Why Washington state schools are #47 in education funding: Let's start with Bill Gates
Documenting Microsoft's Billion Dollar per year State Tax Scam
Like Boeing, Microsoft receives all kinds of hidden tax breaks -- like millions in credits for equipment and property tax exemptions for their intangible property. But we will focus on the biggest State tax break, namely the Software Royalty License tax scam.
The Washington State B&O Software Royalty Tax applies to ". . . every person engaging within this state in the business of receiving income from royaltiesĂ˘€Â¦for the granting of intangible rights, such as. . .software licenses." Furthermore, "Royalty income from software licenses is taxed at the 'domicile,' or location, of the owner of the property." Because it is a wholesale tax, it applies to sales regardless of the location of the customer -- whether in the U.S. or in another country.
Our State's Software Royalty License tax rate historically has been 1.5%. However in 1998, under pressure from Microsoft, the State legislature reduced this rate down to 0.5%. Nearly all of Microsoft's revenue comes from selling software licenses.
One might assume that with $70 billion in gross sales, Microsoft would pay State sales taxes of 0.5% times $70 billion -- or $350 million per year. But they don't. According to a former Microsoft manager who has devoted an entire website to this subject (microsofttaxdodge.com), Microsoft ships about half of its licenses or $35 billion per year to Nevada where there is no corporate tax. The sole reason to do this is to evade paying $350 million per year in corporate B & O royalty taxes in Washington State.
Instead of taking Microsoft to court for tax evasion, Ross Hunter, State Rep from Bellevue and Microsoft's head lobbyist in Olympia, passed a bill in 2010 which exempted Microsoft from having to pay this B & O Royalty tax. To add insult to injury, during the same legislative session, Ross also raised the B & O tax rate on many other businesses from 1.5% to 1.8% to make up for the fact that Microsoft was not paying their fair share. http://microsofttaxdodge.com/2010/04/microsoft-gets-nevada-royalty-tax-cut-and-tax-amnesty.html
What would Microsoft pay if this tax exemption was eliminated and the royalty rate was restored to its historic rate of 1.5%? Microsoft's sales for the current year were $70 billion. 1.5% x $70 billion = $1 billion. The cost to Microsoft would be even less -- because they could deduct their State taxes from their federal taxes.
Can the Legislature cut $1 billion in School Funding in order to give Microsoft $1 billion in corporate welfare?
There is a serious legal question as to whether the legislature even has a legal right to exempt Microsoft from paying one billion per year in State taxes at the same time that the legislature is cutting more than one billion dollars per year in school funding. Our State Constitution makes it quite clear that the Paramount Duty of our State legislature is funding public schools -- not handing out one billion in corporate tax breaks to Microsoft. Microsoft is sitting on over $40 billion in cash. There is no significant benefit to Microsoft in their tax scam. But there is a real harm to our State's one million school children in continuing with this sham. Because of MicrosoftĂ˘€™s huge tax break, our schools are 47th in the nation in school funding and our kids are subjected to among the highest class sizes in the nation.
To read this particle in full and it is highly recommended to do so, go to:
Welcome to the REAL Washington State Budget!
The other website is Microsoft Tax Dodge.
Here is an excerpt from that website regarding Gates and his own special tax system:
Dummies Guide to Microsoft's Nevada Tax Dodge
Update: Thx Slashdot, GeekWire & Macsurfer for linking. This blog has received a big jump in traffic since the New York Times' story on Apple's Nevada tax dodge. Here's a simple summary for Seattleites learning about this for the first time:
In 1997, Microsoft et al. lobbied to reduce Washington State's Royalty Tax from 1.5% to .5%, a threefold reduction. This wasn't low enough. The company decided to open a small Reno, Nevada office to dodge the tax completely.
Between 1997 - 2011, the company used its Nevada office to avoid $1.51 billion in Washington state taxes, interest and penalties. If you include impacts from the company's lobbying and calculate its savings at the original 1.5% rate, it's saved $4.37 billion.
Since 2008, Washington State has cut $4 billion from K-12 and Higher Education. We rank 31st in K-12 spending. 18% of University of Washington freshman are now foreigners (because they pay more) up from 2% six years ago. We rank 47th nationally in 18-24 year old college enrollment and 48th in K-12 class size.
In 2010, after we raised these issues to the legislature, Democratic State Representative Ross Hunter, Chair of the Finance Committee and a former Microsoft executive, led the Legislature to change the state's Royalty Tax from a tax on sales to worldwide customers to just a tiny tax on sales to Washington State customers. This reduced Microsoft's effective Nevada tax dodge by about 99%. He also included language that gave Microsoft amnesty on its back taxes.
Shortly after, Democratic Gov. Gregoire appointed another Microsoft Executive, Suzan Delbene, to run the Washington State's tax department. Delbene is married to Microsoft President Kurt Delbene.
Gregoire regularly praises Microsoft for its $5 million annual scholarship fund for technical graduates at the UW saying it helps mitigates all the unfortunate cuts to higher education - while failing to mention Microsoft's been saving $100 million annually through its Nevada tax office and the changes Hunter made to the law.
To find out more information, all of the details and relationships go to:
Microsoft Tax Dodge
There is absolutely no reason why our schools should not be adequately funded under our state constitution and it's time to demand that happen.
FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of education issues vital to a democracy. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information click here. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.