Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Formula 1 (Read 469271 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Formula 1

Reply #330 –
People are going to lose the money one way or another.

IF its via tax, the government gets it and nobody cares.
IF its via donation, they look like good guys and get more opportunities to make more money.

So why would you not choose to donate it?

Re: Formula 1

Reply #331 –
I think thats a different discussion and argument but given donations are capable of being tax deductible (the not for profit thing you mentioned is largely irrelevant) you may find an incentive exists for people to give more away, than pay it to the government for a net even or even greater result for themselves.

This is why it must be viewed with a cynical lens.  Philanthropy is easy when you have plenty and the levers suit you to pull them.


[/quote]

Dunno Thry, but 20+ years in the space might give me an idea or two.  Good philanthropy is very hard when you have plenty.  Philanthropy is readily available to everyone - and it does make a positive difference.

Re: Formula 1

Reply #332 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
People are going to lose the money one way or another.

IF its via tax, the government gets it and nobody cares.
IF its via donation, they look like good guys and get more opportunities to make more money.

So why would you not choose to donate it?


Incorrect. Its not equal and not equally lost either way. 

If LM earned 500M tax for arguments sake at lets say 50 cents in the dollar he is left with 250M (to spend on watches and Kim K)

If he donated lets say 100M as the donation would be fully tax deductible he now pays tax on 400M again for arguments sake at 50 cents in the dollar he is now left with $200M

So LM making the $100M donation left him with 50M less in his hand then if he didnt donate and paid hes tax.

ballpark if you are in the highest tax bracket for every $1 you donate your net loss is 50c for every dollar.

Im not a fan of LH but any donation of that sort of money is still very noble.

Re: Formula 1

Reply #333 –
Quote from: shawny – on
Quote from: kruddler – on
People are going to lose the money one way or another.

IF its via tax, the government gets it and nobody cares.
IF its via donation, they look like good guys and get more opportunities to make more money.

So why would you not choose to donate it?


Incorrect. Its not equal and not equally lost either way. 

If LM earned 500M tax for arguments sake at lets say 50 cents in the dollar he is left with 250M (to spend on watches and Kim K)

If he donated lets say 100M as the donation would be fully tax deductible he now pays tax on 400M again for arguments sake at 50 cents in the dollar he is now left with $200M

So LM making the $100M donation left him with 50M less in his hand then if he didnt donate and paid hes tax.

ballpark if you are in the highest tax bracket for every $1 you donate your net loss is 50c for every dollar.

Im not a fan of LH but any donation of that sort of money is still very noble.

Not sure i ever said it was equal.

But i did say this....
Quote
IF its via donation, they look like good guys and get more opportunities to make more money.
So sponsors hitch their wagon to Hamilton because everyone loves him and he has a good brand.

Maybe he gets a 50mil deal out of it?

Maybe he gets a Kardashian out of it. ;)

Re: Formula 1

Reply #334 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
Quote from: shawny – on



Incorrect. Its not equal and not equally lost either way. 

If LM earned 500M tax for arguments sake at lets say 50 cents in the dollar he is left with 250M (to spend on watches and Kim K)

If he donated lets say 100M as the donation would be fully tax deductible he now pays tax on 400M again for arguments sake at 50 cents in the dollar he is now left with $200M

So LM making the $100M donation left him with 50M less in his hand then if he didnt donate and paid hes tax.

ballpark if you are in the highest tax bracket for every $1 you donate your net loss is 50c for every dollar.

Im not a fan of LH but any donation of that sort of money is still very noble.

Not sure i ever said it was equal.

But i did say this....
Quote
IF its via donation, they look like good guys and get more opportunities to make more money.
So sponsors hitch their wagon to Hamilton because everyone loves him and he has a good brand.

Maybe he gets a 50mil deal out of it?

Maybe he gets a Kardashian out of it. ;)

You should enter politics Kruddler and im being serious.

You never admit a wrong and always find an angle to defend😂😂

Re: Formula 1

Reply #335 –
In this case hes correct.  Im a cynic, people are generally self interested.
"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson

Re: Formula 1

Reply #336 –
Quote from: shawny – on
Quote from: kruddler – on


Not sure i ever said it was equal.

But i did say this....

So sponsors hitch their wagon to Hamilton because everyone loves him and he has a good brand.

Maybe he gets a 50mil deal out of it?

Maybe he gets a Kardashian out of it. ;)

You should enter politics Kruddler and im being serious.

You never admit a wrong and always find an angle to defend😂😂

Not my fault you read something into it that was never said.  :P

Re: Formula 1

Reply #337 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
Quote from: shawny – on


You should enter politics Kruddler and im being serious.

You never admit a wrong and always find an angle to defend😂😂

Not my fault you read something into it that was never said.  :P
Quote from: kruddler – on
Quote from: shawny – on


You should enter politics Kruddler and im being serious.

You never admit a wrong and always find an angle to defend😂😂

Not my fault you read something into it that was never said.  :P

Stop your usual spinning to try and be right.

Your post very clearly implied there was no difference giving to charity or getting it taken via tax.

There is big difference as i explained.

The end.




Re: Formula 1

Reply #338 –
You guys are making an assumption that this donation is the only tax minimisation strategy.

Its just one more, along with all the rest of the mechanisms used to reduce that income.

You could structure in a bunch of other tax deductions then use donations to reduce income tax further and you wouldnt know.

Only someone intimate with all his accounts would know, including stuff like cayman Islands payments etc.
"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson

Re: Formula 1

Reply #339 –
Quote from: shawny – on
Quote from: kruddler – on


Not my fault you read something into it that was never said.  :P
Quote from: kruddler – on


Not my fault you read something into it that was never said.  :P

Stop your usual spinning to try and be right.

Your post very clearly implied there was no difference giving to charity or getting it taken via tax.

There is big difference as i explained.

The end.

There is a big difference in the hypothetical world you created based on words i didnt say.

On that we can agree.

Re: Formula 1

Reply #340 –
Quote from: Thryleon – on
You guys are making an assumption that this donation is the only tax minimisation strategy.

No.
Which is why i wasnt implying what shawny said i was implying.

There are a million and 1 ways to benefit from things, shawny assumed there was 1.

I listed a couple, but its just the tip of the iceberg.
Kickbacks are another.

I donate to you, you get my fashion label some shelf space in paris and milan.

I donate to you, you give me some inside info on stock tips.

.....get me a good real estate deal.

Rich helping the rich.

Re: Formula 1

Reply #341 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
Quote from: Thryleon – on
You guys are making an assumption that this donation is the only tax minimisation strategy.

No.
Which is why i wasnt implying what shawny said i was implying.

There are a million and 1 ways to benefit from things, shawny assumed there was 1.

I listed a couple, but its just the tip of the iceberg.
Kickbacks are another.

I donate to you, you get my fashion label some shelf space in paris and milan.

I donate to you, you give me some inside info on stock tips.

.....get me a good real estate deal.

Rich helping the rich.

Your talking rubbish changed your point added more elements in.

Your last sentence in the original post confirms your incorrect thoughts on donating but of course your wouldnt dare admit you got it wrong.

Fonzee is never wrrrrrrong.

goodnight

Re: Formula 1

Reply #342 –
Quote from: shawny – on
Quote from: kruddler – on


No.
Which is why i wasnt implying what shawny said i was implying.

There are a million and 1 ways to benefit from things, shawny assumed there was 1.

I listed a couple, but its just the tip of the iceberg.
Kickbacks are another.

I donate to you, you get my fashion label some shelf space in paris and milan.

I donate to you, you give me some inside info on stock tips.

.....get me a good real estate deal.

Rich helping the rich.

Your talking rubbish changed your point added more elements in.

Your last sentence in the original post confirms your incorrect thoughts on donating but of course your wouldnt dare admit you got it wrong.

Fonzee is never wrrrrrrong.

goodnight

Reread my 2nd post.
 

Re: Formula 1

Reply #343 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
Quote from: Thryleon – on
You guys are making an assumption that this donation is the only tax minimisation strategy.

No.
Which is why i wasnt implying what shawny said i was implying.

There are a million and 1 ways to benefit from things, shawny assumed there was 1.

I listed a couple, but its just the tip of the iceberg.
Kickbacks are another.

I donate to you, you get my fashion label some shelf space in paris and milan.

I donate to you, you give me some inside info on stock tips.

.....get me a good real estate deal.

Rich helping the rich.
Not you, shawny and dodge.

Solely on that original donation mentioned there's no benefit.

Add in some tax deductions for travel, costs of living like hotels, airfares, car expenses, educational stuff for "research", other income tax breaks such as paying yourself via a contracted company based in the cayman Islands and then he tips into charity to help and comes out with the deals you mention all to look like a philanthropist.

Thats not to condemn him.  Good on him, probably costs him nothing and gives him the exact perks and public reputation, but its not that long ago that Lewis Hamilton had a very different reputation in the world.

Perhaps time and age have humbled him.  Declaring an outright position here is fraught with danger.  He might be an A1 bloke, or he could be a real tosser.  You wouldnt know for sure. 

Good luck to him and all that support him. 

"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson