Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 215 posts

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#71

Post by jarek »

newbie12 wrote: post #49

Apple, as a corporation, should pay ZERO taxes. The resources invested in Apple were taxed before invested, and will be taxed again when investors realize their capital or income gains. Corporate taxes are double taxation. It is Apple's moral duty to legally pay the minimal amount of taxes possible. Every dollar Washington or Sacramento takes from Apple and gives away as some political handout is one less dollar avai…

Yeah, especially those political handouts that pay for maintenance on the I-280.

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#72

Post by ajkessler »

BCM43 wrote: post #32
yummyfajitas wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ireland can't lower it's taxes to the point of unprofitability, so it will lower it's taxes until revenues raised == cost of services + small margin. That's a good thing. Don't complain that others provide the same service at lower cost, try to innovate and outcompete them.

But that won't work if some very small country lowers it's tax to 1%. The US can't compete with that.

Why not? (Honest question.)

We have states that have no personal income tax. Not surprisingly, these states are doing fine because they raise revenue other ways.

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#74

Post by driverdan »

epoxyhockey wrote: post #61

Every time I read about these tax schemes, I think, "I want to do that, too." Is there any company out there that will help the little guys making all of their money online complete a double Irish Dutch sandwich?

Define little. It's only worthwhile when you reach a certain level of profit. There are quite a few lawyers and accountants that specialize in offshoring.

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#75

Post by driverdan »

zobzu wrote: post #53

So when the state takes 50% of the salary, it's bad but it's life. It's what the state needs to survive and enhance. When companies pay 0% tax rate, quick, defend them. If they did pay the tax, the CA state certainly wouldn't have any money problem. But no, that's not important, right? Shares etc are! I'm surprised everyone finds it ok. I'd almost dare to say it's an issue that is especially present in the US (that p…

There is no state in the US that takes anywhere near 50% of your salary (assuming by state you don't mean country).

Companies should pay lower taxes because the buck doesn't stop there. Owners / equity holders are the benefactors of the company's profits and should be the ones to pay taxes, assuming you agree with having income taxes.

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#76

Post by jarek »

acslater00 wrote: post #27
TheEzEzz wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the US had a globally competitive corporate tax rate (say 15%), it would make most of these tactics irrelevant. Until Ireland further lowers its taxes. Your argument leads to a race to the bottom. The problem with only taxing dividends is that corporations only pay out a small portion of their profits in dividends. I may theoretically be a billionaire in my holdings, but I only need a million in dividends per ye…

That's great. If apple makes $1b, if the bulk of the money is held by a foreign SUBSIDIARY, my stock will go up, and I will pay capital gains. If they give it to me as a dividend, I will pay taxes on that. If they reinvest it in the company and the investment makes money, my stock will go up even more. And if they reinvest it in the company and squander it all, no taxes will be collected on the income, but they won't…

Wall Street does care about there the money is. That is why tech companies have spent huge sums lobbying for a repatriation amnesty.

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#77

Post by forrestthewoods »

lemming wrote: post #60
yummyfajitas wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ireland can't lower it's taxes to the point of unprofitability, so it will lower it's taxes until revenues raised == cost of services + small margin. That's a good thing. Don't complain that others provide the same service at lower cost, try to innovate and outcompete them.

One thing to bear in mind is that for these really big companies, the huge attraction of Ireland is not the low corporate tax rate, it's that profits can be easily and legally sent to Holland, from where they can be sent to the Caribbean. I've seen similar stories from Google and Ikea, I believe they both pay low single digit tax rates on their non-US income due to this arrangement; in Ikea's case this is nearly all…

To me that implies that our current tax methodology is fundamentally wrong. In a global system with value placed on intellectual property and virtual goods, rather than manufactured products, the current tax design seems irreparably broken.

I don't know nearly enough about taxes or economics to propose a solution. Would a VAT tax at a lower rate be more consistent than a higher corporate income tax that may or may not be avoided depending on the corporation? Europeans seem to hate the VAT tax but I'm not sure if that stems from a high tax rate or the concept of the tax itself.

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#78

Post by jarek »

protomyth wrote: post #50
acslater00 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The actual appreciation of their investments would be higher if you eliminated corporate income tax. And you would still get to defer payment until you sell the actual investment. Properly designed, it all evens out.

The problem is "defer payment until you sell the actual investment." which is when I have no other income coming in. This isn't going to be a rich person's problem, it effects pretty much everyone under 50.

Specific interests being mentioned in a tax policy discussion? Unheard of!

Re: How Apple Sidesteps Billions in Taxes

#79

Post by yequalsx »

protomyth wrote: post #64
yequalsx wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you say is true. What I said is true too. Both statements are true. Bush II tax cuts are a very large portion of the current deficient that we have. Taxes are currently at a 50 year low as a percent of GDP. Bush II taxes greatly increased the deficit. Other tax cuts have too. I was just giving an example of the statement that I responded to being false.

If they repealed all the Bush era tax cuts, the deficit would still be growing at a higher rate than before. Obama has run up the deficit at a faster pace (approaching double) than Bush and those tax cuts aren't even the major part of it. The biggest problem is the lack of a passed federal budget in over a 1,000 days. This is causing a lot of budget increasing in a time when we cannot afford it. What the media and po…

The point I made in showing that yummyfajita's remarks to be wrong stand. I might be wrong on my belief that repealing the Bush tax cuts would greatly improve the fiscal outlook of the federal government but this does not in any way detract from my point.

Your last two paragraphs are not germane to my point and they are wrong in any case. However, let's assume your last statement is correct.

Right now taxes around 15.4% GDP [1]. You seem to believe that 19% GDP in taxes is a reasonable amount to pay for government services. The GDP of the U.S. is around $15 trillion [2]. A 3.5% GDP increase in taxes to get us to 19% GDP for taxes would mean an increase of taxes by $525 billion. Current budgetary projections have the U.S. deficit at slightly over $500 billion in 4 years [3]. A lot of the current deficit is in non-recurring expenditures that are related to the fiscal crisis that started in 2008.

I might be wrong on my belief about the Bush II tax cuts being a large portion of our long term fiscal problems but from your sentence one must conclude that you agree that raising taxes by a reasonable amount would eliminate our long term fiscal problems.

[1] http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Doc...

[2] http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD

[3] http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/federal_deficit_chart.ht...

Post reply on HN