Hacker Neue

Preferences
solumunus parent
Yes, that’s how a software business works. The OP seemed to be talking about how we need to reform tax due to worker replacement. Everyone is talking past each other.
bruce511
Correct, building an AI is an asset, which can then be rented to other businesses.

However the thread revolves around employers replacing employees with AI. Given that the number of AI creators is minimal, and the number of companies replacing employees is large, it follows that most companies replacing employees are renting AI, they did not create it.

Hence, for those companies, AI is not an asset, it is an expense.

One way of taxing those companies would be to tax AI producers based on revenue, not profits. If 50% of revenue was tax, then, the costs of AI to the end-user would go up to cover that. So revenue would "double", but half would go to govt.

I am not a tax lawyer though, but I expect such a scheme is so radically different to the current tax regime, that is has precisely zero chance of being implemented like this.

jameshart
Of course businesses have always leased equipment to reduce the need for labor. This isn’t materially any different than paying your neighbor to borrow his ox and plow so you only need one guy to work your field instead of three.
solumunus OP
> One way of taxing those companies would be to tax AI producers based on revenue, not profits.

Why?

jameshart
I guess to put AI vendors on an equal footing with human intelligence vendors (ie humans). Workers are taxed on their revenue - their gross earnings - not their profits.
bruce511
If the point is to tax AI consumers then AI providers can collect that tax on behalf of the IRS.

Taxing the profit of AI companies is useless since profit is a number that is easily manipulated to 0. Taxing revenue is much more direct. Prices have to go up to cover the tax. Hence the consumer oays "more" and that more is passed onto the tax man.

Taxing profit is exactly why businesses pay so little tax - it's trivial to make "no profit". (For example if the IP is held in another jurisdiction with a lower tax rate, and is "licensed" by the company which wants to make no profit. )

solumunus OP
Aren’t we then just nullifying the productivity gains that could be had from the technology though? Obviously some people want this, they want AI to be less competitive with human labour, but don’t we just fall behind other nations who don’t tax that way and allow maximum productivity gains in all the AI consuming businesses?
lazide
Which other countries exactly?

This item has no comments currently.