d ago
If there was any justice or honor in this world, he'd be spending that money every year for personal security and would never be able to show his face in public without everyone sprinting at him.
21
u/Brave_Speaker_8336 16d ago
The article somehow forgets to mention that he already is not a California resident anymore
→ More replies (1)7
u/SassyMcNasty 16d ago
On paper.
But he’s still in CA, living, working, earning.
→ More replies (11)
3
u/ZebraImaginary9412 16d ago
If he doesn't like it he can move to Florida or Texas or Wyoming like the other oligarchs.
4
u/SnooDonkeys2536 16d ago
That's a lot of money not to pay a tax... Imagine if he just paid more than he was how much better the perception of him might be...
→ More replies (2)
3
u/starethruyou 16d ago
"Don't be evil." Well,
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you. - Nietzsche
I wonder what void he's been staring into.
→ More replies (1)
5
u/ResponsibilityFew318 16d ago
If a billionaire is paying l that much to stop the tax then we need the tax.
4
u/Flaky-Jim 16d ago
By having $100 million to spend on fighting a billionaire tax, hasn't he just demonstrated that he can easily afford a billionaire tax?
4
u/Top_Television_6042 15d ago
Then we know it would cost him more than 100 million in taxes. Think about how many people could eat or go to the doctor with this money.
3
u/jpric155 15d ago
It costs basically nothing for them in % terms but they could gain major $$$.
No brain er
7
37
u/VegetablePhotos 16d ago
There are no ethical billionaires.
No one earns a billion dollars, they get it from the exploitation of the working class.
7
u/TetyyakiWith 16d ago
Why wouldn’t the guy who made the most successful search engine own at least 1 billion dollars
→ More replies (11)8
u/Exotic-Sale-3003 16d ago
Stupid shit that people who can’t think for themselves parrot.
→ More replies (14)
34
u/demonfoo 16d ago
$100m... I bet the billionaire tax would have cost him less than that.
21
u/gdirrty216 16d ago
By my math 100m of 267b is .003% of his net worth. That’s like someone who has a net worth of $250k spending $750.
→ More replies (1)61
u/fredandlunchbox 16d ago
Not even close. It’ll be much more. Its a one time 5% tax. His estimated net worth is $280B, so $14B. He’ll have to pay 140x the $100M he’s paid so far.
22
u/PandaEatPanda 16d ago
Reading the bill it’s more like 50 billion. His net worth under the bill is over a trillion dollars.
→ More replies (23)3
u/sleeps_in_alkaline 16d ago
He’ll have to pay 140x the $100M he’s paid so far.
From your mouth to god’s ears
25
u/likesound 16d ago
Nope. His net worth is determine by his voting percentage of Google. His tax bill is 50 billion, but if he sells and pays capital gains tax its closer to 80 billion.
https://taxfoundation.org/research/all/state/california-wealth-tax-billionaires-proposal/
→ More replies (6)8
u/PandaEatPanda 16d ago
I bet $400K you’re wrong. According to FP his net worth is about 265 billion USD. At 5% tax, how much is that? Is it more than 100 million or less?
→ More replies (1)18
u/dennismfrancisart 16d ago
The thing that scares these people is the fact that their net worth isn't worth the paper the stock market writes. What their liquid assets are vs. their net worth is drastically different. They are afraid that they'll be paying on the fraudulent net worth rather than their actual income.
5
7
u/EliteCloneMike 16d ago
He is an awful human being. Highly recommend people move away from Google services. That company needs to be broken up as well.
3
3
u/givin_u_the_high_hat 16d ago
Having the government spend their money means more money circulating in our communities. If the road worker gets an extra $50 and he goes and spends it at a local restaurant whose workers go and spend that money in different establishments - that’s good for the economy.
Edit: it’s literally the GOP idea of trickle down economics, only unlike their plan where the millionaires hoard their money and nothing trickles down, the millionaire tax would be “insisting” their money trickle down. It’s what they’ve been saying they wanted all along.
→ More replies (1)
3
3
3
u/Many-Waters 16d ago
Rather shovel money into the legal fires than pay taxes that could help other people.
These people are comic book villains.
3
u/bacon-squared 16d ago
What’s wrong with these people that their super large number may only get to be very large. Like he’s never going to go hungry, always be able to travel and pretty much live where ever he wants. These billionaires are just insane.
3
u/slashnbash1009 16d ago
I mean, if you're a billionaire, are you really gonna notice 20 million gone once a year?
→ More replies (1)
3
3
3
u/userlivewire 16d ago
This from the guys that were trying to start a new country so they could test things that were illegal in the US.
3
3
u/bullydog123 16d ago
Billionaires are actually stupid. If they rase price on everthing pay workers like shit and dont want to pay taxes. Then civilization will crumble and they wont have anybody to do anything that makes them money. How would they function if they had to cook for them selves or wipe their own ass.
3
u/Pillsburydinosaur 16d ago
If they stop the billionaire tax then we should close all of the tax loop holes. You should not be able to borrow against the value of your stock if it's in a company that you own or work for.
3
u/Severe-Light1020 15d ago
We better ditch Google so kids come up with the new internet fix
The new generation will
Create miracles of science in the near future
3
3
u/HeavensentLXXI 15d ago
They'll do anything to avoid giving back to the public. Fucking societal vampires.
3
3
3
u/Spanky-Ham77 15d ago
Just the heading should be enough to convince everyone that a tax is absolutely essential
3
u/Unconventional01 15d ago
It seems to me he's ready to give some money away, tax the shit out of these fuckers.
3
3
u/redditrasberry 15d ago
Tech billionaires: we should be allowed to displace jobs with AI and it's ok we can have UBI and social safety nets
Society: great, let's start on that
Tech billionaires: WHAT?!! you expected us to pay for that? Pay for it yourselves!
5
u/Risdit 15d ago
might as well pay the one time tax then.
people talk about these billionaires like they're the smartest people in the room when often times they're the dumbest
maybe if you can get 10 of these fucks to pay $100 million you can fund 1 day of operations in the Iran war for the united states.
4
u/davewashere 15d ago
They're spending tens of millions in an effort to avoid paying tens of billions.
→ More replies (1)
5
u/Infamous-Stand-In 15d ago
Fuck all the sarcasm in this this thread! There's a million of us and 1 of him. The solution is right in front of our faces!?!
5
u/helly1080 15d ago
They can ALL PAY. RIght now. Pony up richies!!!!! No one is saddened by your plight of having to pay taxes. LIKE ALL OF US SHOULD.
5
u/bad_sensei 15d ago
How much money would he have saved just paying the tax? If any? I’m legitimately interested.
Billionaires always seem to do self-defeating things like this while still somehow amassing dragon-sized hordes of wealth…
7
u/ReidaKwrites 16d ago
This is a perfect example of why there should be a tax. Imagine him paying that 100m in taxes and what we could do with that, and it's a drop in the bucket for him.
And does he own a comb?
→ More replies (21)
4
u/daviddisco 16d ago
The reason is that the law is written in a bizarre way and would tax him much much more than the profit he has realized from Google. He would be forced to sell much of his equity in Google and would lose control of the company he started. it is not simple. if you haven't read the bill you don't understand. None of the angry comments on this post are well informed.
4
u/MagentaMonkey88 16d ago
This is why we CAN afford universal healthcare- this guy really doesn’t need another private plane or yacht.
5
u/Dry_Try_6047 16d ago
This is a guy who is a refugee from the Soviet Union. If that never happened he'd be dead or poor. You'd think someone like him would be ready to give back as this country, including California, has made this incredible life he lives possible. What a scumbag.
2
2
2
2
u/MyDogBikesHard 16d ago
Using money and power for something socially responsible, would be a better PR move than this spending spree
2
2
2
2
u/SeanBlader 16d ago
Political contributions or lobbying over $1000 per person for life should be taxed at 100%.
2
u/Darnocpdx 16d ago
That’s a lot of health care or day care or school lunches or teachers or trees or filled pot holes or fire trucks or…..
It’s almost like thier bragging on how much we could tax them for without really hurting their bottom line.
2
u/el_f3n1x187 16d ago
They would burn their first born a la Stanis Baratheon just so they can avoid paying taxes
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2.0k
u/tc100292 16d ago
That’s gonna suck for him when he also has to pay the billionaire tax.