What is the reasonable amount for a company that pays its "owner" no dividend and apparently never will?
This isn't empty rhetoric. Most countries extract tax as x% of turnover plus y% of dividend plus many smaller taxes. Kamprad structured his company to pay its "owner" nothing, which leaves VAT and the smaller taxes, and apparently the structure prevented his heirs from ever getting any financial benefit from Ikea.
Forgoing an income foregoes income tax. I'm asking you whether that's fair. Can someone like Kamprad decide that neither he nor the state should get any financial benefit from Ikea?
The money is now in a foundation, that can re-invest in Ikea or use it for philantropical purposes. It's a nonprofit according to Dutch rules, and they have decided not to tax those.
Eventually the money is spent on something, and will be taxed then.
This isn't empty rhetoric. Most countries extract tax as x% of turnover plus y% of dividend plus many smaller taxes. Kamprad structured his company to pay its "owner" nothing, which leaves VAT and the smaller taxes, and apparently the structure prevented his heirs from ever getting any financial benefit from Ikea.
Forgoing an income foregoes income tax. I'm asking you whether that's fair. Can someone like Kamprad decide that neither he nor the state should get any financial benefit from Ikea?