Ryfujk

How to speed up a process

What to do when being responsible for data protection in your lab, yet advice is ignored?

What is the wife of a henpecked husband called?

What if I store 10TB on azure servers and then keep the vm powered off?

Compare four integers, return word based on maximum

Make me a metasequence

Called into a meeting and told we are being made redundant (laid off) and "not to share outside". Can I tell my partner?

Did 5.25" floppies undergo a change in magnetic coating?

Can you use a beast's innate abilities while polymorphed?

What's the difference between a cart and a wagon?

How to deny access to SQL Server to certain login over SSMS, but allow over .Net SqlClient Data Provider

How can atoms be electrically neutral when there is a difference in the positions of the charges?

Why does the 31P{1H} NMR spectrum of cis-[Mo(CO)2(dppe)2] show two signals?

Did Amazon pay $0 in taxes last year?

Why does Starman/Roadster have radial acceleration?

Pure Functions: Does "No Side Effects" Imply "Always Same Output, Given Same Input"?

Should I choose Itemized or Standard deduction?

Equivalent to "source" in OpenBSD?

How can I handle a player who pre-plans arguments about my rulings on RAW?

How to properly claim credit for peer review?

Understanding Kramnik's play in game 1 of Candidates 2018

What do the pedals on grand pianos do?

Is divide-by-zero a security vulnerability?

How to kill a localhost:8080

Did Amazon pay $0 in taxes last year?

Do rich companies pay little/no corporate income taxes in the United States?Do US companies pay significantly less taxes than European ones (based on tax rates)?Are value-added taxes naturally progressive?If you raise taxes, will the rich leave the country?Did Warren Buffett pay a lower rate of income tax than his secretary?Does the USA have the highest taxes?Does Shell get $2 billion a year in subsidies from the US government?2 % of 'the rich' pay 50 % of taxes in GermanyDo rich Americans pay a lower portion of their income in federal taxes than the middle class?Are US workers legally required to pay income taxes?

7

1

Background

I saw this article saying that Amazon paid $0 in corporate income tax last year. Is this true or just phrased to sound like they are getting away with paying nothing?

Here's the article: https://www.vox.com/2019/2/20/18231742/amazon-federal-taxes-zero-corporate-income

Claims from article

Chart:Confused on why they say "Federal Tax" in the graph, but corporate income tax throughout the article

Quote:

Yet during this surge into profitability — the company’s earnings doubled between 2017 and 2018 — Amazon’s tax bill has actually gone down. The company paid $0 in corporate income tax last year, according to an analysis from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, an astonishing figure that generated dozens of news stories last week.

united-states economics law taxes business

share|improve this question

asked 6 hours ago

Noah CristinoNoah Cristino

1362

New contributor

Noah Cristino is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Is the graph saying that the company paid negative tax in 2017 and 2018?
  
  – Andrew Grimm
  5 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @AndrewGrimm yeah I saw in another article "To top it off, Amazon actually reported a $129 million 2018 federal income tax rebate—making its tax rate -1%."(fortune.com/2019/02/14/amazon-doesnt-pay-federal-taxes-2019)
  
  – Noah Cristino
  5 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

7

1

Background

I saw this article saying that Amazon paid $0 in corporate income tax last year. Is this true or just phrased to sound like they are getting away with paying nothing?

Here's the article: https://www.vox.com/2019/2/20/18231742/amazon-federal-taxes-zero-corporate-income

Claims from article

Chart:Confused on why they say "Federal Tax" in the graph, but corporate income tax throughout the article

Quote:

Yet during this surge into profitability — the company’s earnings doubled between 2017 and 2018 — Amazon’s tax bill has actually gone down. The company paid $0 in corporate income tax last year, according to an analysis from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, an astonishing figure that generated dozens of news stories last week.

united-states economics law taxes business

share|improve this question

asked 6 hours ago

Noah CristinoNoah Cristino

1362

New contributor

Noah Cristino is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Is the graph saying that the company paid negative tax in 2017 and 2018?
  
  – Andrew Grimm
  5 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @AndrewGrimm yeah I saw in another article "To top it off, Amazon actually reported a $129 million 2018 federal income tax rebate—making its tax rate -1%."(fortune.com/2019/02/14/amazon-doesnt-pay-federal-taxes-2019)
  
  – Noah Cristino
  5 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

Background

I saw this article saying that Amazon paid $0 in corporate income tax last year. Is this true or just phrased to sound like they are getting away with paying nothing?

Here's the article: https://www.vox.com/2019/2/20/18231742/amazon-federal-taxes-zero-corporate-income

Claims from article

Chart:Confused on why they say "Federal Tax" in the graph, but corporate income tax throughout the article

Quote:

Yet during this surge into profitability — the company’s earnings doubled between 2017 and 2018 — Amazon’s tax bill has actually gone down. The company paid $0 in corporate income tax last year, according to an analysis from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, an astonishing figure that generated dozens of news stories last week.

united-states economics law taxes business

share|improve this question

asked 6 hours ago

Noah CristinoNoah Cristino

1362

New contributor

Noah Cristino is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

share|improve this question

asked 6 hours ago

Noah CristinoNoah Cristino

1362

New contributor

Noah Cristino is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

share|improve this question

asked 6 hours ago

Noah CristinoNoah Cristino

1362

New contributor

Noah Cristino is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

asked 6 hours ago

Noah CristinoNoah Cristino

1362

New contributor

Noah Cristino is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

asked 6 hours ago

Noah CristinoNoah Cristino

1362

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

5

When Bernie Sanders claimed Amazon didn't pay federal income taxes in 2017, Snopes wrote a helpful article:

In regards to U.S. federal income taxes, the claim that Amazon paid none in 2017 is almost certainly factual. While Amazon’s tax filings are not public, their SEC filing for the year 2017 illustrates that the company used the tax code expertly (and legally) to their advantage, so well that the company anticipated a $137 million tax refund from the federal government (numbers are in millions of dollars):

Amazon did pay taxes to individual U.S. states ($211 million) and to international jurisdictions ($724 million), but their federal income tax burden was (less than) zero. The filings indicate that two factors provided the lion share of Amazon’s reduced federal tax liability: $220 million worth of tax credits, and $917 million in tax-deductible executive pay derived from the sale of stocks

(Politifact also wrote about this, coming to the same conclusion: it's likely true.)

The form they're referring to is the 10-K. Looking at the 2018 filing, it has the same sections, so the same explanation applies. Under "Current Taxes: U.S. Federal" for 2018 it says "$(129)" (parenthesis indicate a negative number and this number is still in millions). In other words, much like last year, they expected to get a federal net tax refund, which is why the line in the graph is negative for those years.

Again, this is referring to federal income taxes. There's no evidence that they didn't pay other types of taxes; as you can see in the charts, the columns for "U.S. State" and "International" taxes all show positive numbers.

share|improve this answer

edited 2 hours ago

answered 4 hours ago

LaurelLaurel

11.3k54958

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Great answer. However, since "There's no evidence that they didn't pay other types of taxes" and that common people seemingly don't segment taxes like business do in their minds, a brief list of any of the taxes Amazon did or might have pay to the federal government might be in order. Their undoubted contribution to social security is certainly one I can think of.
  
  – fredsbend
  3 hours ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  It's acceptable for me to focus on "federal", but the Q goes for a more general "taxes". Don't want to echo the previous comment, but at least cite how you arrive at "no evidence" for 'other taxes'?
  
  – LangLangC
  3 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Minor quibble: Getting a tax refund and paying negative taxes are not the same thing. You can get a tax refund while paying extremely positive taxes, for example. A tax refund just means that your withholding (or quarterly estimated payments, as the case may be) exceeded your actual tax liability for the year. That could happen even if your tax liability is quite large.
  
  – reirab
  2 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @LangLangC The evidence for having paid other taxes is the same as the evidence that "their federal income tax burden was (less than) zero." The screenshot of SEC filing shows a negative number on the line labeled "U.S. Federal" ((137) [million dollars]) under section labeled "Current taxes" and a positive number on each of the two lines labeled "U.S. State" (211 [million dollars]) and "International" (724 [million dollars]).
  
  – Jaquez
  2 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @reirab: I think the context makes it clear it is a net refund.
  
  – Mehrdad
  2 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 3 more comments

5

When Bernie Sanders claimed Amazon didn't pay federal income taxes in 2017, Snopes wrote a helpful article:

In regards to U.S. federal income taxes, the claim that Amazon paid none in 2017 is almost certainly factual. While Amazon’s tax filings are not public, their SEC filing for the year 2017 illustrates that the company used the tax code expertly (and legally) to their advantage, so well that the company anticipated a $137 million tax refund from the federal government (numbers are in millions of dollars):

Amazon did pay taxes to individual U.S. states ($211 million) and to international jurisdictions ($724 million), but their federal income tax burden was (less than) zero. The filings indicate that two factors provided the lion share of Amazon’s reduced federal tax liability: $220 million worth of tax credits, and $917 million in tax-deductible executive pay derived from the sale of stocks

(Politifact also wrote about this, coming to the same conclusion: it's likely true.)

The form they're referring to is the 10-K. Looking at the 2018 filing, it has the same sections, so the same explanation applies. Under "Current Taxes: U.S. Federal" for 2018 it says "$(129)" (parenthesis indicate a negative number and this number is still in millions). In other words, much like last year, they expected to get a federal net tax refund, which is why the line in the graph is negative for those years.

Again, this is referring to federal income taxes. There's no evidence that they didn't pay other types of taxes; as you can see in the charts, the columns for "U.S. State" and "International" taxes all show positive numbers.

share|improve this answer

edited 2 hours ago

answered 4 hours ago

LaurelLaurel

11.3k54958

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Great answer. However, since "There's no evidence that they didn't pay other types of taxes" and that common people seemingly don't segment taxes like business do in their minds, a brief list of any of the taxes Amazon did or might have pay to the federal government might be in order. Their undoubted contribution to social security is certainly one I can think of.
  
  – fredsbend
  3 hours ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  It's acceptable for me to focus on "federal", but the Q goes for a more general "taxes". Don't want to echo the previous comment, but at least cite how you arrive at "no evidence" for 'other taxes'?
  
  – LangLangC
  3 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Minor quibble: Getting a tax refund and paying negative taxes are not the same thing. You can get a tax refund while paying extremely positive taxes, for example. A tax refund just means that your withholding (or quarterly estimated payments, as the case may be) exceeded your actual tax liability for the year. That could happen even if your tax liability is quite large.
  
  – reirab
  2 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @LangLangC The evidence for having paid other taxes is the same as the evidence that "their federal income tax burden was (less than) zero." The screenshot of SEC filing shows a negative number on the line labeled "U.S. Federal" ((137) [million dollars]) under section labeled "Current taxes" and a positive number on each of the two lines labeled "U.S. State" (211 [million dollars]) and "International" (724 [million dollars]).
  
  – Jaquez
  2 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @reirab: I think the context makes it clear it is a net refund.
  
  – Mehrdad
  2 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 3 more comments

5

When Bernie Sanders claimed Amazon didn't pay federal income taxes in 2017, Snopes wrote a helpful article:

In regards to U.S. federal income taxes, the claim that Amazon paid none in 2017 is almost certainly factual. While Amazon’s tax filings are not public, their SEC filing for the year 2017 illustrates that the company used the tax code expertly (and legally) to their advantage, so well that the company anticipated a $137 million tax refund from the federal government (numbers are in millions of dollars):

Amazon did pay taxes to individual U.S. states ($211 million) and to international jurisdictions ($724 million), but their federal income tax burden was (less than) zero. The filings indicate that two factors provided the lion share of Amazon’s reduced federal tax liability: $220 million worth of tax credits, and $917 million in tax-deductible executive pay derived from the sale of stocks

(Politifact also wrote about this, coming to the same conclusion: it's likely true.)

The form they're referring to is the 10-K. Looking at the 2018 filing, it has the same sections, so the same explanation applies. Under "Current Taxes: U.S. Federal" for 2018 it says "$(129)" (parenthesis indicate a negative number and this number is still in millions). In other words, much like last year, they expected to get a federal net tax refund, which is why the line in the graph is negative for those years.

Again, this is referring to federal income taxes. There's no evidence that they didn't pay other types of taxes; as you can see in the charts, the columns for "U.S. State" and "International" taxes all show positive numbers.

share|improve this answer

edited 2 hours ago

answered 4 hours ago

LaurelLaurel

11.3k54958

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Great answer. However, since "There's no evidence that they didn't pay other types of taxes" and that common people seemingly don't segment taxes like business do in their minds, a brief list of any of the taxes Amazon did or might have pay to the federal government might be in order. Their undoubted contribution to social security is certainly one I can think of.
  
  – fredsbend
  3 hours ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  It's acceptable for me to focus on "federal", but the Q goes for a more general "taxes". Don't want to echo the previous comment, but at least cite how you arrive at "no evidence" for 'other taxes'?
  
  – LangLangC
  3 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Minor quibble: Getting a tax refund and paying negative taxes are not the same thing. You can get a tax refund while paying extremely positive taxes, for example. A tax refund just means that your withholding (or quarterly estimated payments, as the case may be) exceeded your actual tax liability for the year. That could happen even if your tax liability is quite large.
  
  – reirab
  2 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @LangLangC The evidence for having paid other taxes is the same as the evidence that "their federal income tax burden was (less than) zero." The screenshot of SEC filing shows a negative number on the line labeled "U.S. Federal" ((137) [million dollars]) under section labeled "Current taxes" and a positive number on each of the two lines labeled "U.S. State" (211 [million dollars]) and "International" (724 [million dollars]).
  
  – Jaquez
  2 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @reirab: I think the context makes it clear it is a net refund.
  
  – Mehrdad
  2 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 3 more comments

When Bernie Sanders claimed Amazon didn't pay federal income taxes in 2017, Snopes wrote a helpful article:

In regards to U.S. federal income taxes, the claim that Amazon paid none in 2017 is almost certainly factual. While Amazon’s tax filings are not public, their SEC filing for the year 2017 illustrates that the company used the tax code expertly (and legally) to their advantage, so well that the company anticipated a $137 million tax refund from the federal government (numbers are in millions of dollars):

Amazon did pay taxes to individual U.S. states ($211 million) and to international jurisdictions ($724 million), but their federal income tax burden was (less than) zero. The filings indicate that two factors provided the lion share of Amazon’s reduced federal tax liability: $220 million worth of tax credits, and $917 million in tax-deductible executive pay derived from the sale of stocks

(Politifact also wrote about this, coming to the same conclusion: it's likely true.)

The form they're referring to is the 10-K. Looking at the 2018 filing, it has the same sections, so the same explanation applies. Under "Current Taxes: U.S. Federal" for 2018 it says "$(129)" (parenthesis indicate a negative number and this number is still in millions). In other words, much like last year, they expected to get a federal net tax refund, which is why the line in the graph is negative for those years.

Again, this is referring to federal income taxes. There's no evidence that they didn't pay other types of taxes; as you can see in the charts, the columns for "U.S. State" and "International" taxes all show positive numbers.

share|improve this answer

edited 2 hours ago

answered 4 hours ago

LaurelLaurel

11.3k54958

share|improve this answer

edited 2 hours ago

answered 4 hours ago

LaurelLaurel

11.3k54958

answered 4 hours ago

LaurelLaurel

11.3k54958

answered 4 hours ago

LaurelLaurel

11.3k54958