I think personal income is more akin to revenue than profit. If you bring in 100K then you pay out rent, food, expenses, etc and only profit 30K or whatever you manage to save.
Personal income is paid from corporate gross profits (unless your company is failing, in which case your profits go negative, but that is still a profit impact), just like other fees like legal fees or whatever else. The money that is spent will necessarily reduce your profit, but it does not reduce your revenue. This is explicitly a business expense for Meta though, not personal income. This impacts profitability, not revenue. It would be an expense just the same if it was paid to zuck as income, so not much changes, but the point is you were right in spirit, just not in scale, and that’s all I meant
Ahh sorry I get our misunderstanding now. I meant as an analogy, for an individual your total income is like revenue is for a company (i.e., money in, not accounting for expenses out). AFAIK the payment to Trump came from Meta not from Zuck.
I agree that probably everyone rich is being recommended to kiss the ring, but 1M seems excessive.
It’s 0.0007% of their 2023 revenue. 0.002% of their 2023 profit. To put into realistic terms, if you made $100K it would be like giving 70 cents.
The money would come out of profit rather than rev, so it would be more like $2.00, but your point still stands gloriously as far as I’m concerned
Edit: there are undoubtedly tax implications that I ignored, I’m not an accountant, I just stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night
I think personal income is more akin to revenue than profit. If you bring in 100K then you pay out rent, food, expenses, etc and only profit 30K or whatever you manage to save.
Personal income is paid from corporate gross profits (unless your company is failing, in which case your profits go negative, but that is still a profit impact), just like other fees like legal fees or whatever else. The money that is spent will necessarily reduce your profit, but it does not reduce your revenue. This is explicitly a business expense for Meta though, not personal income. This impacts profitability, not revenue. It would be an expense just the same if it was paid to zuck as income, so not much changes, but the point is you were right in spirit, just not in scale, and that’s all I meant
Ahh sorry I get our misunderstanding now. I meant as an analogy, for an individual your total income is like revenue is for a company (i.e., money in, not accounting for expenses out). AFAIK the payment to Trump came from Meta not from Zuck.
I think shaking people, companies, and countries down for cash is the whole point of this administration. 1M should be pocket change for Meta.