Apple plans new U.S. campus, to pay $38B in foreign cash taxes • Hacker News Board

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

#361

Post by fjsolwmv » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 2:47 AM UTC

chrischen wrote: post #268

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…

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…

Boy are you in for a shock when you find out the money that you spend, which you've paid income tax on it, goes to someone who pays income tax on it again!

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

#362

Post by fjsolwmv » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 2:49 AM UTC

philwelch wrote: post #263

pishpash wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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 ev…

It's amazingly elitist to ignore the fully half of Americans who own none of this capital

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

#363

Post by fjsolwmv » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 2:51 AM UTC

axau wrote: post #237

onezerozeroone wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

Whether or not Apple/whatever was being shifty or not is a matter of opinion. The fact is, though, that nearly every other country already had a territorial tax system.

And Apple used bullshit rationale to hide their money in a territory where they did not earn their money. They tell Europe that all the innovation is from California, then tell USA that all the IP is owned by an Irish company.

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

#364

Post by breatheoften » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 2:56 AM UTC

c3534l wrote: post #347

sjg007 wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US corporations are citizens except that they just can't vote... but they can contribute unlimited campaign contributions.

> US corporations are citizens No they're not. You're confusing the already commonly-confused concept of legal personhood with citizenship. > but they can contribute unlimited campaign contributions Citizens United ruled that actual human beings had the right to make unlimited campaign contributions and that the right to do so could not be rescinded just because those flesh-and-blood individuals decided to pool their…

This is so beyond the pale as to be far beyond the realm of logical discussion.

If I have pooled my 'right of personhoop' contributions into a corporate asset base and thus absolved myself of liability laws regarding the disposition of this asset base -- what basis do I have to have to claim 'my' personhood rights over how this asset base is distributed to political campaigns?

If what you say is _actually_ true then it should be illegal for corporations to disperse campaign funds in anything other than an amount that _exactly_ reflects the relative ownership amount of every single stockholder in that corporation -- otherwise an individual shareholder's claim on the percentage of personhood ownership of the corporation has been rescinded.

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

#365

Post by rayiner » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 2:59 AM UTC

c3534l wrote: post #347

sjg007 wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US corporations are citizens except that they just can't vote... but they can contribute unlimited campaign contributions.

> US corporations are citizens No they're not. You're confusing the already commonly-confused concept of legal personhood with citizenship. > but they can contribute unlimited campaign contributions Citizens United ruled that actual human beings had the right to make unlimited campaign contributions and that the right to do so could not be rescinded just because those flesh-and-blood individuals decided to pool their…

Actually campaign contributions weren’t the issue. Citizens United decided that’s Congress could not take away the right of flesh and blood people to air a political advertisement just because they were organized as a corporation.

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

#366

Post by c3534l » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 3:02 AM UTC

breatheoften wrote: post #364

c3534l wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> US corporations are citizens No they're not. You're confusing the already commonly-confused concept of legal personhood with citizenship. > but they can contribute unlimited campaign contributions Citizens United ruled that actual human beings had the right to make unlimited campaign contributions and that the right to do so could not be rescinded just because those flesh-and-blood individuals decided to pool their…

This is so beyond the pale as to be far beyond the realm of logical discussion. If I have pooled my 'right of personhoop' contributions into a corporate asset base and thus absolved myself of liability laws regarding the disposition of this asset base -- what basis do I have to have to claim 'my' personhood rights over how this asset base is distributed to political campaigns? If what you say is _actually_ true then…

I have no problem limiting campaign contributions and certain political activities. The constitution does, though. The law generally likes to treat corporations as separate from their owners, but no such notion exists in the constitution. And if it comes to a question of constitutionality, then it doesn't matter that our laws limit the financial liability of a stockholder to his or her contribution because that's not a constitutional question.

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

#367

Post by philwelch » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 3:02 AM UTC

fjsolwmv wrote: post #362

philwelch wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ev…

It's amazingly elitist to ignore the fully half of Americans who own none of this capital

My point is that if you want to punish the other half of all Americans (including poor grandmothers living on pensions) as a means of taxing “the rich”—which is exactly what high corporate taxes do—that an injustice has been done. Advocating for the interests of a diverse half of the population is many things, but “elitist” is not one of them.

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

#368

Post by pishpash » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 3:10 AM UTC

philwelch wrote: post #263

pishpash wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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 ev…

Half (46% in 2013) of all Americans owned some financial wealth, that's already counting indirect investments -- I believe this number came from a study by Ed Wolff. In the same year (2013), the bottom 80% together owned about 5% of the financial wealth in the US, under the same definition counting indirect investments (80%-99% owned about 50%, 99%-100% owned about 45%). So no, "everyone" does not benefit in the same way from corporate wealth and "regular people" (the bottom 80% seems like a pretty good proxy) have basically nothing to do with it, even in aggregate -- forget about per capita.

As for not taxing corporations at all and instead fully taxing dividends and gains, that's a different discussion with its own merits.

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

#369

Post by yorby » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 3:13 AM UTC

sjg007 wrote: post #346

rdtsc wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True it seems we are getting the crumbs here falling between the cracks. But what is another realistic scenario? Tax them even more? Wouldn't they move to another tax haven. Why didn't that work so far, these tax tricks are not new.

The whole point is that earned income should not have to be repatriated to be taxed. If I as a citizen have a bank account in Switzerland that accepts my foreign income then I pay tax on that money in the year it was earned. The exact same rules should apply. Just because the bank account is outside of the US should not make a difference.

If I don't pay my taxes on time, I get fined... If Apple doesn't pay on time, they get a reduced rate.

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

#370

Post by rdtsc » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 3:18 AM UTC

sjg007 wrote: post #346

rdtsc wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True it seems we are getting the crumbs here falling between the cracks. But what is another realistic scenario? Tax them even more? Wouldn't they move to another tax haven. Why didn't that work so far, these tax tricks are not new.

The whole point is that earned income should not have to be repatriated to be taxed. If I as a citizen have a bank account in Switzerland that accepts my foreign income then I pay tax on that money in the year it was earned. The exact same rules should apply. Just because the bank account is outside of the US should not make a difference.

> The whole point is that earned income should not have to be repatriated to be taxed.

Agree. They used the double Irish paying basically no income tax there. Then were trying to move to Jersey (the island). This isn't new though and other companies were doing it. Is there any realistic short term hope that we'll finally close all the loopholes and the Apples and Googles of this country will start paying their fair share of taxes? Probably not.

But I don't see why not at least be happy with them paying some taxes and investing the money domestically? Yet everyone here is upset. It is not ideal, I'd rather have universal healthcare, basic income even, I'd rather these companies not be able to do these schemes and pay their fair share of taxes, but it is what it is, why not be happy for some positive thing happening.