41–50 of 163 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As I said, in some countries, you can't treat an on duty public/government "servant" like that.
If he'd been a police officer investigating a crime, or a fire marshall, that wouldn't fly. Doing it to the mayor is just rude.
> Apple pays a 2.3% effective tax rate on its $181bn in cash held offshore... > ...shield themselves off from the theoretically 35% federal corporate tax rate Something seems wrong here. I don't think companies are expected to pay 35% yearly on cash reserves. Am I confused, or is the article? If anyone is knowledgable about this I'd be interested to know the deal!
Basically all countries tax companies on income earned in that country. So, if you're a UK company and you earn $1B in the UK and $500M in France, you pay tax on $1B to the UK government and tax on $500M to the French government. The US taxes companies on their worldwide income when they re-patriate that money to the US. So, if you earned $500M in France and want to bring that money back into the US, you owe US taxes…
The other hard thing to reason about is where the value was added. If the IP was developed in the states, technically, it has to be sold through, so profits on it are still taxed here, to the foreign branch, where only retail profits are taxed...or something like that. It gets really messy when you are also doing R&D abroad...and you can see why tax games are possible and even necessary.
"[How do] city residents benefit from [Apple's new campus]?"
Jobs: "Well, as you know, we're the largest taxpayer in Cupertino. So we'd like to continue to stay here and pay taxes. [...]. Because if we can't, then we have to go somehwere like Mountain View [and] the largest tax base will go away. This wouldn't be good for Cupertino."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, the idea that the city should have to provide roads, utilities, etc to a huge, rich corporation and get nothing back for their trouble is terrible.
Creating the world's most successful company in your backyard, attracting high-value talent from all over the world, making Cupertino a household name...is "giving nothing back"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Basically all countries tax companies on income earned in that country. So, if you're a UK company and you earn $1B in the UK and $500M in France, you pay tax on $1B to the UK government and tax on $500M to the French government. The US taxes companies on their worldwide income when they re-patriate that money to the US. So, if you earned $500M in France and want to bring that money back into the US, you owe US taxes…
This isn't entirely accurate. First, You can deduct foreign taxes paid, so $1B earned in the UK could would come back only in paying the difference of higher US and UK taxes. But tax systems in different countries are different, deductions are different, as are fees and such....it leads to a huge mess. The other hard thing to reason about is where the value was added. If the IP was developed in the states, technicall…
Do you mean deduct, or you get a tax credit? If you mean deduct, then you pay UK taxes on $1B and then US taxes on the $800M (or whatever) that is left over.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe if he described what these problems were, he's get my support. But considering that he can't even get the support of his own citizens at Town Hall meetings, nor the support of his fellow council members, methinks he's simply incompetent. And that the problems he describes are made up in his imagination. I can't imagine it to be too difficult to come up with a budget that says "We have to pay for X Million Dolla…
> Maybe if he described what these problems were, he's get my support. I believe the city's infrastructure is struggling to cope with the city's growth. There was mentions of poor and congested roads. > But considering that he can't even get the support of his own citizens at Town Hall meetings, nor the support of his fellow council members, methinks he's simply incompetent. to be fair the article points out Apples i…
IE: Lets increase all corporate taxes by 3% in this city, to pay for a new road project. Here's the proposed road, etc. etc.
I mean, yeah, its hard to get approval from your citizens to build new roads. My area (on the East Coast) had to appease a ton of environmentalist types who refused to build a highway over any wetlands or swamps (ie: cheap areas), and the NIMBY guys who were being threatened with eviction.
But you propose a road (meet with engineers / architects, get some fancy drawings, write it up, build a website, etc.), you describe the costs (not just monetary, but also the houses you have to bulldoze, the "quiet" you have to disturb, meet with HOA communities to help gather support despite the costs), you raise a tax to pay for it, borrow some money with a bond and then it gets done. Its not easy, but its the freaking job of a Mayor.
---------
Why would the Mayor EVER have to explicitly reference Apple through this process? Only a complete dunce would do that, as it reeks of favoritism.
I'm reading through this entire piece, and its completely devoid of substance. The complaints are hilariously awful. I'm not sure if the Mayor is actually incompetent, or if the guardian is just awful at writing and completely focused on the wrong issues.
I mean, cripes. I've NEVER heard of a necessary road project being scuttled because of money. Its almost always the NIMBY people (to be fair, getting evicted from your family home for 50 years gotta suck because a road is being built through your plot), or environmentalists (Protect the swamp! protect the forest! Protect the grasslands!) who seem to get in the way. And NIMBY vs Environmentalists is a hell of an issue to work out.
In the UK we have the concept of "Section 106" payments which allow a development through planning by the developer paying the local government some amount of money to redress the cost of dealing with congestion, public relam, affordable housing, etc. For large skyscraper developments in London, this can be many many millions of pounds. Does something similar exist in CA?
Absolutely terrible article. In an article about property taxes paid or unpaid, it doesn't even mention property taxes. Is Apple's campus under-assessed? A little Googling shows Cupertino's tax rate as $7.96 on a thousand which would value Apple's campus at $1.16B. Is that a lot? Is that a little? What are other companies assessed at in Cupertino and surrounding cities? The article talks about income taxes which are…
"The Guardian" has a left leaning bias. So I am not surprised with the way of reporting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Creating the world's most successful company in your backyard, attracting high-value talent from all over the world, making Cupertino a household name...is "giving nothing back"?
How do any of those things improve the lives of non-Apple citizens living in Cupertino?