81–90 of 163 posts
This reporter is credulous, because the Guardian is just awful. "Barry Chang barely made it into the lobby when Apple’s security team surrounded and escorted him off the property. “They said ‘you cannot come in, you’re not invited’. After that I left and have not gone back,” said an exasperated Chang." Uh huh. Yeah I bet it happened just like that. What buffoon of a reporter prints a politician's self-serving and inc…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't like this idea. Corporations should pay taxes and whatever, and not be treated specially just because they're the largest entity in the town. A huge number of towns in America are basically run by one or two corporations. Cupertino is not unique in the slightest, aside from the fact that Apple is just a larger company. But it really doesn't matter if you "only" have a $1 Billion market cap company headquarter…
There is a solution how you can get both. The German city of Wolfsburg, and the state of Niedersachsen have done it with VW. The solution: You just buy a large amount of shares of the companies that are started in your city. Municipalities get a far larger share of the profits directly, politicians have an incentive to ensure companies are profitable, and companies can’t avoid paying for the infrastructure they use.
> Barry Chang barely made it into the lobby when Apple’s security team surrounded and escorted him off the property. I had to read it again to make sure I'm not making a mistake. Its unimaginable in some geographies. Evokes mixed feelings like : "cool, they can do that?" to "that's quite arrogant" Also reminds me of a video where Steve Jobs met the council. The mayor was delighted like a teenager, showing off his iPa…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If Apple is meant to pay a new tax based on their net income, then every business that operates in Cupertino should obviously pay the same tax. Let's see how that goes over.
Exactly. Although really, Apple would just change headquarters and Cupertino would be in a bit of a mess if you made an corporate-level income-tax
Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple is already structured this way.
I can't believe Apple is wilfully not paying property taxes on their headquarters! That's quite illegal, and I'm sure... ...oh, they are paying their property taxes? I see. So which taxes, precisely, are they not paying the Cupertino government? Oh, there aren't any taxes, but you sort of wish someone with the authority to do so would pass a law making new taxes, but they won't, so you're mad at...Apple? 'k.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow... outstanding haha. So in bringing more business to an area, they need to pay twice? At what point do people actually own the land they own?
1) the developer doesn't "bring" business to the area, they are supported by their clients and are responding to economic incentives, same as anyone else. 2) if you do perceive them as "bringing" business, then it's only right to equally perceive them as bringing congestion, pollution, and all the other undesirable side effects of economic activity. 3) when does one ever "own" land? Property rights are enforced by th…
The compensation they extract has nothing to do with the cost of enforcing property rights, because those costs are trivial.
You might argue that the mayor is abusing us because of the cities housing restrictions.
It's not just apple, it is every company that dodges taxes. Making an example of apple is not fair - everyone should pay their taxes... who knows how the systems we have in place would actually work if people used it the way it is designed (instead of finding loopholes for their own benefit).
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…
This is where the U.S. nominal rate comes in. If it was about the same as other countries', then it would not be an impediment to repatriating profits. But at 35%, it's the highest in the world, so corps repatriating profits will indeed pay additional taxes to the U.S. government, even taking the foreign tax credits into account.
That's why corps want the corporate tax rate lowered--so that business purposes can have a bigger role in decisions about moving capital. Right now tax avoidance has a large role in those decisions, at least when it comes to the U.S.
It's also why a temporary corporate tax holiday does not really help. It lets companies bring back one big lump sum, but does not change their long-term decision making, and it is long-term decision making that determines where investment goes and where jobs are created.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a solution how you can get both. The German city of Wolfsburg, and the state of Niedersachsen have done it with VW. The solution: You just buy a large amount of shares of the companies that are started in your city. Municipalities get a far larger share of the profits directly, politicians have an incentive to ensure companies are profitable, and companies can’t avoid paying for the infrastructure they use.
This municipal capture you describe sounds brilliant.