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

241–250 of 708 posts

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

#241

Post by tpm »

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…

For some issues unanimous agreement is already not needed. For example recently a law was passed in the Council with 20 of 27 votes (only with the help of an Austrian minister against the wish of her government).

https://www.dw.com/en/eu-ministers-approve-contested-nature-...

The full rules are here, 'of course' taxation still needs unanimous agreement: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_in_the_Council_of_the_E...

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

#242

Post by ajsnigrutin »

Retric wrote: post #240
ajsnigrutin wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That ultimately the taxes owed should probably be paid out to the countries where the sale occurs. This is hard to implement in practice. Imagine selling in a country with 50% tax, and having a country with 10% somehwere, anywhere in the world. For easier math, let's say you buy dildos from a chinese manufacture for 1eur (including shipping), and sell them for 11eur to end customers. You've just earned 10eur, and y…

Multinational corporations have subsidiaries not cousins. A great number of tricks go away if you treat subsidiaries as a single company. Countries are reluctant to pierce the corporate veil, but it’s all arbitrary rules.

I was giving an example with 11eur dildos, you have cousins for that.

And for every regulatory change will bring changes to tax avoidance... subsidiaries will just get "one more step" removed from the main company...

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

#243

Post by red_trumpet »

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.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean. AFAIU, Ireland just refused to demand the money from Apple. I'm not sure what that has to do with vetoes. Can you point to a concrete instance relating to the Apple case, in which Ireland used a veto?

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

#244

Post by eesmith »

InsomniacL wrote: post #91
eesmith wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you should be cautious about saying "Ireland cheated the system". The onus is placed more directly on the Irish tax authority, and then more broadly the government, and then more broadly the voting population, and only then the entire population. Consider how the ruling says "Ireland had renounced tax revenue, which had given rise to a loss of State resources". This means many people living in Ireland got les…

> This means many people living in Ireland got less government resources than they would have No it doesn't. Ireland did this deal to benefit from it. What they lost from direct tax in one area they gained in others. Had Ireland not made this deal, it's unlikely it would have become the conduit for Apple profits from around the world. The subject of the ruling contains "concerning tax rulings issued by Ireland in fav…

> What they lost from direct tax in one area they gained in others.

Where is your evidence? I quoted the court decision to support my position.

The very existence of revolving door politics is an example of how conflicts of interest can exist which favor those in power, to the overall detriment of the population.

Government officials and politicians are well aware there may be a cushy job for them with the big companies they once regulated, so long as those companies are happy with them.

Thus I again caution on using "Ireland" in a way which blurs the difference between those in Ireland who gained from unlawful state aid and those who gain from its return.

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

#245

Post by AnimalMuppet »

petesergeant wrote: post #227

So Ireland double-dipped here by luring the tech companies, and now it gets the foregone tax anyway. Does feel a bit like the EU should get the cash, not the state that was responsible for it

> Does feel a bit like the EU should get the cash, not the state that was responsible for it

The EU court judges that a member country didn't tax a company enough, so the EU takes the money? That would be ripe for abuse.

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

#246

Post by guappa »

sensanaty wrote: post #234
petesergeant wrote: post #227

So Ireland double-dipped here by luring the tech companies, and now it gets the foregone tax anyway. Does feel a bit like the EU should get the cash, not the state that was responsible for it

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the way I understand it, it's not really like Ireland is demanding Apple pay suddenly, the EU is saying that Apple owes Ireland the 13B and has to make up the losses due to Ireland & Apple colluding to strike an tax deal that is unfair (for all other EU members) for Apple. Ireland itself probably doesn't want to do this, since those deals exist for a reason.

> since those deals exist for a reason.

Scam the rest of the EU countries?

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

#247

Post by bluecalm »

aswerty wrote: post #225

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 w…

If you want to tax sells in a given country charge VAT. Corporate income tax is just a fundamentally bad tax. It's hard to enforce, even with good will it's hard to calculate (is paying $X for a license a legit expense or not?), unjust (buying more expensive things to provide the same service leads to paying less tax) it sets incentives to mix corporate and private use of resources, it incentivizes building holding companies to use losses of one entity to offset tax of another, it gives big players an advantage and it gives dishonest players an advantage.

I think it should be 0 and we should tax use of resources and consumption instead. Then let countries compete to create business friendly environment. It doesn't provide enough revenue to be worth all the hassle with enforcement and accounting.

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

#249

Post by orwin »

sensanaty wrote: post #234
petesergeant wrote: post #227

So Ireland double-dipped here by luring the tech companies, and now it gets the foregone tax anyway. Does feel a bit like the EU should get the cash, not the state that was responsible for it

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the way I understand it, it's not really like Ireland is demanding Apple pay suddenly, the EU is saying that Apple owes Ireland the 13B and has to make up the losses due to Ireland & Apple colluding to strike an tax deal that is unfair (for all other EU members) for Apple. Ireland itself probably doesn't want to do this, since those deals exist for a reason.

To be exact, the ruling is that Ireland gave unfair advantage to Apple, compared to other companies. If Ireland want to set corporate taxes at 1%, it can, but it should be for all companies. Amazon notably didn't get the same deal Apple did, which is anti-competitive.
Post reply on HN