Re:Alphabet Finishes Reorganization with New XXVI Company
by gt2 on Friday September 01, 2017 @07:41PM
(#15153167)
I thought corporations have the same liability protections as LLCs and that the difference was more in the way of taxation, ownership, and administration requirements.
Re:Alphabet Finishes Reorganization with New XXVI Company
by Itaxpica on Friday September 01, 2017 @08:09PM
(#15153319)
Nope. The "liability" in the name refers to personal liability, and it's 'limited' in relation to the greater personal liability present in a partnership or sole proprietorship. An LLC's liability structure is exactly the same as that of a corporation; the main differences between the two are how taxation is handled
Re:Alphabet Finishes Reorganization with New XXVI Company
by ocdtrekkie on Friday September 01, 2017 @09:44PM
(#15153712)
I am confused because that's what the article seems to say. The other segment on this is:
> “By separating them, it allows the parent company to limit the exposure of the various obligations of the LLCs,” Hobart said. “For example, if one of the LLCs has its own debt, only that LLC will end up being responsible for payment of that debt.”
Is it that the act of making them separate companies under a holding company that grants them this, rather than the change to an LLC specifically?
Re:Alphabet Finishes Reorganization with New XXVI Company
by gertef on Friday September 01, 2017 @07:11PM
(#15153027)
Yes, similar to how SpaceX isn't liable for Tesla.
Re:Alphabet Finishes Reorganization with New XXVI Company
by vxNsr on Friday September 01, 2017 @07:20PM
(#15153067)
But Space X and Tesla are two different companies with different shareholders and boards, the only thing they share really is the CEO.
Re:Alphabet Finishes Reorganization with New XXVI Company
by mark_element on Friday September 01, 2017 @08:09PM
(#15153320)
It is more like how Berkshire Hathaway owns Duracell and GEICO and actions in one don't directly impact another.
> "The change helps keep potential challenges in one business from spreading to another, according to Dana Hobart, a litigator with the Buchalter law firm in Los Angeles."
Effectively, I take it this means Google isn't responsible if a self-driving car goes on a Skynet-esque murder spree, nor can their self-driving car property be sold off by the government to pay all of Google's antitrust fines coming down the pipe?