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

Apple must pay 13B euros in back taxes, EU's top court rules

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 708 posts

Re: Apple must pay 13B euros in back taxes, EU's top court rules

#221

Post by plorg »

mrks_hy wrote: post #214

Another article: https://www.politico.eu/article/commission-scores-surprise-w... Full ruling: https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/202... Fascinating, how does that work? Can anybody explain in simpler terms how that was legal to begin with? > Both companies were incorporated in Ireland but not tax resident in Ireland. Those tax rulings approved the methods used by ASI and AOE to determine their c…

That appears to be a summary of the ruling, although it contains a link to the docket: https://curia.europa.eu/juris/documents.jsf?num=C-465/20%20P

Judgment: https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&do...

Re: Apple must pay 13B euros in back taxes, EU's top court rules

#222

Post by tankenmate »

dachworker wrote: post #191
quonn wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea was that these big companies and the Irish government obey the law.

The law forbids the rich and poor alike from sleeping under bridges. The law in the EU is written the France and Germany.

"The law in the EU is written the France and Germany."; that is an overt oversimplification. Obviously France and Germany have more influence in the EU than other member states, but it is by no means a monopoly.

Re: Apple must pay 13B euros in back taxes, EU's top court rules

#223

Post by tankenmate »

dachworker wrote: post #199
Hamuko wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ireland has a pretty big advantage for getting big American companies to settle there since it's the only place in EU where English is the official language. Well, technically Malta also exists, but I imagine that not a lot of companies are looking to set up on a small island the size of Kansas City.

It's not just the language. It's also the culture. In fact I would say the culture is even more important. Germans and Americans wouldn't understand each other, even if they spoke the same culture. Their understanding of how life works, their worldview, their expectation of others, ...etc all of these are quite different. For example, a project is ongoing, but in the course of completing the todo list, it is apparent…

Not just the culture; Irish law is based on common law, something that Ireland and the US share. Most other EU states use a civil law basis.

Re: Apple must pay 13B euros in back taxes, EU's top court rules

#224

Post by mrks_hy »

plorg wrote: post #221
mrks_hy wrote: post #214

Another article: https://www.politico.eu/article/commission-scores-surprise-w... Full ruling: https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/202... Fascinating, how does that work? Can anybody explain in simpler terms how that was legal to begin with? > Both companies were incorporated in Ireland but not tax resident in Ireland. Those tax rulings approved the methods used by ASI and AOE to determine their c…

That appears to be a summary of the ruling, although it contains a link to the docket: https://curia.europa.eu/juris/documents.jsf?num=C-465/20%20P Judgment: https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&do...

Thank you, and sorry. Had the wrong link in my clipboard.

Re: Apple must pay 13B euros in back taxes, EU's top court rules

#225

Post by aswerty »

From discussions in the past, I was under the impression there was general sense that if Ireland should have legitimately taxed them to this degree. That ultimately the taxes owed should probably be paid out to the countries where the sale occurs. As one country reaping the rewards of the tax for the entire European operation would be bizarre, when that country just has a medium sized support/sales operation (which was what Ireland was originally collecting tax on).

Does this also have the knock on affect that these companies can now write off this tax so their owed US taxes are much less (assuming they ever repatriate these earning - which they have often avoided to avoid paying US tax)?

Anyways, writing the above shows me how much I don't understand about these cases.

Re: Apple must pay 13B euros in back taxes, EU's top court rules

#226

Post by Rinzler89 »

red_trumpet wrote: post #220
mrks_hy wrote: post #214

Another article: https://www.politico.eu/article/commission-scores-surprise-w... Full ruling: https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/202... Fascinating, how does that work? Can anybody explain in simpler terms how that was legal to begin with? > Both companies were incorporated in Ireland but not tax resident in Ireland. Those tax rulings approved the methods used by ASI and AOE to determine their c…

Well, they had Ireland on their side. > "Ireland granted Apple unlawful aid which Ireland is required to recover," the Court of Justice said on Tuesday.

>Well, they had Ireland on their side.

This is one of the reasons the EU is set to remove the single country veto rule since it was open to abuse. You'll then need two countries on your side to alter the EU's rulings.

Re: Apple must pay 13B euros in back taxes, EU's top court rules

#228

Post by jkaplowitz »

Rinzler89 wrote: post #226
red_trumpet wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, they had Ireland on their side. > "Ireland granted Apple unlawful aid which Ireland is required to recover," the Court of Justice said on Tuesday.

>Well, they had Ireland on their side. This is one of the reasons the EU is set to remove the single country veto rule since it was open to abuse. You'll then need two countries on your side to alter the EU's rulings.

> This is one of the reasons the EU is set to remove the single country veto rule since it was open to abuse. You'll then need two countries on your side to alter the EU's rulings.

There are definitely countries calling for this rule to be removed or otherwise reformed, but I wasn't aware that the EU "is set" to do it. My understanding is that this change would itself require unanimous agreement in order to make it happen (without effectively forking the EU in an extreme step no country has yet seriously proposed), and that this unanimous agreement is not yet present.

Have I missed some recent major announcement on this point? I know the EU Parliament voted about this some months ago, but their wishes on this point will never become EU law through the current procedures without unanimous agreement from the member states.

Re: Apple must pay 13B euros in back taxes, EU's top court rules

#229

Post by vitus »

There's a separate ruling for Google that was released at the same time:

Docket: https://curia.europa.eu/juris/documents.jsf?num=C-48/22%20P

Ruling: https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&do...

And other news reports confirming the same:

https://www.reuters.com/technology/eu-court-upholds-googles-...

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cjw3e1pn741o

CNN also has links to both (summaries of the) rulings: https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/10/tech/europe-ruling-apple-tax-...

Re: Apple must pay 13B euros in back taxes, EU's top court rules

#230

Post by schmorptron »

jkaplowitz wrote: post #228
Rinzler89 wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Well, they had Ireland on their side. This is one of the reasons the EU is set to remove the single country veto rule since it was open to abuse. You'll then need two countries on your side to alter the EU's rulings.

> This is one of the reasons the EU is set to remove the single country veto rule since it was open to abuse. You'll then need two countries on your side to alter the EU's rulings. There are definitely countries calling for this rule to be removed or otherwise reformed, but I wasn't aware that the EU "is set" to do it. My understanding is that this change would itself require unanimous agreement in order to make it h…

Won't this lead to this-for-that alliances within the EU and might turn member countries against each other in the long run? "France didn't help us veto a decision we wanted, so we won't help them either on this other front" or a more straightforward "if you help us veto this tax decision we will help you veto something that would affect you later".
Post reply on HN