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

How Apple sidestepped a 2013 crackdown on its Irish tax practices

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 350 posts

Re: How Apple sidestepped a 2013 crackdown on its Irish tax practices

#91

Post by mrguyorama »

tomxor wrote: post #84
mrguyorama wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every human being in that company should be held accountable for their actions. Someone, somewhere said "Yes let's do it this way", and they committed an (arguably) immoral act by doing so.

[EDIT] My incorrect interpretation of parent comment who means accountability on an individual basis (see children). --- I know where you are coming from but this level of extremely inclusive accountability would result in either: Everyone from the janitors to the legal team being held accountable for corporate tax evasion or: a company wide democracy on every decision that could potentially result in legally or mora…

Why would it be extremely inclusive? The janitor didn't choose to place the money in Ireland. As you go up in management, you typically see pay scale up, and the normal justification for this is that they hold more accountability. You expect more pay to offset the higher risk that a mistake or poor choice will hurt you. If the CFO approves the choice to do X, Y, and Z with the company's money, he should be held accountable on a moral level.

Why are we not allowed to have a minimum level of moral expectations for people just because they paid a small fee and registered under an LLC?

Re: How Apple sidestepped a 2013 crackdown on its Irish tax practices

#92

Post by lovich »

fleitz wrote: post #62
the_mitsuhiko wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This was not a law but a secret bespoke areangement.

That seems unsupported by the article, in 2015 Ireland changed its laws, Apple consulted a law firm on advice on how to proceed and sought assurances from the govts involved that it's understanding of the law was correct. Where is this agreement you speak of?

This is a little off topic but the question will help me parse your posts better.

Is there any situation you can imagine where Apple, or any corporation, could have done anything wrong when it comes to how it pays taxes?

Re: How Apple sidestepped a 2013 crackdown on its Irish tax practices

#93

Post by Oletros »

munk-a wrote: post #80
DINKDINK wrote: post #31

Point of debate: Why should Apple have the US government lay claim to the revenue/profits that it generates in non US countries? From the article: "This allowed Apple to funnel all its sales outside of the Americas - currently about 55% of its revenue - through Irish subsidiaries that were effectively stateless for taxation purposes, and so incurred hardly any tax." If you support the taxation, do you also support th…

First some background... VATs (value added taxes) are pretty solid for distributing this money fairly between the national entities involved in producing this wealth. Currently companies cheat the system a bit to do the bulk of their value adding in nationalities that don't tax it highly (the famous putting stickers on computers in bermuda in apple's case). I think it is fair for a nationality to claim that there is…

VAT is paid by customers, not companies

Re: How Apple sidestepped a 2013 crackdown on its Irish tax practices

#94

Post by DigitalJack »

vidarh wrote: post #28
mistercow wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm always skeptical when someone precedes "close the loophole" with the word "just", especially when the entity searching for loopholes has hundreds of billions of dollars in cash. Closing loopholes is good, but they'll almost certainly find another one.

The thing, though, is that their main "loophole" currently consists of "play chicken with the government until someone passes a tax holiday". If you make it clear there will never be a tax holiday, but that you will instead keep adjusting the rules to go after earnings withheld abroad, at some point the rational choice for them will be to bite the bullet and repatriate the income. As it is, the most rational choice f…

In this case it's not a loophole in American laws. It's a problem with European and Carribean laws. This money was earned abroad. Blame the Irish, and now whatever this Jersey Island place is.

The EU made a move to close the loophole, apple found another.

I suppose there are loopholes with them selling IP assets to subsidiaries. But that's a different loophole than the one with them floating money around different countries. That money wasn't earned in America, so why are you trying to "repatriate" it? The better term would be "appropriate" it as it was never here in the first place.

Until it costs more for apple to pay interest on a loan (and/or penalties and fines) than they would pay in taxes, that money will never come here.

Re: How Apple sidestepped a 2013 crackdown on its Irish tax practices

#95

Post by bduerst »

microcolonel wrote: post #86
BoiledCabbage wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pure free market Capitalism is playing a game of Monopoly where after each time anyone passes go, the player with the most money gets to create a new rule. Guess what? The game is gonna get pretty skewed, pretty darn fast. Consolidated money is power. The only way that capitalism can work long term is if there are rules actively countering/fighting using that power to change the rules. Money is power and capitalism c…

> Pure free market Capitalism is playing a game of Monopoly where after each time anyone passes go, the player with the most money gets to create a new rule. Guess what? The game is gonna get pretty skewed, pretty darn fast. I think you've misunderstood the free in free market . If anyone is allowed to make rules like that, it is not a free market , not superlatively, not normally, not even slightly. The problem here…

I think their point is that in a free market, the vacuum of power leads to organizations (with the means to) filling that vacuum and establishing rules that rationally favor themselves.

Re: How Apple sidestepped a 2013 crackdown on its Irish tax practices

#96

Post by nautilus12 »

tryingagainbro wrote: post #74
nautilus12 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is not capitalism and existing law, but the interpretation and enforcement of the law. The issue is that we have removed rational judgement from legal proceeding with regards to tax law. Its clearly demonstrable that Apple is not following the spirit of US tax law, but simply sidestepping the law by offshoring its money in this way. Does anyone with more legal expertise know of a more concise way of express…

USA can make it illegal probably but they will not (treaties? And /or a total breakdown of the current system.) Should Apple pay 35% if they can legally pay 5%, with some maneuvering? Then we can ask: Why not pay 50% since they're really profitable?

I would say that its the "with some maneuvering" that we should re-evaluate as a society. If you can demonstrate clearly (and I think its clear to everyone here that they are dodging taxes) that they are attempting to sidestep the law even though its technically legal, then we should pursue precedents that prevent this.

Re: How Apple sidestepped a 2013 crackdown on its Irish tax practices

#97

Post by pbhjpbhj »

mistercow wrote: post #7
canuckintime wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or the US Congress could just change the law, close the loophole and require corporations to bring the money home anyway without any tax holidays...

I'm always skeptical when someone precedes "close the loophole" with the word "just", especially when the entity searching for loopholes has hundreds of billions of dollars in cash. Closing loopholes is good, but they'll almost certainly find another one.

You can close all loopholes that rely on literal interpretation by changing the approach to interpretation of the law/tax code. You can reinforce it with minimum taxation based on revenue, which prevents you having to wade through treacle in the courts.

Re: How Apple sidestepped a 2013 crackdown on its Irish tax practices

#99

Post by anigbrowl »

fleitz wrote: post #67
tasty_freeze wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have a system of taxation. I pay my share. I expect others to pay there share. But when the other has found some legal loophole (perhaps one they helped to put in place or at least to maintain) and avoid paying their share, then yes, I'm upset and I want them to pay their share. Why do you try to cast this as a matter of greed. Apple is getting billions of dollars in benefits from being a US-based company, directl…

You mean you pay what the government says you owe, just like Apple does... Or are you saying that you don't claim any deductions and pay the maximum allowable by the system?

GP made a specific point about the fact that companies lobby for the creation of such loopholes, a point which has been made over and over in threads on this subject and even in this thread. Why are you misrepresenting their argument?

Re: How Apple sidestepped a 2013 crackdown on its Irish tax practices

#100

Post by idoh »

nautilus12 wrote: post #48
komali2 wrote: post #5

If you unplugged Apple's board (or given decision-making apparatus) and plugged in a (currently nonexistent) AI with the parameter "Maximize Profit," would you see a different result? I think not. I think we'd see things far more morally horrifying, in fact, with just enough PR makeup to ensure "maximized profit." Unsure why we laud capitalism and then act horrified at the result. Here in America we've made our decis…

The issue is not capitalism and existing law, but the interpretation and enforcement of the law. The issue is that we have removed rational judgement from legal proceeding with regards to tax law. Its clearly demonstrable that Apple is not following the spirit of US tax law, but simply sidestepping the law by offshoring its money in this way. Does anyone with more legal expertise know of a more concise way of express…

A couple points here:

- The US federal government cannot sue someone for not following the spirit of the law. Thankfully.

- Per Justice Learned Hand: "Over and over again courts have said that there is nothing sinister in so arranging one's affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everybody does so, rich or poor; and all do right, for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands: taxes are enforced exactions, not voluntary contributions. To demand more in the name of morals is mere cant."

- "Offshoring" isn't the right word, because it implies that the money was in the US and moved offshore. In fact the money is from product that was sold outside of the US, and the money is remaining outside the US.

Post reply on HN