Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Apple sidestepped a 2013 crackdown on its Irish tax practices

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 350 posts

Re: How Apple sidestepped a 2013 crackdown on its Irish tax practices

#71

Post by nautilus12 »

whatok wrote: post #15
nautilus12 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you are saying that rather than taxing the middle class more that we should simply make large corporations like Apple actually follow the existing tax laws? Owing to its source it doesn't sound like this idea is going to be popular on hacker news, in spite of its blatant rationality.

Pretty sure Apple is following existing tax laws.

mrguyorama I agree 1000% and most reasonable people should as well. The technical letter of the law should not matter as much as the spirit of the law!

Re: How Apple sidestepped a 2013 crackdown on its Irish tax practices

#72

Post by komali2 »

sol_remmy wrote: post #30
komali2 wrote: post #5

If you unplugged Apple's board (or given decision-making apparatus) and plugged in a (currently nonexistent) AI with the parameter "Maximize Profit," would you see a different result? I think not. I think we'd see things far more morally horrifying, in fact, with just enough PR makeup to ensure "maximized profit." Unsure why we laud capitalism and then act horrified at the result. Here in America we've made our decis…

If you unplugged the government's board (or given decision-making apparatus) and plugged in a (currently nonexistent) AI with the parameter "Maximize Power of Government," would you see a different result? I think not. ----- My point is that you are implying government is the alternative ("they will govern morally! academics will keep them in check! journalists will keep them in check!") then you need to rethink your…

>if you are implying government is the alternative

I implied nothing on purpose, though I understand people will find meaning in other's words on their own.

What sort of solutions do you have in mind, if not governmental? Or do you not think solutions are necessary (that this isn't a problem)?

Re: How Apple sidestepped a 2013 crackdown on its Irish tax practices

#73

Post by enraged_camel »

BoiledCabbage wrote: post #63
fredley wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not the fault of Capitalism alone. In a healthy democracy, the people vote in the Government, who can impose fines, tariffs, penalties and such on companies and business practices that the people (via the people they elect) deem to be working against them. Sadly, as you point out, this creates a direct incentive to lobby or otherwise attempt to control Government by large and powerful companies. The only way…

Pure free market Capitalism is playing a game of Monopoly where after each time anyone passes go, the player with the most money gets to create a new rule. Guess what? The game is gonna get pretty skewed, pretty darn fast. Consolidated money is power. The only way that capitalism can work long term is if there are rules actively countering/fighting using that power to change the rules. Money is power and capitalism c…

>>Consolidated money is power. The only way that capitalism can work long term is if there are rules actively countering/fighting using that power to change the rules.

Yes. This is why I'm in favor of term limits, as well as a rule that outlaws "revolving doors"[1].

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolving_door_(politics)

Re: How Apple sidestepped a 2013 crackdown on its Irish tax practices

#74

Post by tryingagainbro »

nautilus12 wrote: post #48
komali2 wrote: post #5

If you unplugged Apple's board (or given decision-making apparatus) and plugged in a (currently nonexistent) AI with the parameter "Maximize Profit," would you see a different result? I think not. I think we'd see things far more morally horrifying, in fact, with just enough PR makeup to ensure "maximized profit." Unsure why we laud capitalism and then act horrified at the result. Here in America we've made our decis…

The issue is not capitalism and existing law, but the interpretation and enforcement of the law. The issue is that we have removed rational judgement from legal proceeding with regards to tax law. Its clearly demonstrable that Apple is not following the spirit of US tax law, but simply sidestepping the law by offshoring its money in this way. Does anyone with more legal expertise know of a more concise way of express…

USA can make it illegal probably but they will not (treaties? And /or a total breakdown of the current system.)

Should Apple pay 35% if they can legally pay 5%, with some maneuvering?

Then we can ask: Why not pay 50% since they're really profitable?

Re: How Apple sidestepped a 2013 crackdown on its Irish tax practices

#75

Post by aaron-lebo »

civilian wrote: post #64
aaron-lebo wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

governments allow it corrupt governments interfere with it Are those not in opposition? Another solution is a better breed of business that doesn't see $ as the most important thing in the world, but not sure how you change that. Capitalism can and should be a conduit for innovation without outright greed.

I was working for a tech company that liked to pride itself on being "one of the good guys". They gave us pretty lavish benefits, that often seemed kind of silly, and had a massive well-designed office. Although the office was still an open office, and suffered from those aspects. They recently had to lay off 60 of their ~200 people. What would have been better? Should they have been greedier, given fewer benefits, a…

Not using a "massive well-designed office" would be a start. They probably didn't need 200 people, either.

If you will look at most tech companies, they are poorly run. Github lost $66 million in 2016 hosting code. You don't gotta be Warren Buffet to know that something is wrong with that setup.

The greed aspect comes into the everything needs to be big, because for too many companies the end goal is not the product, but money. That's greed. That's not just a failing of morality but a practical failure of building sustainable businesses.

Re: How Apple sidestepped a 2013 crackdown on its Irish tax practices

#76

Post by komali2 »

fleitz wrote: post #67
tasty_freeze wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have a system of taxation. I pay my share. I expect others to pay there share. But when the other has found some legal loophole (perhaps one they helped to put in place or at least to maintain) and avoid paying their share, then yes, I'm upset and I want them to pay their share. Why do you try to cast this as a matter of greed. Apple is getting billions of dollars in benefits from being a US-based company, directl…

You mean you pay what the government says you owe, just like Apple does... Or are you saying that you don't claim any deductions and pay the maximum allowable by the system?

I see where you're coming from (we're in agreeance that Apple is paying what the law says they owe), I think what people are discussing is that these loopholes probably shouldn't exist (i.e. that the spirit of the law is Apple should be paying ~30% tax on ALL profits, instead of just 50% of profits).

Re: How Apple sidestepped a 2013 crackdown on its Irish tax practices

#77

Post by javajosh »

sol_remmy wrote: post #30
komali2 wrote: post #5

If you unplugged Apple's board (or given decision-making apparatus) and plugged in a (currently nonexistent) AI with the parameter "Maximize Profit," would you see a different result? I think not. I think we'd see things far more morally horrifying, in fact, with just enough PR makeup to ensure "maximized profit." Unsure why we laud capitalism and then act horrified at the result. Here in America we've made our decis…

If you unplugged the government's board (or given decision-making apparatus) and plugged in a (currently nonexistent) AI with the parameter "Maximize Power of Government," would you see a different result? I think not. ----- My point is that you are implying government is the alternative ("they will govern morally! academics will keep them in check! journalists will keep them in check!") then you need to rethink your…

Government, by definition, has total power over it's space. That power is systematically reduced by the law (every positive individual right is a restriction on government). Reductions (law) are enacted by the people (in the US, the members of Congress are "the people"). If we can speak, if we can vote, then we have, theoretically, the ability to set the dial of government power anywhere from 0 (Somalia) to totality (North Korea).

There are obvious constraints on this slider. Set the slider too low, and a weak government is vulnerable to take-over. Set too high, the people are oppressed, unhappy, and will revolt.

The West's slider is pretty firmly in the middle, although it's uneven from policy to policy (it's set very low on gun ownership; it's set very high on commercial flying).

The US Federal government could acquire far more power in a variety of ways. For example, they could federalize local law-enforcement. They could run drones within our borders, for both surveillance and assassinations. They could outlaw independent media and control all media output (a la Russia). They could require us all to carry Federal ID and require us to show this ID to any law-enforcement on-demand, for any reason. They could require us to run special DRM/tracking software in our smartphones, and fine/jail us if we remove it.

Re: How Apple sidestepped a 2013 crackdown on its Irish tax practices

#78

Post by shkkmo »

enraged_camel wrote: post #73
BoiledCabbage wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pure free market Capitalism is playing a game of Monopoly where after each time anyone passes go, the player with the most money gets to create a new rule. Guess what? The game is gonna get pretty skewed, pretty darn fast. Consolidated money is power. The only way that capitalism can work long term is if there are rules actively countering/fighting using that power to change the rules. Money is power and capitalism c…

>>Consolidated money is power. The only way that capitalism can work long term is if there are rules actively countering/fighting using that power to change the rules. Yes. This is why I'm in favor of term limits, as well as a rule that outlaws "revolving doors"[1]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolving_door_(politics)

This is why I favor making our representatives an actual representative population using random selection.

Our current selection process overwhelmingly favors white male lawyers who are good at talking corporations into giving them money for their election campaigns.

Re: How Apple sidestepped a 2013 crackdown on its Irish tax practices

#79

Post by [deleted] »

mannykannot wrote: post #42
colemannugent wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see your point about the bad side of capitalism, but consider that this kind of abuse is only possible because the governments allow it. No economic system can live up to its design when corrupt governments interfere with it.

Nice try, but there is not much point in considering the corrupted without also taking a look at who is doing the corrupting.

[deleted]

Re: How Apple sidestepped a 2013 crackdown on its Irish tax practices

#80

Post by munk-a »

DINKDINK wrote: post #31

Point of debate: Why should Apple have the US government lay claim to the revenue/profits that it generates in non US countries? From the article: "This allowed Apple to funnel all its sales outside of the Americas - currently about 55% of its revenue - through Irish subsidiaries that were effectively stateless for taxation purposes, and so incurred hardly any tax." If you support the taxation, do you also support th…

First some background... VATs (value added taxes) are pretty solid for distributing this money fairly between the national entities involved in producing this wealth. Currently companies cheat the system a bit to do the bulk of their value adding in nationalities that don't tax it highly (the famous putting stickers on computers in bermuda in apple's case).

I think it is fair for a nationality to claim that there is a certain minimum amount of our production we wish to divert to social causes, in that case I also think it is fair that, for products sold in that nationality the government can claim any shortfall in paid taxes on the value accrued to that point. Let's assume that China has a 10% VAT on 5% of the value, Bermuda .5% on 90% of the value and USA 8% VAT on 5% of the value. The tax owed to the US might be calculated by ignoring the first 5% of the value, since china already collected a sum exceeding the sum the US would collect, then the US would collect a 7.5% remainder tax on the middle 90% and a full 8% on the last 5%.

These collections would only be owed on products sold or incrementally improved in the US, any items that never entered the US could live by their own rules.

Regarding the IRS taxing the wages of expats living abroad, it follows much the same system. An expat is only required to pay the difference between the taxes they are paying and the taxes they would owe if they resided in the US, this is a silly rule that probably shouldn't be on the books since expats living abroad gain none of the benefits from their citizenship.

Post reply on HN