101–110 of 181 posts
Forbes doesn't even work with an adblocker for the last couple weeks. If you want to hear about the actual settlement, here's a ReCode article: http://recode.net/2015/12/30/apple-to-pay-348-million-to-set... Not sure if the article brings up the same discussion and conclusions as the Forbes one though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can (in principle) do this anyway - the jet and the yacht are expenses, and you only pay corporate income tax on the profit ($1M - cost of yacht - cost of house ~= $0). In practice the IRS will treat use of the yacht as taxable income paid to the user.
Maybe but I'd bet if you surveyed all the corporate jets out there and found what percentage were being treated as personal taxable income you'd find it pretty low.
In fact, eliminating corporate income tax would discourage this, since it makes alternatives (namely taking a profit and reinvesting in the business) cheaper.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The primary goal is to get Apple to pay U.S. taxes on U.S. sales. The linked Forbes article is a great introduction, but unless I'm reading it wrong, it covers how Apple avoids US taxes on foreign sales, not US taxes on US sales. How exactly are they avoiding US taxes on US sales? The US practice of taxing entities (corporations and people) on their global income based on citizenship instead of residency is just stup…
There are two distinct outrages here: - Apple avoiding paying taxes on foreign income to the USA - Apple avoiding paying European taxes to anybody Your argument holds weight on the former. However, it obfuscates the second, where Apple pays taxes on its European income at a rate of 0% to Ireland. That's a true outrage.
Apple doesn't write the rules. It's ridiculous to criticise them for them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No! No! No! What you legally owe in taxes, in a reasonable tax structure, has NOTHING to do with your moral compass. You should be able to plug numbers into a spreadsheet and get it. I'm not saying that taxes are bad. We need tax revenue. I get that. But there should NEVER, EVER, be two legally correct answers to how much you owe. The fact that you had to spend paragraphs making your case, makes mine -- when you reso…
OK, I'll add another 'no' to you both. If a company is operating in a certain country offering goods and services to the population of that country then that country has the right to levy taxes upon the sales of those goods, and upon the operating profits of that company operating within that country. Global corporations fiddle this by moving money around so it appears that they don't make a corporate profit in that…
You have sales tax, then this company invest into the country and hire people, paying rental for stores, advertising and spending. Once you take away all that, the country has to take 35% of your profits?
The case for Apple isn't as convincing as they are the most profitable company in the world. What about company that operate on laser thin margin? As most company are these days.
I am not again Tax, but it needs to be fair and reasonable. And in most cases it is not. As per your example, how about Vodafone, or many other SME who invest their profits into property market, driving up the cost of property which are every days needs for people in their country, and yet does not pay a single dime of tax.
It's great how we're living in a world where tax codes are so idiotic and complex that it takes long lawsuits to figure out what tax is actually due. It's not about following the letter of the law; it's about following the letter of the law, avoiding the court of public opinion, and coughing up whatever is necessary to stop the complaints when some politician wants to distract people from their incompetence and whip…
A easy solution is to admit that creating ethereal entities is a stupid idea, get rid of it, and just has owners and investors. It would scare away the larger corporations, but it would make life much easier for everyone else, eliminate a bunch of complicated laws, and make international trade much easier since you then only deal with corporeal beings.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree with you and I'm updating my post to show that your position and mine are similar. We both want a reasonable tax structure. But Apple is exploiting the unreasonableness of the tax structure, e.g. by using outdated codes, shell games, tax havens, etc. Apple leaders have the opportunity and moral responsibility to stop exploiting, and start helping.
You keep saying "moral responsibility". They don't. Companies have already been telling the government what's wrong and the government refuses to change it. Apple is responsible to its shareholders bottom line.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The primary goal is to get Apple to pay U.S. taxes on U.S. sales. The linked Forbes article is a great introduction, but unless I'm reading it wrong, it covers how Apple avoids US taxes on foreign sales, not US taxes on US sales. How exactly are they avoiding US taxes on US sales? The US practice of taxing entities (corporations and people) on their global income based on citizenship instead of residency is just stup…
There are two distinct outrages here: - Apple avoiding paying taxes on foreign income to the USA - Apple avoiding paying European taxes to anybody Your argument holds weight on the former. However, it obfuscates the second, where Apple pays taxes on its European income at a rate of 0% to Ireland. That's a true outrage.
Being outraged at Apple is like being outraged at the weatherman about the weather.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What Apple owes is clear to me: pay the standard U.S. corporate tax on the standard U.S. profits. Do the same for all countries. The Apple problem is that its lawyers are deliberately avoiding using current tax codes, and instead essentially claiming that Apple is based in Ireland, then playing shell games with what counts as U.S. sales, U.S. profits, and also U.S. property. Apple ends up paying ~10% U.S. tax, rather…
No! No! No! What you legally owe in taxes, in a reasonable tax structure, has NOTHING to do with your moral compass. You should be able to plug numbers into a spreadsheet and get it. I'm not saying that taxes are bad. We need tax revenue. I get that. But there should NEVER, EVER, be two legally correct answers to how much you owe. The fact that you had to spend paragraphs making your case, makes mine -- when you reso…
It's great how we're living in a world where tax codes are so idiotic and complex that it takes long lawsuits to figure out what tax is actually due. It's not about following the letter of the law; it's about following the letter of the law, avoiding the court of public opinion, and coughing up whatever is necessary to stop the complaints when some politician wants to distract people from their incompetence and whip…
What Apple owes is clear to me: pay the standard U.S. corporate tax on the standard U.S. profits. Do the same for all countries. The Apple problem is that its lawyers are deliberately avoiding using current tax codes, and instead essentially claiming that Apple is based in Ireland, then playing shell games with what counts as U.S. sales, U.S. profits, and also U.S. property. Apple ends up paying ~10% U.S. tax, rather…
This is exactly what they pay currently.
> Do the same for all countries.
This is what they just settled with the Italian government about; previously they thought they were legally in the clear paying Irish corporate taxes for profits from across the EU.
> The Apple problem is that its lawyers are deliberately avoiding using current tax codes, and instead essentially claiming that Apple is based in Ireland, then playing shell games with what counts as U.S. sales, U.S. profits, and also U.S. property. Apple ends up paying ~10% U.S. tax, rather than ~35%.
Apple does pay standard US corporate tax on profit from all US sales, the same 35% as any other company, and makes no claim that Apple, Inc. is located in Ireland. The Irish subsidiaries are money pools that collect Apple’s foreign profits, so that e.g. in Europe Apple pays VAT in each country but only small amounts of corporate taxes. They can then take that money and use it to acquire foreign companies, run their foreign retail/support operations, invest in manufacturing capital, fund overseas R&D offices, et cetera, or just hoard a pile of cash. In the US, Apple has simultaneously taken out big loans (because they currently get ridiculously low interest rates) which money they can use for capital expenditures in the US or dividends or whatever.
But Apple isn’t playing any shell games about US sales, profits, or property, per se. In my opinion you should do some basic research before making such obviously false accusations.
There’s plenty about the Irish tax setup that is questionable, and arguably Apple should repatriate more of its foreign profits back to the US and pay US corporate taxes on them. However, the discussion should be focused on what they currently do vs. what they should be forced to do by an improved tax code, not on some imaginary scenario based on what some other companies do.
It's great how we're living in a world where tax codes are so idiotic and complex that it takes long lawsuits to figure out what tax is actually due. It's not about following the letter of the law; it's about following the letter of the law, avoiding the court of public opinion, and coughing up whatever is necessary to stop the complaints when some politician wants to distract people from their incompetence and whip…
What Apple owes is clear to me: pay the standard U.S. corporate tax on the standard U.S. profits. Do the same for all countries. The Apple problem is that its lawyers are deliberately avoiding using current tax codes, and instead essentially claiming that Apple is based in Ireland, then playing shell games with what counts as U.S. sales, U.S. profits, and also U.S. property. Apple ends up paying ~10% U.S. tax, rather…
Apple, and the rest of them, are following these laws. If governments are unhappy with the the amount of tax Apple pays after following the rules then they should change them.