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

How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 215 posts

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#201

Post by clavalle »

greedo wrote: post #189
notJim wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think a number of people reading the article have the tacit impression that if the government taxed the money from Apple, that they would somehow benefit to a greater extent. But given that the US Government spends $11.5 billion more per day[1] than it receives in taxes, even seizing all of Apple's worldwide profits would just be a drop in the bucket. What about the net effect of the government going after every…

>I think it is entirely consistent and rational to support a rule for higher taxation while still striving to pay the minimum required amount. Yes. It's called hypocrisy. Rational yes, consistent with the idea that there are rules for me and rules for thee.

It is not hypocrisy.

Say in the NFL a group of players started advocating for a change in rules. Say, they want a rule where a player must be evaluated and sit out of a game after taking so many hits of so many g forces to the head.

If certain teams decide to implement the rules unilaterally it would put them at a disadvantage. The rules have to change for everyone for it to make sense. It is perfectly reasonable for a team or player to advocate for a rule change without acting as if that rule is in place without a hint of hypocrisy.

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#202

Post by yummyfajitas »

yequalsx wrote: post #198
yummyfajitas wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Roads, sewers, police and fire are dirt cheap. Bringing them up is disingenuous. http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/year_spending_2010USbt_1... As for the federal road system, that's paid for by gas taxes - Apple (or fedex, or whoever delivers iPhones) pays for it whenever they fill up their gas tanks roughly in proportion to how much they use it. It's also hardly clear that businesses are not paying their share of…

The federal road system is not paid for by gas taxes. The soft power wielded by the U.S. is not paid for by gas taxes or by corporate taxes. The are a lot of very large companies that pay no tax despite reaping great rewards for using the services of the U.S. government and despite (at least in some areas) having regulatory capture. Labor has very little power in the U.S. and in an environment of 8%+ unemployment (15…

My mistake, there is a small fraction of the highway system which is not paid for by user fees.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System#Fina...

There is a pretty simple solution to this problem - raise user fees until the system is revenue neutral.

As for "soft power", could you define that in a less vague manner? Are you asserting that dead Iraqis somehow benefit Apple?

And again, I'll note you keep harping on a few cheap, useful items, while ignoring the fact that the vast majority of spending is merely redistribution from the young to the old which doesn't benefit Apple at all.

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#203

Post by jarek »

greedo wrote: post #192
jarek wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

It's not the disasters we should really be concerned about, it's the normal government 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 department, or politician, wants them to say to cover people's asses. Taxpayer funds and freedoms are…

Yeah. Sounds fairly similar. You forgot to update the sentence about middle management, further strengthening my point about indistinguishability. Thanks for underlining that private sector isn't "much" better. :)

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#204

Post by RawData »

rmc wrote: post #182
RawData wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most people don't have this luxury. Why not? Seriously. What's stopping anyone from doing this exact thing? Inertia...that's really all - when you get right down to it..

Visa issues? You cant just move and work in any country you like.

I'm pretty sure I could incorporate a business virtually anywhere I liked (within reason - there are obvious exceptions). No one is going to throw me in prison if I try to start a company in Singapore, or Chile, or Hong Kong, or any other whatever. You don't have to physically MOVE there in most cases...and even if you did...what's stopping you? And as to Visa issues...there's ways to gain residency in most countries...you can make it happen if you want.

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#205

Post by RawData »

yzhengyu wrote: post #170
RawData wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most people don't have this luxury. Why not? Seriously. What's stopping anyone from doing this exact thing? Inertia...that's really all - when you get right down to it..

Well, you may call it inertia. But really, once you add up all these challenges, it tends to be quite substantial. For example, say, you are a skilled plumber who owns a similar business repairing/installing plumbing in Shanghai, China. Theoretically, all these skills would actually make him/her eminently employable or set up a similar business, say in Sweden. Unfortunately, that is really not the case. Be as much as…

OK...skilled plumber...he might not be able to move...I studied economics in college and there are examples of industries that the professors would always cite...like hair stylists...plumbers...etc. Sure.

BUT...that plumber could create a company hiring local plumbers in 20 different countries, and sell plumbing services locally in each of those countries, and incorporate the overall business in a friendly tax country.

So your example isn't really valid. I argue that ANYONE can take advantage of globalization with a little thought. If you choose not to, and Apple chooses TO do...well its really your own fault and choice...isn't it?

That's just one simple example...that plumber could create a digital course that teaches others to become plumbers...or teaches plumbers to market their services better...he could package that digital product, incorporate a company in singapore or WHEREVER he finds the best corporate tax rate, and take advantage of the same things Apple does...

I could go on and on...it's all choice. You chose to be proactive or you choose to snipe at others who do...A thing is not unfair if everyone has the ability to take advantage of it...and some simply choose not to because it's hard.

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#206

Post by protomyth »

jarek wrote: post #78
protomyth wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is "defer payment until you sell the actual investment." which is when I have no other income coming in. This isn't going to be a rich person's problem, it effects pretty much everyone under 50.

Specific interests being mentioned in a tax policy discussion? Unheard of!

I take your meaning, but I am not looking for a interest group tax deduction. I am really wondering about what all of us need out of a tax system. It is more about when is it ok to tax and when is it just moving money around (SS and Unemployment are two I can think of off the top of my head).

I admit to being in the flat-rate tax camp with exclusions for one time capital gains (selling stock not dividends) and estate tax. I also wish they just gave a large basic deduction ($15K or $20K) and had everyone file as individuals.

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#207

Post by RawData »

CapitalistCartr wrote: post #150
RawData wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most people don't have this luxury. Why not? Seriously. What's stopping anyone from doing this exact thing? Inertia...that's really all - when you get right down to it..

Try emigrating from China to the USA. Its not inertia. There are many millions of people who would gladly move to another country given the opportunity.

We aren't talking about emigration...we're talking about corporate domicile creation...the red tape is substantially less...

But even emigrating...why not? My girlfriends brothers wife emigrated from China to the US...my brothers exwife emigrated from Sri Lanka to the US...I have lots of friends who's families have done this...what's the problem?

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#208

Post by yequalsx »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #202
yequalsx wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The federal road system is not paid for by gas taxes. The soft power wielded by the U.S. is not paid for by gas taxes or by corporate taxes. The are a lot of very large companies that pay no tax despite reaping great rewards for using the services of the U.S. government and despite (at least in some areas) having regulatory capture. Labor has very little power in the U.S. and in an environment of 8%+ unemployment (15…

My mistake, there is a small fraction of the highway system which is not paid for by user fees. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System#Fina... There is a pretty simple solution to this problem - raise user fees until the system is revenue neutral. As for "soft power", could you define that in a less vague manner? Are you asserting that dead Iraqis somehow benefit Apple? And again, I'll note you keep…

Taxes are at a 50 year low. The current deficit is large with most of it coming from non-recurring expenses but with long term deficit of around $500 billion. Corporations are having record profits and are sitting on over $1 trillion in cash. Solution to the problem is easy. Tax more (or spend less but in the present situation that would be more hurtful than raising taxes). It can't be said that taxes are too high unless one is a fanatic that thinks all taxation is theft or evil. A lot of the large U.S. corporations pay no corporate taxes.

Consult Wikileaks cables for how corporations benefit from U.S. soft power and hard power. Apple benefits from being in the U.S. It should pay for this benefit. I don't know the optimum rate. It should not only pay for the tangible, easily understood benefits. It and other corporations benefit from the U.S. exerting its power to their benefit. The U.S. does this quite a bit.

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#209

Post by toyg »

forrestthewoods wrote: post #77
lemming wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing to bear in mind is that for these really big companies, the huge attraction of Ireland is not the low corporate tax rate, it's that profits can be easily and legally sent to Holland, from where they can be sent to the Caribbean. I've seen similar stories from Google and Ikea, I believe they both pay low single digit tax rates on their non-US income due to this arrangement; in Ikea's case this is nearly all…

To me that implies that our current tax methodology is fundamentally wrong. In a global system with value placed on intellectual property and virtual goods, rather than manufactured products, the current tax design seems irreparably broken. I don't know nearly enough about taxes or economics to propose a solution. Would a VAT tax at a lower rate be more consistent than a higher corporate income tax that may or may no…

Jeebus Chrysler, VAT is the most regressive tax ever invented, please do not even mention it as a solution to anything. It's a flat (!) tax on non-avoidable consumption that is fundamentally unrelated to real wealth; it doesn't touch capital activity or in-activity, which means that rich people (whose wealth is sheltered as business capital on paper) simply don't pay it. It was a terrible gimmick invented by European governments to raise taxes on low-income individuals without telling them.

I hate to say this, but the only solution I can see to rise of worldwide corporations is... worldwide government, exactly like the answer to the rise of "national companies" in the XIX century was the creation of national governments of similar size. We can discuss about implementation details (the current arrangements -- going through WTO, WMF, UN etc -- are ineffective, opaque and/or fundamentally corrupt), but I don't see how else we could ever get out of this mess.

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#210

Post by yzhengyu »

RawData wrote: post #205
yzhengyu wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, you may call it inertia. But really, once you add up all these challenges, it tends to be quite substantial. For example, say, you are a skilled plumber who owns a similar business repairing/installing plumbing in Shanghai, China. Theoretically, all these skills would actually make him/her eminently employable or set up a similar business, say in Sweden. Unfortunately, that is really not the case. Be as much as…

OK...skilled plumber...he might not be able to move...I studied economics in college and there are examples of industries that the professors would always cite...like hair stylists...plumbers...etc. Sure. BUT...that plumber could create a company hiring local plumbers in 20 different countries, and sell plumbing services locally in each of those countries, and incorporate the overall business in a friendly tax countr…

Ah. Be careful where you are stepping.

Yes, its one choice. But personally, I find that to be rather too smug / elitist and smacks of "Oh, its HIS/HER choice - there's nothing DEFICIENT or FLAWED with the current setup" rather than recognizing that the market/world is inherently complex and difficult to navigate.

Arguing that it's one choice is just sophistry. Kinda like those just world people I meet who argue that the poor deserve their station because its their choice.

Post reply on HN