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

261–270 of 537 posts

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

#261

Post by threeseed »

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.

Again. Apple has said nothing about the economy.

We could be in a 1930's recession and it would still be tax-advantageous to bring the money back. Especially since Apple is tipped to use it for stock buy back.

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

#262

Post by aerotwelve »

rcMgD2BwE72F wrote: post #31
jdoliner wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Corporations have a legal obligation to their shareholders to maximize their profits. If they did something as negligent as paying taxes they didn't have to pay, and that none of their competitors pay, they'd be opening themselves up to a lawsuit from shareholders. Laws are weird.

Source?

There is no source because there is no legal imperative for corporations to maximize shareholder value anywhere in the United States. It's a myth.

Shareholder primacy is a theory -- though it's really more of an ideology -- that executives/board members can believe in, but it is by no means required by law[1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_judgment_rule

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

#263

Post by philwelch »

pishpash wrote: post #249
onezerozeroone wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you or I decided we just didn't like the tax rate that applied to us and didn't pay our taxes for decades at a time on income we made overseas, what do you think would happen? Corporations are treated as people only when it's convenient. You and I don't have high-powered lawyers, lobbyists, loopholes, offshore accounts, subsidiaries, etc to hide behind. This is an insult to every U.S. citizen...Apple wouldn't exis…

"Corporations are people, too!" as in, the people who hold their wealth in the form of corporations and generate their income from capital. Realize that it's not just an inane phrase, they are talking about themselves. They want to escape being taxed and they always succeed. Everybody else can pay, please. What's incredible is that there are many more of regular people than these "people," yet regular people do not a…

Regular people own wealth in the form of corporations, too. Half of all Americans own stocks. Public and private sector pension funds own large amounts of stock. University endowments include stock investments and private equity. Sovereign wealth funds, such as the Alaska Permanent Fund, own large amounts of stock.

If we want to tax the rich, let's tax the rich. Let's not tax straw men that intermediate wealth for everyone, because that's what corporations are.

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

#264

Post by downandout »

m52go wrote: post #228
downandout wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Thanks, I don't get it myself. I guess simply stating what a bill actually does is going to have a hard time here on HN, if that bill has even a tangential connection to the current administration. It has become a holy war.

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

#265

Post by anilshanbhag »

benjaminl wrote: post #253

This discussion is missing context. The whole reason that Apple has to pay taxes on foreign income is because unlike almost every other developed nation the US has a worldwide tax system. Almost every other nation has a territorial tax system. The rest of the world with their territorial system taxes income earned within that country, the US rather taxes income worldwide, regardless of where it is earned. For example…

=> But if a US company earns income in Germany it pays both German taxes and US taxes.

This is not portrayed accurately. If you pay German taxes, you claim exception for that amount. So if you pay more taxes than the rate in US, you owe no tax for that income in US. If the rate is less in the country than in US, you pay the difference.

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

#266

Post by debt »

rambleraptor wrote: post #149

I feel like this potentially buried the lede. Apple is planning on opening up a new campus in the USA. I feel like Amazon's HQ2 search is going to open the floodgates for tech companies asking for public incentives. Tech companies in the Bay Area have been creating tens of thousands of jobs for years without asking for much publicly. Expect that to change now.

"without asking for much publicly"

Well when ya all but purchase support from all the mayors, aldermen, district supervisors, judges, etc, kinda negates your need to ask for anything.

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

#267

Post by liquidise »

SapphireSun wrote: post #250
liquidise wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no diversion about it. Remember that people, voting individuals in the US, have decidedly different stances on what "appropriate" amount of taxes should be. Business, particularly public ones, have a responsibility to their share holders to handle money as fiscally responsibly as they can. From my perspective, Apple isn't "grabbing" anything. They are moving their money from Bank A to Bank B and paying a 20%…

Paying their taxes and investing in technology and scientific progress would help workers even more.

Would you mind clarifying what you mean? The implications i read in this comment are that Apple isn't paying taxes and do not invest in technology. Both are of course false, even before this announcement. I haven't fished through documents but i suspect Apple spends Billions on both every year.

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

#268

Post by chrischen »

onezerozeroone wrote: post #213
downandout wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We currently get $0 in tax revenue from the cash Apple is hoarding overseas. This tax “holiday” (a term I dislike because it incorrectly implies that no tax is being paid on the repatriation, when it is simply a reduced rate) is resulting in $38 billion that we would not have otherwise received. $38,000,000,000 > $0

If you or I decided we just didn't like the tax rate that applied to us and didn't pay our taxes for decades at a time on income we made overseas, what do you think would happen? Corporations are treated as people only when it's convenient. You and I don't have high-powered lawyers, lobbyists, loopholes, offshore accounts, subsidiaries, etc to hide behind. This is an insult to every U.S. citizen...Apple wouldn't exis…

If they bring the money back then inevitably they'd spend it back into the US economy either through direct job creation or buying things. If they do create jobs, the US gets most of its money from income tax, which would increase from the more jobs/higher wages. It feels like double dipping if we expect them to pay taxes on repatriating the money and then also taxing the wages that the repatriated money allows them to pay.

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

#269

Post by downandout »

threeseed wrote: post #261
downandout wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Again. Apple has said nothing about the economy. We could be in a 1930's recession and it would still be tax-advantageous to bring the money back. Especially since Apple is tipped to use it for stock buy back.

Again, they don't have to bring it back - it was going to be taxed regardless. They could pay the tax and invest it somewhere else. They chose to invest it here.

Analogy: Anyone can open a cryptocurrency masternode [1] and get a several percent per month ROI, paid in that currency. I don't want to do that unless I believe in a given coin, however, because I must invest in and hold a large amount of the given coin in order to operate the masternode and get the return. Yes, I am being incentivized to do so, but it still doesn't make sense unless I believe in the underlying investment.

[1] https://masternodes.online/

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

#270

Post by SapphireSun »

pfarnsworth wrote: post #260
SapphireSun wrote: post #235

This is a diversion tactic. They're grabbing 252.3B and spending less than a fifth of it. Let's imagine a different world. 200B, divided by 50k + 1.5x overhead (75k) could create about 2.6M decent jobs for one year (or 1.3M for two years etc). 2.6M jobs is equal to 0.8% of the total US population. The total labor force size is about 160M (~1/2 the total population) and the U6 measure of unemployment is about 8%. A he…

Crisis? Unemployment is almost at all-time lows.

U6 is still high. Most of the jobs created after 2008 were more transient than old jobs. Hence, the term "gig economy". The precariousness of the working class has increased dramatically and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.
Post reply on HN