How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes • Hacker News Board

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#151

Post by mhartl » Sun, Apr 29, 2012, 1:40 AM UTC

jarek wrote: post #145

mhartl wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

California is "struggling" because of atrociously bad management. It's not like the state lacks in physical or human capital. I mean, Jeebus, the Golden State is home to the capitals of two of the world's greatest industries (entertainment and technology). It takes world-class incompetence to squander such riches. Don't blame the state government, though. The problems are structural, not personal. If we replaced the…

What if pushing capitalism far enough results in California being run like an Enron, a Blockbuster, a Lehman, or any number of tech bubble 1.0 darling businesses instead of like Apple? Apple is pretty lean and is winning the market cap game right now, but the largest companies haven't always been as good.

Such disasters could happen, and minimizing their frequency is an important engineering problem. But you have a long road to hoe if you want to argue that the average quality of private management isn't much better than the average quality of public governance.

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#152

Post by jerf » Sun, Apr 29, 2012, 1:44 AM UTC

You know, it's not as if this money has escaped being taxed. At most, it's escaped one layer. It'll be taxed if they use it to pay someone. It'll be taxed when that someone uses it to pay for something else. If they move any of it somewhere else, it'll be taxed, if it becomes someone's capital gains it'll be taxed. If they use it to buy something, that purchase will be taxed, as will the thing they purchased at pretty much every layer. If it does pretty much anything other than sit there, it'll be taxed, and the next people to get it will have their use of the money taxed too. It isn't money that has magically been freed of taxation, it's just money that isn't being taxed this exact second.

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#153

Post by jarek » Sun, Apr 29, 2012, 2:06 AM UTC

mhartl wrote: post #151

jarek wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if pushing capitalism far enough results in California being run like an Enron, a Blockbuster, a Lehman, or any number of tech bubble 1.0 darling businesses instead of like Apple? Apple is pretty lean and is winning the market cap game right now, but the largest companies haven't always been as good.

Such disasters could happen, and minimizing their frequency is an important engineering problem. But you have a long road to hoe if you want to argue that the average quality of private management isn't much better than the average quality of public governance.

It's not the disasters we should really be concerned about, it's the normal bigcorp experience. People are promoted based on office politics and taking credit for others' work. Big useless projects to raise a manager's profile happen all the time. Consultants are hired to produce reports that say exactly what the company, or part of the company, wants them to say to cover people's asses. Market leads and shareholder value are squandered by corporations unable to adjust to changing business or consumer climates.

Plenty of people on this site quit their bigcorp jobs because they couldn't stand the wastefulness and the politics. Every time HR is brought up, HN seethes hate at their uselessness. Middle management, that most corporate of jobs, is almost universally derided.

Much better? I'd doubt it, but neither of us has data and personally I'm not sure how that would even be quantified.

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#154

Post by paulhauggis » Sun, Apr 29, 2012, 2:55 AM UTC

zobzu wrote: post #53

So when the state takes 50% of the salary, it's bad but it's life. It's what the state needs to survive and enhance. When companies pay 0% tax rate, quick, defend them. If they did pay the tax, the CA state certainly wouldn't have any money problem. But no, that's not important, right? Shares etc are! I'm surprised everyone finds it ok. I'd almost dare to say it's an issue that is especially present in the US (that p…

or how about the fact that many people think that monopolies are bad, yet are fine with the government completely taking over things like health care, which would create a monopoly. The same rules will also apply (IE: no competition=no innovation).

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#155

Post by Zak » Sun, Apr 29, 2012, 2:59 AM UTC

ianterrell wrote: post #96

Zak wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure it's that simple. I live in the US. The vast majority of the US Federal budget goes to the military, income redistribution (welfare) and insurance programs (social security, medicare). I do not believe most of those expenditures enable me to make money, and I think a significant segment is actively harmful. I also feel that I don't have a meaningful say in how that money is used because the political sys…

I'm not saying I agree with all of it in practice, but there's a strong argument against your thoughts here, especially in principle. The military keeps foreigners from invading/suicide bombing and thus creates stability which lets you make money. Social safety nets including welfare, social security, etc, create the same sort of stability since there's less of a likelihood a starving person or angry elderly woman wi…

I'm not saying having a military isn't valuable. I'm saying the US spends more on its military than the next ten countries put together and maintains a foreign policy of intervening in affairs of other countries and regions. I do not believe these things are necessary to defend the country, and may actually endanger us by creating new enemies.

I'm not saying social safety nets aren't valuable. I'm saying that the current implementation does little to encourage or help people who use them to move on to something productive. I'm also saying that social security is an unsustainable pyramid scheme and that medicare is both inefficient and a poor allocation of resources.

I don't necessarily have solutions in mind for the latter problems; they're hard problems and not in a field with which I have experience. What I am saying is that I don't feel obligated to pay any more in taxes than I have to when on the order of 90% of the money will go toward things that I believe aren't constructive.

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#156

Post by larrys » Sun, Apr 29, 2012, 3:00 AM UTC

_delirium wrote: post #111

grellas wrote: post #66

The implied but never fully-articulated point of this article is that high-tax domiciles resent it when rational actors having a choice in the matter will routinely structure their business affairs to incur tax to the maximum extent possible in low-tax as opposed to high-tax domiciles. The issue becomes almost formulaic. Given (1) rational actors, (2) freedom to choose and to structure business affairs using a multip…

What's annoying to me is not that companies choose jurisdictions based on taxes, but that they get away with playing shell games to fake moving between jurisdictions entirely on paper, which also gives them an advantage over smaller companies and individuals that can't do that. I lived in California for some years. If it were possible for me to open a P.O. box (or even rent a small office) in Reno, book all my non-Ca…

"which also gives them an advantage over smaller companies and individuals that can't do that."

So? They also get lower rates on car rentals, hotel rooms, components, office supplies etc. and can choose from a larger pool of potential employees. And a million other things that "smaller companies and individuals" can't.

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#157

Post by gravitronic » Sun, Apr 29, 2012, 3:08 AM UTC

The article mentioning Ireland touched home for me. That's where the bulk of RIM's developer payments come from. Until now I thought my dj app was just REALLY popular with the Irish.

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#158

Post by fecklessyouth » Sun, Apr 29, 2012, 3:11 AM UTC

Zak wrote: post #84

jacquesm wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course it is an issue of morality. I could choose to avoid paying taxes in the society that I'm a part of. It would be in my economic interest to do so. But it is morally wrong because it is that same society that enables me to make my money in the first place. Simple, right?

I'm not sure it's that simple. I live in the US. The vast majority of the US Federal budget goes to the military, income redistribution (welfare) and insurance programs (social security, medicare). I do not believe most of those expenditures enable me to make money, and I think a significant segment is actively harmful. I also feel that I don't have a meaningful say in how that money is used because the political sys…

Thoreau came to the same conclusion. "I don't support war, so I'm not going to pay taxes." This, however, isn't a tenable practice for society as a whole.

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#159

Post by JamisonM » Sun, Apr 29, 2012, 3:20 AM UTC

mhartl wrote: post #151

jarek wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if pushing capitalism far enough results in California being run like an Enron, a Blockbuster, a Lehman, or any number of tech bubble 1.0 darling businesses instead of like Apple? Apple is pretty lean and is winning the market cap game right now, but the largest companies haven't always been as good.

Such disasters could happen, and minimizing their frequency is an important engineering problem. But you have a long road to hoe if you want to argue that the average quality of private management isn't much better than the average quality of public governance.

I have not seen much evidence that private management is superior to any given civil service. I have seen absurd waste in the private sector in my time. I think that there is little empirical evidence to support either position. The civil service generally is handicapped by the fact that any waste exposed is made very public because they are accountable to, well, everyone. For example, journalists generally do not chase stories about waste or incompetence in private companies but publish such stories about government. Even audits that reveal waste in any private company are generally kept under wraps.

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#160

Post by appleaintbad » Sun, Apr 29, 2012, 3:33 AM UTC

So- if there is anything unfair about this, it is that small companies that can't choose to relocate from Cali bear the tax burden. But it is ridiculous to make it look like Apple is avoiding paying its bills. Instead why don't we see this as a perfect case in point for why we should privatize government? If we paid government directly for its services rather than requiring it to parasitically suck cash as it is set up to now, then Apple would have to pay its fair share of the services rendered in Cali and elsewhere. But, it won't be billions, because "billions" is not a fair price to pay for what it gets from the government- at least, unless there is something it is getting that I don't know about.