When the state tells us that we must give such-and-such a percent of our earnings to charity, in our disgust, we simply let the state confiscate those earnings and use them as it desires. That is taxation. How is it any different – how is it not taxation – if Goldman Sachs compels its employees to donate some percent of their earnings to charity? Why will they then not simply say, “Here, you can just keep whatever percent and donate it yourself?” At least that way, they will not be double-taxed by the state on the same income upon which they’d previously been taxed by the company.
No related posts.
{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }
The state is nice enough to let you deduct your giving from the amount of your taxable income. A decade ago I read Further Up the Organization by Robert Townsend and in one of his sections he stated that corporate charity is one of the more asinine things companies attempt to do. Townsend stated that it is better that the company worry about its customers and pay its employees enough that they can donate to charity themselves, if they so choose.
The state is nice enough…
I love the state.
Ok, ok, sarcasm aside corporate charity is wrong.
According to the Federal government, Goldman Sachs is a charity.