Hacker News Reader

This is what I don't understand...how do you present two cases of "up to" and then say "whichever is higher"?!

"Infringements of the following provisions shall, in accordance with paragraph 2, be subject to administrative fines up to 10 000 000 EUR, or in the case of an undertaking, up to 2 % of the total worldwide annual turnover of the preceding financial year, whichever is higher:"

View on HN

What's the problem with that? The "whichever is higher" doesn't refer to the fine, but to the limit it can be "up to". Something a bit more verbose could have been easier to understand, true, but there's no doubt about what it means.

> but to the limit it can be "up to".

So then why not just set it to a percent of revenue? If you're just going to slap a small company with minimal turnover with €1k fines anyway, then why the need for the "up to €10M" amount?

What if the company has huge cash reserves/holdings but artificially low turnover?

Depending on how quickly regulators can act, and how they would determine the date of precedence for 'the preceeding financial year', it's just about conceivable that a company might have >1 year of warning to do some financial trickery to minimise their fines.

Having a range(0..max($turnover_amount, $fixed_amount)) reduces the scope for that sort of trickery.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com