U2 singer Bono praises philanthropy of Apple's Steve Jobs

1246

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 114
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    Just out of curiosity, what is the impact of Gate's foundation on his tax returns?



    I wonder why so many people don't get this.



    Let's say that 50% of Gates' income goes to pay taxes. That means that for every dollar he donates to charity, he's still out $0.50. Charitable donations still cost the donor real money - no matter how high their tax bracket.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FriedLobster View Post


    Do you know for a fact that Steve doesn't give to charity?



    No, and I specifically stated that I don't know - in the portion of my post that you deleted.



    My point was that Bono's statement does nothing to say whether Jobs does or does not give to charity. Bono said that APPLE donated a lot of money. We still don't have any idea whether Jobs did - so calling Jobs a philanthropist on the basis of Bono's statement is wrong.
  • Reply 62 of 114
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    Just out of curiosity, what is the impact of Gate's foundation on his tax returns?



    You hit the nail on the head. I don't have a link, but Gates continues to increase his net worth every year, largely because of the huge tax write-off that the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation provides.



    Not to take anything away from the wonderful work the foundation has accomplished, but just like Carnegie and Rockefeller before him, Bill Gates didn't suddenly wake up a generous man with a heart three times bigger than before. The foundation is very profitable for the gates', and that is why it exists.



    You don't become a multiple-billionaire by giving away more than you take in, ever.
  • Reply 63 of 114
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    Just out of curiosity, what is the impact of Gate's foundation on his tax returns?



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    I wonder why so many people don't get this.



    Let's say that 50% of Gates' income goes to pay taxes. That means that for every dollar he donates to charity, he's still out $0.50. Charitable donations still cost the donor real money - no matter how high their tax bracket.



    Your math doesn't factor in having billions in the bank. Charity donations can save lots of money for an investor who makes their income off of dividens and interest. When your tax comes from interest, and you donate enough, you end up keeping more money than you would by just paying the taxes.
  • Reply 64 of 114
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bigdaddyguido View Post


    Your math doesn't factor in having billions in the bank. Charity donations can save lots of money for an investor who makes their income off of dividens and interest. When your tax comes from interest, and you donate enough, you end up keeping more money than you would by just paying the taxes.



    You don't know what you're talking about.



    Let's say you own a billion dollars in assets and it's generating 5% per year dividends and assume you don't give anything away. Those dividends are taxed at 40%. So your asset is giving of $50 M in dividends a year and that means you pay $20 M in takes and keep $30 M. Your assets are still worth $1.0 B at the end of the year. So your net worth is now $1.03 B (assuming you didn't spend anything).



    Now, instead, you give away $50 M in assets to charity. That $50 M means that you have zero income and pay zero taxes. HOWEVER, your assets are now worth $950 M rather than $1.0 B. So you lost $50 M in asset value and kept $50 M in income. Thus, your net worth is $1.0 B at the end of the year - so you're $30 M worse off with the charitable contribution.



    Now, it's slightly more complicated than that. First, if you donate the asset rather than the dividends, you pay capital gains tax rates which are usually lower, but the end result is that it's impossible to give something away to charity and have more than you started.



    AND, when you consider something called the alternative minimum tax, the tax savings from the charitable contribution are even lower.
  • Reply 65 of 114
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    Just out of curiosity, what is the impact of Gate's foundation on his tax returns?



    We don't know because we don't have the exact details of how Bill and Melissa Gates are donating to the fund.



    However, it is likely that they are donating fully appreciated securities instead of cash. That's a more effective donation method for rich people.



    Let's say Bill Gates acquired some MSFT shares at $5/share sometime in the Nineties. If he donates a million shares today ($25/share), he doesn't pay capital gains (as he would if he sold them then gave cash) and can write off the donation at the current market value of the securities ($25 million) despite the fact that he paid out of pocket $5 million. That's a rather simplistic explanation, but more or less valid.



    What we don't know is which lot of shares he's donating and what the acquisition price of that lot was. That's really between him and his tax person. Since he controls the BMGF, he can pretty much do what he wants with the money (from a charity standpoint) and evade some of the personal capital gains taxes. Rather than giving the money to the government, he gives it to charity.
  • Reply 66 of 114
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bigdaddyguido View Post


    Your math doesn't factor in having billions in the bank. Charity donations can save lots of money for an investor who makes their income off of dividens and interest. When your tax comes from interest, and you donate enough, you end up keeping more money than you would by just paying the taxes.



    exactly.
  • Reply 67 of 114
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    You don't know what you're talking about.



    Let's say you own a billion dollars in assets and it's generating 5% per year dividends and assume you don't give anything away. Those dividends are taxed at 40%. So your asset is giving of $50 M in dividends a year and that means you pay $20 M in takes and keep $30 M. Your assets are still worth $1.0 B at the end of the year. So your net worth is now $1.03 B (assuming you didn't spend anything).



    Now, instead, you give away $50 M in assets to charity. That $50 M means that you have zero income and pay zero taxes. HOWEVER, your assets are now worth $950 M rather than $1.0 B. So you lost $50 M in asset value and kept $50 M in income. Thus, your net worth is $1.0 B at the end of the year - so you're $30 M worse off with the charitable contribution.



    Now, it's slightly more complicated than that. First, if you donate the asset rather than the dividends, you pay capital gains tax rates which are usually lower, but the end result is that it's impossible to give something away to charity and have more than you started.



    AND, when you consider something called the alternative minimum tax, the tax savings from the charitable contribution are even lower.



    I'm at work, and don't have time to elaborate too much, but you're vastly under-informed on the complexity of tax law. My family has donated thousands of dollars multiple times because we made more by donating than by paying taxes. Since I've done this, and I'm not half as good at tax law as gates' accountant, the simple answer is you are very, very off base.



    Gates' net worth goes up every year. How is that possible if he's donating as much as you say, paying taxes AND losing money on donations?
  • Reply 68 of 114
    onhkaonhka Posts: 1,025member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post


    From the article:





    Selling $500+ products, however useful they may be, does not normally count as philanthropy.



    I would expect such rhetoric from you.



    Dumb retort as usual.



    I guess MS selling Windows as they have been over the past 20 years for much more most of the time is more to your liking. Must be nice to hang your hat on a company that spent most of their product manufacturing on copying machines.
  • Reply 69 of 114
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bigdaddyguido View Post


    I'm at work, and don't have time to elaborate too much, but you're vastly under-informed on the complexity of tax law. My family has donated thousands of dollars multiple times because we made more by donating than by paying taxes. Since I've done this, and I'm not half as good at tax law as gates' accountant, the simple answer is you are very, very off base.



    Total BS. I've explained how it works. Now, feel free to explain how you can donate significant amounts of money and have more than if you hadn't donated any.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bigdaddyguido View Post


    Gates' net worth goes up every year. How is that possible if he's donating as much as you say, paying taxes AND losing money on donations?



    That is true if the value of the assets increases faster than the amount of money he donates and pays in taxes. It is not inconsistent with what I said. He would still have less than if he hadn't donated anything.



    But feel free to show how it works in your world.
  • Reply 70 of 114
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    No, and I specifically stated that I don't know - in the portion of my post that you deleted.



    My point was that Bono's statement does nothing to say whether Jobs does or does not give to charity. Bono said that APPLE donated a lot of money. We still don't have any idea whether Jobs did - so calling Jobs a philanthropist on the basis of Bono's statement is wrong.



    Jobs was the CEO when they donated the money. it was JOBS' DECISION to donate that money. Also, as I mentioned earlier, Jobs was getting $1/year salary when he could've been earning $100-$500 Million plus+ if he wanted to.



    That $100-$500 Million plus is money Apple's free to donate to any charity whenever they want.
  • Reply 71 of 114
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    Total BS. I've explained how it works. Now, feel free to explain how you can donate significant amounts of money and have more than if you hadn't donated any.







    That is true if the value of the assets increases faster than the amount of money he donates and pays in taxes. It is not inconsistent with what I said. He would still have less than if he hadn't donated anything.



    But feel free to show how it works in your world.



    I'm sorry, you didn't show anything. Your explanation was so simplified it's not actually useful. You failed to mention how tax brackets work, how IRAs and other investment options can alter your taxable income, how having your money spread out in different banks and in binds from around the world can alter interest rates and allow you to make a profit off of investments that wouldn't possible otherwise. Anyone actually knowledgable of the subject would know that our little forum is in no way setup to delve into the vast complexity of Bill Gates tax statement. If your looking for a simple answer to your question, the you're not living in the reality that exists today.





    Honestly, what I'm talking about is basic economic fact, many wealthy people save money by donations. If you don't understand, take an economics class, don't wave your hands and accuse me of living in a fantasy world when you're the one trying to act like the works is as simple as an interest equation we learned when we were 6.
  • Reply 72 of 114
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    You don't know what you're talking about.



    Let's say you own a billion dollars in assets and it's generating 5% per year dividends and assume you don't give anything away. Those dividends are taxed at 40%. So your asset is giving of $50 M in dividends a year and that means you pay $20 M in takes and keep $30 M. Your assets are still worth $1.0 B at the end of the year. So your net worth is now $1.03 B (assuming you didn't spend anything).



    Now, instead, you give away $50 M in assets to charity. That $50 M means that you have zero income and pay zero taxes. HOWEVER, your assets are now worth $950 M rather than $1.0 B. So you lost $50 M in asset value and kept $50 M in income. Thus, your net worth is $1.0 B at the end of the year - so you're $30 M worse off with the charitable contribution.



    Now, it's slightly more complicated than that. First, if you donate the asset rather than the dividends, you pay capital gains tax rates which are usually lower, but the end result is that it's impossible to give something away to charity and have more than you started.



    AND, when you consider something called the alternative minimum tax, the tax savings from the charitable contribution are even lower.





    wow you are clueless ROFL
  • Reply 73 of 114
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FriedLobster View Post


    wow you are clueless ROFL



    Thank you. This guy is good enough at basic math to make seemingly valid arguments, but beneath the surface is a lot of naïveté.
  • Reply 74 of 114
    macrulezmacrulez Posts: 2,455member
    deleted
  • Reply 75 of 114
    nceencee Posts: 836member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson View Post


    Hear, hear!



    It's fashionable for people who like Apple (and obviously on a site like this, that's the majority) to bash Bill Gates, just as it's no doubt popular on Microsoft fan sites to bash Steve Jobs.



    But to be critical of how Bill Gates is conducting himself in his post-Microsoft life is entirely wrong. He is being generous of his money and his time, and his foundation is achieving some wonderful things. The world is a better place because of Bill Gates.



    He, Mr. Gates, and many others have been very generous with the MILLIONS, folks like US have given them.



    Skip
  • Reply 76 of 114
    macrulezmacrulez Posts: 2,455member
    deleted
  • Reply 77 of 114
    macrulezmacrulez Posts: 2,455member
    deleted
  • Reply 78 of 114
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ncee View Post


    He, Mr. Gates, and many others have been very generous with the MILLIONS, folks like US have given them.



    Skip



    Yes they have, and isn't that wonderful.
  • Reply 79 of 114
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bigdaddyguido View Post


    I'm sorry, you didn't show anything. Your explanation was so simplified it's not actually useful. You failed to mention how tax brackets work, how IRAs and other investment options can alter your taxable income, how having your money spread out in different banks and in binds from around the world can alter interest rates and allow you to make a profit off of investments that wouldn't possible otherwise. Anyone actually knowledgable of the subject would know that our little forum is in no way setup to delve into the vast complexity of Bill Gates tax statement. If your looking for a simple answer to your question, the you're not living in the reality that exists today.





    Honestly, what I'm talking about is basic economic fact, many wealthy people save money by donations. If you don't understand, take an economics class, don't wave your hands and accuse me of living in a fantasy world when you're the one trying to act like the works is as simple as an interest equation we learned when we were 6.



    ROTLFMAO. Then go ahead and show the how it works.



    I simplified it because the people posting in this forum clearly don't understand finances. Looks like I didn't simplify it enough. I can guarantee that tax brackets, IRAs, and other investment options don't change the actual picture. You don't have more money by making charitable donations. The most you can say is that taxes reduce the out of pocket cost of the donation, but never to zero or below.



    But feel free to provide an example of how it works.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FriedLobster View Post


    wow you are clueless ROFL



    Your inability to provide logical arguments is noted.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FriedLobster View Post


    Jobs was the CEO when they donated the money. it was JOBS' DECISION to donate that money. Also, as I mentioned earlier, Jobs was getting $1/year salary when he could've been earning $100-$500 Million plus+ if he wanted to.



    That $100-$500 Million plus is money Apple's free to donate to any charity whenever they want.



    No, it's not. The money that Apple donates is shareholder money. Jobs is acting in the shareholder's interest. His fiduciary responsibility is to donate money only if it has a net positive to the company. He is only allowed to give away his own money. Giving away other people's money is not charity.



    Yes, Jobs could be earning a greater salary. But 'what ifs' are not the same as charity. You don't have any way of knowing if he's donating money today, nor do you know if he'd donate more money if he had a million dollar salary. Furthermore, that's all irrelevant. Bono claims that since APPLE gave lots of money that Jobs is a philanthropist. He's wrong. Jobs may or may not be a philanthropist, but giving away someone else's money doesn't make him one.
  • Reply 80 of 114
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bigdaddyguido View Post


    Thank you. This guy is good enough at basic math to make seemingly valid arguments, but beneath the surface is a lot of naïveté.



    Then go ahead and provide a detailed example of how one can give away a million dollars and have more money than if one didn't give the money away. I can guarantee there's a flaw in whatever passes for logic in your mind.
Sign In or Register to comment.