Funny they are being fined in the Netherlands, because Uber is almost invisible there, as regular taxis have been protected. I don't have accurate data, but it's at least 15€ per inhabitant, so it seems like a very very steep fine. I can't imagine how much this is per driver, €25000?
It seems the dutch regulator is saying "why don't you just go away?". The feeling is likely mutual.
Uber europe is headquartered in the Netherlands, which is why the fine was handed out there, the complaint was passed from the french privacy watchdog to the Dutch one.
> Although the fine comes from the Dutch regulator, the investigation began in France. In June 2020, 21 Uber drivers there stepped forward to human rights organization Ligue Des Droits De L'homme Et Du Citoyen. Another 151 Uber drivers later joined that complaint. The LDH took that complaint back to the CNIL, France's national privacy regulator. The latter forwarded the complaint to the Dutch Personal Data Authority in January 2021 because Uber's European headquarters is in the Netherlands.
That's one way of saying "Europe is full of nations who provide unethical tax shelters for businesses (while criticizing any nation that doesn't provide their level of social programs), so they can regulate and fine and fill their coffers with money from businesses all over the world." But yeah, blame it on the companies that take advantage of the tax shelters EU nations choose to provide and the EU chooses to allow.
Maybe our definitions of "Tax shelters" are a bit different, but I think of Cayman Islands or Bermuda when I hear that, and Netherlands is not like that in the context of Europe. Probably Ireland is the closest you get, so would have been a much better example.
The Dutch Innovation Box regime provides a lower effective tax rate (7% as of 2024) on profits derived from qualifying intellectual property, such as patents and software. For companies like Uber, which rely heavily on proprietary technology, this can significantly reduce their overall tax burden on profits derived from IP.
The participation exemption in the Netherlands allows companies to receive dividends and capital gains from qualifying foreign subsidiaries free from Dutch corporate tax. This is particularly beneficial for multinational corporations with substantial foreign operations, as it prevents profits from being taxed multiple times as they move up through the corporate structure.
The Netherlands is a popular location for holding companies due to its favorable tax regime for holding and managing subsidiaries. The combination of participation exemptions, tax treaties, and rulings makes it ideal for structuring complex international operations.
So... a nation like the Netherlands optimizes their tax laws such that it's advantageous for businesses that are otherwise completely unrelated to their nation to HQ in their nation to avoid their proper tax burdens in the country they were started in and operate in much more significantly, for the benefit of the Netherlands getting additional tax revenue and to the detriment of other nations who would otherwise be able to tax that business.
Some people might call that a "tax shelter." Since it you know, benefits Uber, benefits the Netherlands, at the detriment of the nation(s) that Uber operates in...
> > The appeals process is expected to take some four years and any fines are suspended until all legal recourses have been exhausted, according to the DPA.
fine is suspended. it will take 4 years of appeals :)
Once again demonstrating that fining a corporation for criminal behavior is simply adding to their operating cost, and the lawyers will always get paid
Corporations recognize nothing but operating cost, so that’s in fact an appropriate lever. The question is if the correct amount of force is applied to it—usually not, but here I’m not so sure.
It's a fine meant to be a punishment, not damage settlement.
> All DPAs in Europe calculate the amount of fines for businesses in the same manner. Those fines amount to a maximum of 4% of the worldwide annual turnover of a business.
> because Uber is almost invisible there, as regular taxis have been protected
Uber is almost invisible there because they continue to blatantly break the law, and even when told to stop, they continue like nothing happened. (https://www.wsj.com/articles/dutch-authorities-raid-uber-off...). This seems to be just another case of the same hubris.
Of course Uber faces pushback when they act like that.
It seems the dutch regulator is saying "why don't you just go away?". The feeling is likely mutual.