
Facebook removes 1.5B users from protection of EU privacy law - koolba
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/04/facebook-removes-1-5-billion-users-from-protection-of-eu-privacy-laW
======
pdkl95
> Facebook Ireland Limited in Dublin is believed to have been created largely
> for tax minimization reasons.

From a Reuters article[1] on the same topic: "Facebook said the latest change
does not have tax implications."

Is FB really going to get away with claiming Irish residence when talking
about taxes while simultaneously claiming to reside in California for legal
purposes (GDPR)?

[1] [https://www.reuters.com/article/us-facebook-privacy-eu-
exclu...](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-facebook-privacy-eu-
exclusive/exclusive-facebook-to-put-1-5-billion-users-out-of-reach-of-new-eu-
privacy-law-idUSKBN1HQ00P)

------
JumpCrisscross
> _Facebook has quietly altered its terms of service, making stricter Irish
> data protection laws no longer binding on the vast majority of its users_

Was this made more feasible by the recent international corporate tax changes
in the United States?

~~~
soneil
It probably has very little bearing. What's relevant here is which legal
entity users have an agreement with. For taxation, it's which legal entity
their customers have an agreement with.

It's always worth remembering facebook's users and customers are two entirely
separate sets.

------
bnj
What I find confusing here is that (as someone with zero legal background), I
would have thought that if the user has a contract with the Irish subsidiary,
that Facebook shouldn’t be able to make a change like this without getting a
renewed consent from the user.

I know that companies change and update their ToS all the time and maybe
there’s nothing different here, but in this case it particularly sticks out to
me. Even if Facebook or any company “reserves the right to change their terms
of service at any time”, why does this not shred the notion that a user has
informed consent?

