Re:An Oil Spill Helped One Billionaire Avoid Paying Income T...
by dundarious on Friday December 10, 2021 @07:19PM
(#29517135)
The tax code is absolutely used as an incentive and punishment structure to guide behavior. Things are made tax deductible or not all the time. We don't need to get into questions of morality. And there's no issue with enforcement here. You say it's not deductible and maybe you audit their books after a few years. If they tried to write it off, come down on them like a ton of bricks.
Re:An Oil Spill Helped One Billionaire Avoid Paying Income T...
by vorpalhex on Friday December 10, 2021 @08:09PM
(#29517428)
So we should not make environmental cleanup tax deductible? What about organizations who do environmental cleanup in general without having made spills?
Re:An Oil Spill Helped One Billionaire Avoid Paying Income T...
by dundarious on Friday December 10, 2021 @08:42PM
(#29517598)
Ideally, restitution should not be deductible, but it is. My understanding is that that's a pretty recent development, meaning it doesn't have to be so, and if it's undesirable, it can be changed. I think looking at it specifically from the angle of environmental disasters isn't useful or appropriate.
Until we transition entirely off of oil, oil spills are a part of life. We can reduce them, we can limit the damage but we can't prevent them.
Yes, companies can be less than ideal at fixing spills. We have tools like auditors and other third parties as a control.
Tax write offs are for anything that costs you money as a business. Your accountant needs a chair and a laptop, your hairdresser has different needs like scissor sharpening. There is no standards body fit to determine what constitutes a "real business expense" outside of the IRS auditors who do so post-facto.
That the oil company wasn't cooperative might mean we should fine them more but doesn't affect their tax code.
Tax code is not moralistic.