| ▲ | bluecalm 2 hours ago | |
>>Everything you named should be included in the price you charge for a cup of coffee. So the money you extract from it, minus the cost you named is your profit. When you first invest 100k and then sell something for 2$ you don't make a profit for a while. You may be arguing for some other tax but it's ridiculous to argue income tax should be paid until revenue > costs. >>If you dont make profit on that sale, I have bad news for your business idea. When doing business you often don't know if you will make profit or not. In the coffee example you don't know how many you are going to sell so it's impossible to "include costs in the cup of coffee" because that depends on how many you are going to sell and that's unknown. Your whole line of reasoning makes 0 sense. | ||
| ▲ | sevenzero an hour ago | parent [-] | |
My whole line of reasoning makes perfect sense given I worked in trades doing exactly what I talk about in a country with one of the most complicated tax systems there is. Prices are calculated by adding your costs into the base price which is common sense. If you do that you can actually calculate the amount of coffees you need to sell to turn a profit and if the business even makes sense in the first place. Every unit of coffee you sell should turn a profit. Which in turn should be taxed. Even cigarettes that probably only turn micro cents profit should be taxed by per unit sold. They even are, given their sales are heavily regulated. No company is giving out "free" products without making a profit just to go even on their initial investment. | ||