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

Apple plans new U.S. campus, to pay $38B in foreign cash taxes

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 537 posts

Re: Apple plans new U.S. campus, to pay $38B in foreign cash taxes

#211

Post by megaman22 »

downandout wrote: post #156
lbrdn wrote: post #126

Of course lowering taxes would encourage companies to repatriate large overseas cash hoards, but if that's the only goal, why have a tax at all? As a country the US has obligations to its current citizens and its future citizens and those obligations cost money. If we overly celebrate these windfalls every time the tax rate is lowered, we might not realize that what we owe the citizen is being forgot and allowed to e…

We currently get $0 in tax revenue from the cash Apple is hoarding overseas. This tax “holiday” (a term I dislike because it incorrectly implies that no tax is being paid on the repatriation, when it is simply a reduced rate) is resulting in $38 billion that we would not have otherwise received. $38,000,000,000 > $0

Exactly. X% of something is better than (X+Y)% of nothing.

Re: Apple plans new U.S. campus, to pay $38B in foreign cash taxes

#212

Post by specialist »

WalterBright wrote: post #182
jasonlotito wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I find it fascinating that a tax plan proposed by a President reviled throughout the Valley Not quite. The proposal has been on the table for years. The difference has been how to use the proceeds from repatriation. Republicans wanted lower corporate taxes. Democrats wanted something else. This wasn't new, it wasn't unique, and it wasn't Trump. Believing this was a plan proposed by Trump ignores history and facts.…

The buck stops with the President. If the GOP Congress won't work with the President, it's the President's job to find a way to get enough of them on board. LBJ was a master at getting "impossible" legislation through Congress, so I don't believe it was impossible for Obama. I suspect this is where his inexperience in politics showed. An example of this was outlined on Frontline a few years back. Obama crafted a bill…

Obama also failed to fulfill many appointments, including a Supreme Court Justice. What, in your opinion, should he have done differently?

Re: Apple plans new U.S. campus, to pay $38B in foreign cash taxes

#213

Post by onezerozeroone »

downandout wrote: post #156
lbrdn wrote: post #126

Of course lowering taxes would encourage companies to repatriate large overseas cash hoards, but if that's the only goal, why have a tax at all? As a country the US has obligations to its current citizens and its future citizens and those obligations cost money. If we overly celebrate these windfalls every time the tax rate is lowered, we might not realize that what we owe the citizen is being forgot and allowed to e…

We currently get $0 in tax revenue from the cash Apple is hoarding overseas. This tax “holiday” (a term I dislike because it incorrectly implies that no tax is being paid on the repatriation, when it is simply a reduced rate) is resulting in $38 billion that we would not have otherwise received. $38,000,000,000 > $0

If you or I decided we just didn't like the tax rate that applied to us and didn't pay our taxes for decades at a time on income we made overseas, what do you think would happen?

Corporations are treated as people only when it's convenient.

You and I don't have high-powered lawyers, lobbyists, loopholes, offshore accounts, subsidiaries, etc to hide behind.

This is an insult to every U.S. citizen...Apple wouldn't exist if it weren't for the U.S. and its tax-payers providing the environment that allowed Steve Jobs to create his company and become successful.

The rate they're being charged on this money is even lower than the new lower rate that they'll be charged on future income. Must be nice. Yay for corporate oligarchy.

Re: Apple plans new U.S. campus, to pay $38B in foreign cash taxes

#214

Post by FireBeyond »

WalterBright wrote: post #182
jasonlotito wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I find it fascinating that a tax plan proposed by a President reviled throughout the Valley Not quite. The proposal has been on the table for years. The difference has been how to use the proceeds from repatriation. Republicans wanted lower corporate taxes. Democrats wanted something else. This wasn't new, it wasn't unique, and it wasn't Trump. Believing this was a plan proposed by Trump ignores history and facts.…

The buck stops with the President. If the GOP Congress won't work with the President, it's the President's job to find a way to get enough of them on board. LBJ was a master at getting "impossible" legislation through Congress, so I don't believe it was impossible for Obama. I suspect this is where his inexperience in politics showed. An example of this was outlined on Frontline a few years back. Obama crafted a bill…

And what about Mitch "We'll oppose any bill put before us, even if it's good for the country (yes, he actually said that), in order not to let Obama have any victories" McConnell?

That wasn't a failing of Sales, that was an opposition who was willing to harm themselves, and the country, to not give any leeway.

Re: Apple plans new U.S. campus, to pay $38B in foreign cash taxes

#215

Post by snowwrestler »

Clanan wrote: post #49
southphillyman wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair the bonuses I've heard about have been laughable so far and accompanied by large lay offs in two cases (Walmart and Comcast).

$1,000 is not laughable to most people.

Of course not, but that doesn't mean you should take a well-timed and carefully worded press release at face value.

Let's see what actually lands in whose bank accounts before we raise the praise flags.

Re: Apple plans new U.S. campus, to pay $38B in foreign cash taxes

#216

Post by WalterBright »

specialist wrote: post #212
WalterBright wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The buck stops with the President. If the GOP Congress won't work with the President, it's the President's job to find a way to get enough of them on board. LBJ was a master at getting "impossible" legislation through Congress, so I don't believe it was impossible for Obama. I suspect this is where his inexperience in politics showed. An example of this was outlined on Frontline a few years back. Obama crafted a bill…

Obama also failed to fulfill many appointments, including a Supreme Court Justice. What, in your opinion, should he have done differently?

He should have read one of the many biographies of LBJ where they go into considerable detail on his career of getting impossible things through Congress.

All he needed was to peel off a couple GOP Congressman - surely he could have found a way to do that given 50 of them. Political parties are never a solid block of commitment, there are always waverers and members who can be manipulated with the right carrots.

As I mentioned in the antecedent, he made serious persuasion mistakes in dealing with the GOP that pretty much guaranteed failure.

Obama's first step would be to accept responsibility for the task, rather than blaming the GOP. Blaming the GOP only served to diminish Obama's political capital.

(Remember Clinton outmaneuvered the GOP with the "Contract with America". Obama could have consulted with Clinton.)

Re: Apple plans new U.S. campus, to pay $38B in foreign cash taxes

#218

Post by FireBeyond »

jdoliner wrote: post #177
adventured wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Factually, corporations do not have a legal obligation to their shareholders to maximize their profits. That's a myth and a very absurd one at that. If it were true, Salesforce couldn't operate its various corporate charity programs as one example. You could have researched that one pretty easily: https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/04/16/what-are-co... https://medium.com/bull-market/there-is-no-effective-fidu…

I don't really see the difference between having a legal obligation to act in your shareholders best interests and an obligation to maximize profits. Given that profit is most shareholders only interest in owning the stock. Now that does mean that companies should maximize long term profit, perhaps at the cost of short term profit. But I fail to see how paying taxes you don't have to is ever in the best interests of…

Fairly simply, many investors see corporate longevity, while paying smaller, more reliable dividends as their best interest. Doing so could easily be orthogonal to "maximizing profits".

Re: Apple plans new U.S. campus, to pay $38B in foreign cash taxes

#219

Post by WalterBright »

FireBeyond wrote: post #214
WalterBright wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The buck stops with the President. If the GOP Congress won't work with the President, it's the President's job to find a way to get enough of them on board. LBJ was a master at getting "impossible" legislation through Congress, so I don't believe it was impossible for Obama. I suspect this is where his inexperience in politics showed. An example of this was outlined on Frontline a few years back. Obama crafted a bill…

And what about Mitch "We'll oppose any bill put before us, even if it's good for the country (yes, he actually said that), in order not to let Obama have any victories" McConnell? That wasn't a failing of Sales, that was an opposition who was willing to harm themselves, and the country, to not give any leeway.

Politicians are always emitting pompous gasbag statements and promises for public consumption, and then make a deal the next week.

Re: Apple plans new U.S. campus, to pay $38B in foreign cash taxes

#220

Post by FireBeyond »

rdtsc wrote: post #56
southphillyman wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair the bonuses I've heard about have been laughable so far and accompanied by large lay offs in two cases (Walmart and Comcast).

> I've heard about have been laughable so far Having been poor, then living on $750/month in US for many years, a $1000 bonus is not life changing but also not laughable. The companies certainly didn't have to give those and could have pocketed all of it. > large lay offs in two cases (Walmart and Comcast). Are those because of the tax incentives?

> a $1000 bonus

For 20+ year employees.

At 10 years the bonus was, IIRC, $190. IMHO, "laughable".

Post reply on HN