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

221–230 of 537 posts

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

#221

Post by onezerozeroone »

axau wrote: post #186
lbrdn wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it a straw man? Maybe it's the right way to go. I honestly don't know. My point is that encouraging a behavior where the country sets a rate, then many celebrate the reduction because they get a short term gain, risks leading the US farther down a path that neglects its obligations.

Because the US is not going “down a path that neglects its obligations”. In fact quite the opposite since it just got a massive tax revenue increase. So comparing it to a situation where the US decided to just stop levying tax doesn’t make sense.

> In fact quite the opposite since it just got a massive tax revenue increase.

Nah, they capitulated and accepted a far lower rate than they should have received otherwise if Apple (and companies like them) weren't permitted to play these shifty legal games.

If the U.S. gov was really looking out for its own interests and the interests of its citizens, it would have closed these loopholes years ago and told Apple to go pound sand going forward.

Pay your taxes or get slammed with massive fines and be barred from selling product in the U.S. until your tax bill is paid.

Not many markets can afford their products, see how they like it when the country whose resources and laws allowed them to become so successful becomes off limits to them.

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

#222

Post by jonknee »

WalterBright wrote: post #174
jonknee wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do know that the money isn't literally sitting overseas right? It is invested (Apple would be the largest bond fund in the world [1] if they accepted outside money). So they'll sell the investments, pay a little tax and then probably do a massive buy back of their shares and a special dividend. A little switching around on paper, but certainly not a stimulus of any sort. [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/article…

Of course there is no Apple cash hoard, it's all invested. The difference is it being invested in foreign countries, or invested in America.

That's not the difference at all, it is invested in corporate debt (much of it from US companies) and giant amounts of US Treasuries. Even the people that manage it do so from the US.

The difference is purely in accounting, they keep that money on a different line of their balance sheet and are unable to use it for domestic expenses without paying tax on it.

Most of the money isn't going to move at all after they repatriate it (they'll actually sell Treasuries to pay... the Treasury!). No part of "bringing back" the money will result in more money being invested in the US--it's already invested here!

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

#223

Post by WalterBright »

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…

BTW, just as the Dems made a mistake in not getting any Reps on board with Obamacare, the Reps made a mistake in not getting any Dems on board with the tax cut.

Of course, dubbing the bill "Obamacare" was a virtual guarantee of no Republican support. The Dems should have worked hard to name it something more inclusive (and more catchy than "Affordable Care Act"). Marketing matters!

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

#224

Post by missingcolours »

bob_theslob646 wrote: post #54

>Apple is already responsible for creating and supporting over 2 million jobs across the United States and expects to generate even more jobs as a result of the initiatives being announced today What percentage of jobs of these are full time versus part time? Why do large corporations and politicians love to toot their horns about 'jobs', but refuse to go into details? Oh wait, there public. >Employees:As of Septembe…

Both your numerator and your divisor are incorrect. The 2 million number is "creating and supporting", i.e. not direct Apple employees. The 123k number is "full-time equivalent", i.e. "total number of hours worked by employees / 40", where 2 employees @ 20 hours/week = 40 hours = 1 full-time equivalent. So actual full-time employees might be a small portion of the 123k, due to the workforce ofApple retail stores, etc.

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

#226

Post by jdoliner »

FireBeyond wrote: post #218
jdoliner wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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".

Corporate longevity is only in their interests because it maximizes long term profits.

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

#227

Post by snowwrestler »

maxxxxx wrote: post #44
jdoliner wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Job creation and hiring mean different things. I can hire someone for a job that already existed and was previously filled by someone else. If I bring a new job into existence, that hasn't been filled by anyone before then saying I created that job doesn't seem particularly untoward.

I anybody creates jobs it's the people who buy stuff and create demand. Then someone will meet that demand and potentially hire someone. I don't think Apple "creates" jobs. It hires people for certain needs that have been created by the market. If they don't fill the need somebody else will do in a market economy.

Companies create demand by creating new products or services that people want.

You are correct that people have to want them (specifically, want them enough to spend money on them) in order for jobs to be created. But the order of operation is pretty clear from the observable evidence.

For example, there weren't crowds of people lined up outside Apple Stores demanding the iPhone in May of 2004. But after Apple invested in the product development and manufacturing of the iPhone, there were crowds of people outside Apple Stores in June 2007, waiting to pay $600 per item or more. Apple created a lot of jobs to meet that demand, but Apple had also created that demand in the first place.

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

#228

Post by m52go »

downandout wrote: post #196
threeseed wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The fact that they are deploying that capital here indicates some level of belief that the American economy will thrive under this tax plan. This statement is fiction. There is nothing from Apple indicating this.

They are indicating it by doing it. That cash doesn't have to remain here; they simply have to pay taxes on it. The only reason that a rational corporation would keep it here is because they believe it's a good investment.

Sorry you keep getting hassled for such a simple point.

The tax is being levied on all overseas money (mandatory) and some companies are deciding to bring that money back to the USA (voluntary).

Not sure what's so hard to understand about that.

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

#229

Post by WalterBright »

jonknee wrote: post #222
WalterBright wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course there is no Apple cash hoard, it's all invested. The difference is it being invested in foreign countries, or invested in America.

That's not the difference at all, it is invested in corporate debt (much of it from US companies) and giant amounts of US Treasuries. Even the people that manage it do so from the US. The difference is purely in accounting, they keep that money on a different line of their balance sheet and are unable to use it for domestic expenses without paying tax on it. Most of the money isn't going to move at all after they rep…

If it will be used for a "domestic expense" then it is being spent into the American economy.

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

#230

Post by [deleted] »

missingcolours wrote: post #224
bob_theslob646 wrote: post #54

>Apple is already responsible for creating and supporting over 2 million jobs across the United States and expects to generate even more jobs as a result of the initiatives being announced today What percentage of jobs of these are full time versus part time? Why do large corporations and politicians love to toot their horns about 'jobs', but refuse to go into details? Oh wait, there public. >Employees:As of Septembe…

Both your numerator and your divisor are incorrect. The 2 million number is "creating and supporting", i.e. not direct Apple employees. The 123k number is "full-time equivalent", i.e. "total number of hours worked by employees / 40", where 2 employees @ 20 hours/week = 40 hours = 1 full-time equivalent. So actual full-time employees might be a small portion of the 123k, due to the workforce ofApple retail stores, etc…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN