Let's imagine an honest tech company that buys a 100 patents each year for 10 years.
As usual : 90% of them and up being useless. 9.9% of them allow to make a good product that sell well and keeps them afloat. And one of those ends up being ground breaking pushing the company forward, allowing major innovation in their product line.
In the current situation, the company placed a bet on those patents. They took risks, every year, for 10 years. And ended up being rewarded for it after some struggle and a lot of research.
In your proposed situation, the company would put as much risk in buying the patents. Would still struggle for 10 years. Then, once the ground breaking product comes along and starts generating sales, authorities come in and ask for retroactive taxation because their crown jewel was "clearly under market value"
That honest company would probably not stay in business for very long. Or would not even exist if the founders knew that would be the outcome.
You got this wrong. My point is to not allow to sell IP from the US Inc to the British Virgin Island subsidiary Ltd for a handful of dollars, and deprive the US taxman of billions of earnings. That "ground breaking product" was developed in the US, thus the profits and taxes should be made there.
I love US companies making boatloads of cash. I just hate them to get around paying normal taxes here.
In the current situation, the company placed a bet on those patents. They took risks, every year, for 10 years. And ended up being rewarded for it after some struggle and a lot of research. In your proposed situation, the company would put as much risk in buying the patents. Would still struggle for 10 years. Then, once the ground breaking product comes along and starts generating sales, authorities come in and ask for retroactive taxation because their crown jewel was "clearly under market value"
That honest company would probably not stay in business for very long. Or would not even exist if the founders knew that would be the outcome.