Hacker News Reader

Comment by C4stor | Hacker News Reader

That's strictly false.

The article clearly states that _initially_ companies were called to moderation, and that _now_ a law project will be passed to strictly forbids this.

"Le président de la République Emmanuel Macron a franchi un cap, vendredi matin, lors d’une rencontre téléphonique avec les partenaires sociaux, en annonçant que M. Le Maire soumettrait au premier ministre Edouard Philippe un projet pour encadrer strictement le versement des dividendes. Ils devront être suspendus quand les sociétés bénéficient des reports d’échéances fiscales et sociales"

View on HN

Again, what I say is not "stricly false" at all, I'm just quoting Le Maire. And he's just talking about taxes, not partial unemployment.

You're not just quoting Le Marie, you're arguing that Reuters is wrong.

Yes I am. State aid is not only guaranteed bonds. Partial unemployement is, too.

It cannot be clearer : "Ils devront être suspendus quand les sociétés bénéficient des reports d’échéances fiscales et sociales". The three words "devront être suspendus" explicitly indicates it will be illegal. And the terms "les sociétés bénéficiant des reports d’échéances fiscales et sociales" say that any company benefiting at least from the most basic state-funded help package (related to COVID) is targeted.

The title is

> French companies benefiting from state aid can't buy back shares

You stated "That's a false statement"

However it is in fact a true statement, since a law is effectively passed to forbid the very thing the post title describes.

Hence stating "That's a false statement" is "strictly false", and quoting a part of an article that explains that the exact thing you're quoting is now outdated doesn't make it less false somehow.

If you want to mean that companies "can" still buy back shares, although it's now illegal, well, that's just refusing to give the post title an honest interpretation of what it means.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com