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

191–200 of 350 posts

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

#191

Post by tryingagainbro »

nautilus12 wrote: post #183
twblalock wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the state charges you with murder, the state has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you intended to kill. You don't have to prove anything. And that's the way it should be.

So why can't this be a scenario of the state charging Apple with tax evasion and the state proving beyond a reasonable doubt that this was their intention?

It's not evasion. They're paying everything they're legally required to pay. If the state proves that they didn't pay what was required by law, they'll pay it, with penalties.

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

#192

Post by andrepd »

__blockcipher__ wrote: post #157
cmiles74 wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't believe that this is accurate. Apple believes they are in compliance and at this time it appears the US federal government agrees. If the government was to disagree, they could take action and force Apple to comply with the existing tax laws. Apple would have their day in court and precedent would be set. Should Apple win that case, then we'd need to look into creating new laws. I am not convinced that new la…

Pure foolishness. The law says “if you bring your foreign-earned profits abroad, you must pay taxes”. (I left it vague because I’m not an expert but my understanding is Apple would be responsible for around a 30% or higher tax rate). Apple says, “okay we’re not going to bring the money back at that rate. Instead we’ll leave it invested in liquid assets abroad and take on cheap debt in the US to fund our share repurch…

>Forced repatriation? I hope it’s clear why that isn’t a good approach.

It isn't clear to me. Why is that?

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

#193

Post by charlesdm »

slavik81 wrote: post #54
pjc50 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Any kind of business or financial transfer or ownership of assets or beneficiary interest in the Cayman Islands (Etc) is a criminal offence"?

That's insufficient. Most of the world has a lower corporate tax rate than the United States. The Cayman Islands might be the most attractive place to park their funds, but pretty much anywhere would still be more attractive than bringing it to the US.

Lowering the US corporate tax rate to say 10 or 15% is the only reasonably feasible solution. Incentivize companies to book profits in the US. Then increase the dividend tax rate to compensate (depending on if this ends up being tax neutral or not -- it might very well be tax neutral given the extra profits that would be booked in the US)

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

#194

Post by osteele »

nautilus12 wrote: post #8
rrggrr wrote: post #2

If passed, and for a brief period of time, Trump's dollar repatriation tax scheme brings home some of the +2 trillion dollars sequestered abroad - including some of the billions Apple has parked offshore. http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-gop-tax-reform-plan-bil... There's something to be said for Apple's efforts to level the playing field against the favorable tax & public policies under which Samsung and Huawei…

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.

My understanding of the economics (via popular-press reporting [1,2]) is that corporate taxes are effectively paid by workers and shareholders.

In the case of Apple, many employees are high-income individuals. One way to tax them is to raise Apple's effective tax rate, by closing loopholes. Another would to move these individuals to a higher bracket, and tax them directly on income. The latter would allow the tax system to target only those employees who actually are high-income individuals. I don't know how that plays on Hacker News, but it doesn't seem to be politically feasible.

Apple's individual investors are probably mostly high-net-worth individuals. (Apple might have more non-rich investors than a blue chip like GE does. I know quite a few middle class individuals whose only outside of funds are in APPL or TSLA. They have brand loyalty even if [with TSLA] they don't own the product. It's like playing fantasy football.) (The individual investors with the greatest number of shares are super-high-net-worth, of course[3].) To a progressive, it seems fair to tax them more, which taxing Apple effectively does. Those individuals aren't going to pay taxes on stock appreciation unless the capital gains exemption is rolled back. Now that Apple is paying dividends instead of just appreciating, raising the income bracket could be an alternative to closing the loophole.

My understanding is that institutional investors in general are largely funds, endowments, and pensions. Apple seems to be mostly funds[4]. Funds are probably held by middle and middle-upper class individuals with mutuals or indices in their portfolios. (The poor don't own stocks. The rich own them directly.) The loophole benefits them. [Big disclaimer: I'm a novice in how to interpret this, and I wouldn't be surprised to be wrong.]

[1] "Who Pays the Corporate Income Tax", Bruce Bartlett, New York Times, Feb 19, 2013. https://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/19/who-pays-the-c...

[2] "Who Ultimately Pays the Corporate Income Tax?", Uwe E. Reinhardt (Economics @ Princeton), New York Times, July 23, 2010. https://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/23/who-ultimately...

[3] "Top Apple Shareholders for 2017", John Edwards, Investopedia, October 6, 2017. http://www.investopedia.com/articles/markets/120115/top-5-ap...

[4] "Apple Inc. Institutional Ownership", NASDAQ. http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/aapl/institutional-holdings

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

#195

Post by Frondo »

__blockcipher__ wrote: post #170
anigbrowl wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Prove it. I think companies like being in the US because of the sophisticated capital markets, strong and predictable legal environment, and deep pockets of American consumers. I'd like some evidence instead of hyperbole.

How about you provide the evidence? If US makes it defacto illegal to operate internationally as a US-based company, the US will lose its economic moat within a matter of decades [citation needed, I know] I’m not a tax expert but IME the people who are blaming Apple don’t know what they’re talking about. Only the US has such an insane attitude towards international profits. And remember that there’s no loophole to cl…

No one is saying the US would make it illegal to operate an international company.

They're looking for ways to close some of these loopholes that are keeping a ton of tax money out of the coffers belonging to We the People.

Please don't conflate "closing tax loopholes" with "making it illegal to operate internationally".

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

#196

Post by [deleted] »

madeofpalk wrote: post #173
aaron-lebo wrote: post #3

Steve Jobs: What if the computer was a beautiful object? Something you wanted to look at and have in your home. And what if instead of it being in the right hands, it was in everyone's hands? John Sculley: We'd be talking about the most tectonic shift in the status quo since... Steve Jobs: ...ever. Wonder if Sorkin could make a $1,000 phone and tax avoidance sound good? When did Apple change from being about the aver…

What's this got to do with the tech industry? Doesnt every industry have this problem. Ikea is particularly well known for their ability to minimise tax. Mining/resources companies are currently under a lot of scrutiny in Australia for the same thing.

[deleted]

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

#197

Post by enraged_camel »

namelost wrote: post #190
lbotos wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't it already? I've been under the impression that is one of the big "things" about being an American. You will always pay taxes to the US: "If you are a U.S. citizen or resident alien, the rules for filing income, estate, and gift tax returns and paying estimated tax are generally the same whether you are in the United States or abroad. Your worldwide income is subject to U.S. income tax, regardless of where yo…

For the US to start taxing Apple's foreign income abroad is not like taxing an American living in Ireland (and even that is crazy). It's like if the US started taxing an Irish person in Ireland[1]. However obvious it is that EU Apple is a sock puppet of US Apple, directly imposing taxes on foreign companies operating in foreign countries would be met with retaliation. It is not a smart nor a profitable trade policy.…

>>For the US to start taxing Apple's foreign income abroad is not like taxing an American living in Ireland (and even that is crazy). It's like if the US started taxing an Irish person in Ireland[1].

I'm not sure I follow. Apple is an American company.

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

#199

Post by andrepd »

quest88 wrote: post #155
anigbrowl wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple spent ~$3.5 million on lobbying in the first 6 months of the Trump administration: https://9to5mac.com/2017/07/21/apple-trump-lobbying-increase... How many times do we have to reiterate the point that large corporations and the people who own them spend a fortune on lobbying sitting politicians and bankrolling their election campaigns, and that the controls on such spending limits have been systematically disma…

Where did the $3.5 go to? > The company specifically outlined in its filing that a strong focus of its lobbying has been for immigration. > In addition to immigration, Apple’s government filing indicates lobbying for climate change, patent reform, accessibility, health initiatives, diversity, and education. Seems like worthwhile lobbying to me.

> In addition to immigration, Apple’s government filing indicates lobbying for climate change, patent reform, accessibility, health initiatives, diversity, and education.

Right. And we're supposed to eat that up. Why didn't they add happiness, rainbows, and kittens to that list.

Post reply on HN