Apple May Bring Back Billions In Profits To The U.S. (siliconbeat.com) 302
An anonymous Slashdot reader quotes a report from the San Jose Mercury News:
Apple CEO Tim Cook says the company plans to bring back billions of dollars in profit to the U.S. next year. Cook's statement, made during an interview with RTE radio Thursday, contradicts his previous public statements on the issue: He has said for years that U.S. corporate taxes are too high, and that the Silicon Valley company wouldn't be repatriating profit until its home country changed its tax code.
"Right now I would forecast that we repatriate next year"Cook said, saying that the company has "provisioned several billion" for that purpose.
An interesting side-note: Apple accounts for 40% of Silicon Valley's profits.
"Right now I would forecast that we repatriate next year"Cook said, saying that the company has "provisioned several billion" for that purpose.
An interesting side-note: Apple accounts for 40% of Silicon Valley's profits.
Empty threat (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple just wants to scare the EU, there are plenty of other countries they will hold their money that won't charge as much as the US will.
Re: (Score:2)
Yup, the EU is terrified that Apple may avoid paying taxes in America rather than evade paying taxes in Europe. All that lost money!
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Apple is "repatriating" their money before the US Congress does away with the deferred tax payment provisions in the tax code. The code basically allows any company to book profits in other countries and basically agrees to paying the deferred taxes if they repatriate their money. Both the US government and the big US corporations are sensitive to bad press. The government could "request" the large corporations repatriate their money and equate that request with US patriotism. One can only hope all the othe
Re:Empty threat (Score:5, Insightful)
Ireland attracts companies because of their favorable tax rates.
Calling 0.005% tax on global profits (yes, really, not a typo) favorable tax rates is at least an euphemism
did not violate any EU laws.
They argue it that does violate preexisting EU conditions and that is indeed ilegal.
It's amazing the morons in EU\EC think they can harass US companies and not evoke a response from the US.
Roger. We get it.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The european commission ruled the 0.005% tax rate was illegal because Ireland only gave it to Apple. They did not give it to other businesses. So it was unfair subsidy to a single business and anticompetitive.
I imagine that the 14.5 billion dollar tax bill is a part of why Tim Cook is getting the money out now. Not all of it, but part of it.
Governments are getting wise to the internet and shutting down these abusive situations where companies book profits or pay 100% of profits as franchise fees to other
Re: (Score:2)
That will end up with the return of either the Nazis - this time with nukes - or the Soviet Union or, in the absolute best case, EU turning into a real federation which will be the new #1 superpower on the planet.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Feel that tapping on your shoulder? That's Neville Chamberlain. He'd like to talk to you...
Re: (Score:3)
No, you don't...
You want expensive? How about we withdraw from NATO and let Germany worry about Russia on their own?
So if you withdraw from NATO, Putin will just leave the US alone? That's a new kind of naive I haven't seen around here for a while...
Re: (Score:3)
Anyway screw NATO, they're a bunch of big boys playing games with expensive toys. How did they help Ukraine (or anyone, ever)?
You might want to learn something before you open your mouth...
Ukraine is not a member of NATO...
Re:Empty threat (Score:5, Insightful)
It's amazing the morons in EU\EC think they can harass US companies and not evoke a response from the US.
Oh, cry me a river... There are courts in the EU, you are more likely to see your rights honor there than in the US, a country known to deny effective council, torture people and lock up people without trial.
When you workaround taxes in both the EU and US, I for one encourage Vestager to throw the book at you. Really, when a company like Apple decides to test boundaries of the law, Apple should expect the authorities to do exactly the same.
On topic, I'm sure the US generally likes this because without this pressure the money would have stayed in tax shelters. I for one think it's okay to go after companies that are actively speculating against the state, in hope of better future tax breaks...
Re: (Score:3)
Really, when a company like Apple decides to test boundaries of the law
By "test the boundaries of the law" you actually mean "comply with a 25 year-old agreement with a sovereign nation that still argues that the agreement is wholly correct and is considering suing the EU for attempting to invalidate it".
Apple should expect the authorities to do exactly the same.
And by "do exactly the same" you mean "move the boundaries".
http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21706267-european-commissions-assault-technology-giant-wrong-bruised-apple [economist.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Just checking - is it more than 25 years since Ireland willingly joined the EEC in 1973, and willingly agreed to abide by the rules for the common market?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Yawn. Similar point about Native American genocide and slavery.
Your turn.
Re: (Score:2)
1940.
Re: (Score:2)
Trail of Tears.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with the Trail of Tears is it only happened after the Cherokee president illegally maintained power and several of the opposing political faction in the Cherokee Nation who saw the writing on the wall and wanted to get out of dodge were assassinated. There was no way in hell that the US would have allowed a prosperous Indian nation with large amounts of gold to exist inside its own borders for any real length of time. Had they left while Jackson was in office, they would have had more money, and
Re: (Score:3)
From what I read the UE is not threatening to levy penalties, but is saying you should have collect X, if you choose to take less so be it, but we are going to base subsidies on what you should have collected, not on what you choose to collect, so if you want to let money walk away go for it, but don't expect us to provide anything to bridge the gap. I could of course be mistaken I am neither a lawyer nor an accountant, and I certainly am not a soothsayer able to see the mysterious future.
Re:Empty threat (Score:5, Informative)
Exactly. The EU's beef is primarily with Ireland, only secondarily with Apple. The thing is: Ireland is a net receiver of EU money. So the EU reasons: if you want subsidies, you have a certain obligation to pick up certain types of money, taxes being one of them. Otherwise it would create a perverse incentive to EU nations: don't collect taxes, let the rest of the EU countries pick up the bill. So the EU demands, in exchange for membership, a tax regime of a certain quality. Since they are the ones paying, they decide. Germany, for example, could decide not to tax Apple a penny, but it wouldn't get a similar frown from the EU, since it's a net payer into the system.
So the EU says to Ireland: collect, or we'll lower your subsidy by an equal amount. And Ireland finds itself caught between a rock and a hard place.
Re: (Score:2)
They have been doing this for awhile with no complaints.
No complaints? There has been non-stop complaining about this from the rest of the EU. Some kind of reprisal has been coming for quite a while, the fact that they've moved slowly on it does not mean that Ireland's tax policy was an accepted practice.
Re:Empty threat (Score:4, Insightful)
And what response would be appropriate for the EU shutting down a tax haven a US company was using to avoid US taxes? A "thank you" note?
Not that Apple is really a US company. It's an international company with zero loyalty to anyone. It deserves none in return.
Re:Empty threat (Score:5, Insightful)
Ireland attracts companies because of their favorable tax rates. That was not a secret and did not violate any EU laws.
Ireland's corporate tax rate is 12.5%, the second lowest in the world. The EU doesn't have any issue with that rate. What Apple negotiated was an effective 0.005% tax rate instead of the 12.5% rate. Notice that the number is different. What the EU is asking is that Apple pays the 12.5% tax rate as the 0.005% tax rate has been ruled a state subsidy. State subsidies were made illegal inside the EEC (now EU) by the treaty of Rome in 1958. So yes, it does violate a EU law... one of the founding laws of the EU common market.
It will be cheaper to pay US taxes than worry about the EU\EC passing retroactive tax laws and other fines or penalties.
Because it is well known that paying 35% is cheaper than paying 12.5%, which is the tax rate Apple is being asked to pay. Ireland is bound by the treaty of Rome since they joined the EEC in 1973. Apple opened its Irish operations in Ireland after Ireland became a member of the EEC. This has nothing to do with retroactive tax laws, the deal Apple received from the Irish tax authority was illegal from day 1.
The EU is also only asking for the last 10 years of due taxes, instead of all taxes due since the beginning of Apple operations in Ireland.
If Apple doesn't want to pay its taxes in the EU, it is more than welcome to take its ball and GTFO. If Ireland doesn't want to play along with the rules of the EU market, they can also pay back the money they still owe the EU early and GTFO. They have effectively sold the rest of the EU market down the river. I'm sure international companies will still flock to their shores once Ireland is no longer a member of the EU market and the companies can no longer passport activities/taxes from there.
By the way, it is cute that you believe Apple will pay more taxes in the US. According to a senate inquiry in 2013, Apple is using a subsidiary that effectively pays no tax whatsoever in any jurisdiction to shelter a good quarter of its assets. According to the same senate inquiry in 2013, Apple has been funneling money to the Irish operations in order to avoid paying $11bn in taxes a year between 2009 and 2013. Apple is also apparently misreporting to its shareholder the amount of taxes it pays in the US... what they tell their investors is twice the amount that the IRS can account for.
It's amazing the morons in EU\EC think they can harass US companies and not evoke a response from the US.
It's amazing that the morons in global companies think that they are not bound to the laws of the places where they operate. It's equally funny that you still consider Apple an US company when it's currently not producing in the US, has more than twice the assets outside the US than it has in it and its best innovations lately are in the field of tax avoidance. Also, out of curiosity, can you name the last two companies with record fines from the EU for the same type of deal?
Re: (Score:3)
What do you mean US companies? Apple Ireland is an European company.
I'll believe it when I see it (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How does it contradict? (Score:2)
Obviously Cook is planning that taxes are lower for corporations next year, or that Apple will get a break for bringing back the taxes - either condition would meet his statement that Apple would not re-patriate because taxes are too high.
What large-corperation loving candidate is very likely to win the election and be in office next year to make that happen, hmm...
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously Cook is planning that taxes are lower for corporations next year, or that Apple will get a break for bringing back the taxes - either condition would meet his statement that Apple would not re-patriate because taxes are too high.
What large-corperation loving candidate is very likely to win the election and be in office next year to make that happen, hmm...
Both of them?
Re: (Score:2)
What large-corperation loving candidate is very likely to win the election and be in office next year to make that happen, hmm...
As both major candidates love large corporations (albeit different large corporations), could you be more specific? I say that because Apple is one of those companies that inhabits multiple spaces, some of which have been associated with the left and others which have been associated with the right.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
That is incorrect, the US has the third highest corporate income taxes in the world at 39%. Europe's average is 26%.
http://taxfoundation.org/article/corporate-income-tax-rates-around-world-2015
Re:How does it contradict? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: How does it contradict? (Score:4, Insightful)
I`m no tax expert but I believe it`s done like this:
I believe you will not have to pay income taxes more than once. At least as long as you keep the money in the business set up in the low tax country.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
And also lower than they were in most of the 20th century. If corporations paid higher taxes in the US, maybe we could have fewer mentally ill homeless pooping at the bus stop. Maybe we could have better public education. Maybe we could have a social safety net. Maybe we could have federal funding for... oh never mind, this is slashdot.
Re: (Score:2)
Really it is just an indication of psychopathic greed panic. Basically the entire economic system looks to be shifting to tax payable at point of revenue and no shifting allowed. Can't prove your costs with tax records from other countries than pay full rate tax on total income with no deductions. Hence they are now looking to shift tax burdened money before it kicks in. Catch if they are to abusive about it, those countries ending up with those taxes without being the revenue source will be considered par
Re: (Score:2)
plans to (Score:2)
I disagree with the term "back" (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The money certainly was "in the US". iPhone sales in the US result in profits in Ireland, substantial profits.
Re: (Score:3)
edit: as usual funny captcha AI throws an ironic one - gullible - as in me? right....i wish.
This must be a new thing, I didn't know Slashdot allowed editing posts after submitting!
edit: as suspected, it doesn't.
Re:I disagree with the term "back" (Score:4, Interesting)
Apple is not bringing "back" profits. That money was never in the US
More Apple shareholders are in the US than elsewhere. In finance terminology, profits are "brought back" to the owners. So the term is correct in this usage.
Re:I disagree with the term "back" (Score:5, Insightful)
Look up "transfer pricing".
It's where things happen like Apple USA buy an iPhone from Apple EIRE at very close to retail price and so on paper make almost zero profit in the USA.
The profit then happens in Ireland where the difference between say $10 per unit and $500 per unit is not taxed much at all due to personal agreements with Irish politicians and some other financial games involving Holland.
The EU is extremely pissed off because they have been propping up Ireland financially while Ireland has been looking the other way at vast amounts of tax revenue that Irish laws say they should be collecting. It's not about 6000 jobs (the usual excuse and most likely an outright lie about the number Apple employ in Ireland), the unpaid taxes could provide that a hundred times over, it would be a money trail leading into the pockets of those Irish politicians who are loudly damning the EU this week for suggesting they tax Apple.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not about 6000 jobs (the usual excuse and most likely an outright lie about the number Apple employ in Ireland)
You don't think a company the size of Apple employs 6000 accountants?
if charity, dangerous (Score:2)
If this move turns out to be contrary to the fiduciary interests of shareholders, expect a class action lawsuit. A CEO can't simply throw money away.
B-B-B-But... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I agree on part of it, but Ireland could never pay that amount, certainly not on the backs of the Irish. They'd take the first boat to leave the country if the government did that so it's a bit more obvious to make Apple pay who should have known a low tax rate as they had could never have been correct.
I think Tim
Re: (Score:2)
Actually it doesn't really matter _that_ much if it's Apple Ireland or the Country Ireland that gets charged with 13 billion in taxes... either case will fuck up both Apple and the government. (for the better)
Re: (Score:2)
Huge flaw in that - since the EU is financially propping up Ireland they would be charging themselves!
Re: (Score:2)
Tactical Move (Score:3, Interesting)
Despite his public proclamations and rhetoric, Tim Cook knows that the EU investigation into the tax deal between Ireland and Apple is absolutely not, "political crap" and he's had now enough time for his lawyers to tell him so. That event is an issue between the EU and Ireland and, in a sense, has nothing to do with Apple. The problem for Cook, then, is what to do? He can't put Apple in the middle of the dispute with the EU. He has no options.
Except one.
He can go to the US government to ask for help. "Hey Barak, that sweet deal we had with Ireland, the one that is letting us be profitable and employ lots of Americans? It's going south. Can you help?"
Obama isn't stupid either. He knows that now that the wheels are in motion, Apple is going to have to pay some taxes to someone - and Obama would rather the someone was the US Federal Government and not the Irish government. So what we're seeing now is Apple asking Washington for help. Washington have said, "Sure, we can help. But of course you're going to have to pay some tax somewhere..."
So Tim Cook has made this announcement about repatriation to show Barak that he's serious. Washington will now attempt to apply pressure to Brussels in order to get the EU to back down and allow Apple to continue to operate across the EU, all whilst paying less than 1% Corporation Tax. Meanwhile, Apple will repatriate some of their profits, which the US will tax, as part of the arrangements.
At least, that's their plan. However, bear in mind that the EU are just in the process of throwing out TTIP, which is going to make any attempt by the US to negotiate forcefully absolutely fraught with danger. The worst possible thing would be for the US to try and apply pressure right now: all they will do is make the entire EU mad at them. The only potential ally they would have had, the UK, is in the process of leaving the EU [with the planned start of Article 50 to commence in the New Year].
But the thing that all us little people need to remember here is that every pound, euro or dollar in tax that Apple "avoids", well that's a pound, euro or dollar that we have to find. When companies don't pull their weight, tax-wise, the private individuals are the ones who get stung. You only need to look at the international tax arrangements of the big multinationals to realise what a joke this process has become. What we need is a clear, internationally-agreed law that says that for tax purposes, a transaction occurs at the location that the buyer initiates the transaction. [ Turning that around, and saying that it is where the seller processes the transaction achieves nothing: Apple and others would just put their transaction processing system in a tax haven ].
The interesting thing is that these practices cost "local" tax payers HUGE amounts of extra taxes. So it's entirely possible that what we're seeing here could set a precedent that benefits 500 million people across the EU... Let's hope so...
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Right. It's a three-way game. Apple will bring back 'a few billion'. Which, if taxed at 10 or 20% (nobody with a competent accountant pays the full marginal US rate of 35%), that will cost them a few hundred million. Small potatoes to have the US Treasury arm-twist the EU to BTFO. The USA would like to have Apple repatriate their offshore cash. Not just for the taxes, but to improve the odds that if Apple chooses to make investments, they will make them here. The EU might have shot themselves in the foot, b
Re: (Score:2)
No, the current issue is evasion. Apple evaded taxes by declaring them in an imaginary company that was not based in any country on earth. They did this solely for the purpose of tax evasion.
Ireland is not free to choose its own tax laws (which would have made it a "sweetheart deal" rather than an illegal subsidy). Apple broke the law of the EU (which is the highest sovereign power in Ireland). The money is legally owed - to the EU, and one provision in the deal is that if Ireland does not take it the other
Re: (Score:2)
This announcement makes perfect sense if you think of it as a move in the game of chess between Apple and the EU.
It does, or you can just see it as a simple strategic decision. The EU wants them to start paying taxes; if they're going to have to pay them somewhere, they might as well pay them in the USA. Then they can employ more people here (and less in the EU) which is a benefit since their primary engineering is all here in the USA. They were one of the pioneers of the double irish accounting system, it's "made" them a lot of money, and now that it's over it's only a drawback to employ people in Ireland. It's much
Re: (Score:3)
This is actually a big part of Trump's plan for his presidency. Tax holiday, bring back the billions Apple and Microsoft have stashed overseas, and put the money to work inside of America as well.
It's well known that they're just waiting for a tax holiday to do this, so Obama could theoretically steal some of Trump's fire in the unlikely event it looks like he's going to win and do it early.
Re: (Score:2)
Is no candidate proposing to simply start taxing profits held overseas? Less whatever tax they paid overseas of course.
Re: (Score:3)
Effectively, the EU's decision lets Apple repatriate roughly $50B, tax free.
Re: (Score:2)
This announcement makes perfect sense if you think of it as a move in the game of chess between Apple and the EU.
Despite his public proclamations and rhetoric, Tim Cook knows that the EU investigation into the tax deal between Ireland and Apple is absolutely not, "political crap" and he's had now enough time for his lawyers to tell him so. That event is an issue between the EU and Ireland and, in a sense, has nothing to do with Apple. The problem for Cook, then, is what to do? He can't put Apple in the middle of the dispute with the EU. He has no options.
Except one.
He can go to the US government to ask for help. "Hey Barak, that sweet deal we had with Ireland, the one that is letting us be profitable and employ lots of Americans? It's going south. Can you help?"
Obama isn't stupid either. He knows that now that the wheels are in motion, Apple is going to have to pay some taxes to someone - and Obama would rather the someone was the US Federal Government and not the Irish government. So what we're seeing now is Apple asking Washington for help. Washington have said, "Sure, we can help. But of course you're going to have to pay some tax somewhere..."
So Tim Cook has made this announcement about repatriation to show Barak that he's serious. Washington will now attempt to apply pressure to Brussels in order to get the EU to back down and allow Apple to continue to operate across the EU, all whilst paying less than 1% Corporation Tax. Meanwhile, Apple will repatriate some of their profits, which the US will tax, as part of the arrangements.
At least, that's their plan. However, bear in mind that the EU are just in the process of throwing out TTIP, which is going to make any attempt by the US to negotiate forcefully absolutely fraught with danger. The worst possible thing would be for the US to try and apply pressure right now: all they will do is make the entire EU mad at them. The only potential ally they would have had, the UK, is in the process of leaving the EU [with the planned start of Article 50 to commence in the New Year].
But the thing that all us little people need to remember here is that every pound, euro or dollar in tax that Apple "avoids", well that's a pound, euro or dollar that we have to find. When companies don't pull their weight, tax-wise, the private individuals are the ones who get stung. You only need to look at the international tax arrangements of the big multinationals to realise what a joke this process has become. What we need is a clear, internationally-agreed law that says that for tax purposes, a transaction occurs at the location that the buyer initiates the transaction. [ Turning that around, and saying that it is where the seller processes the transaction achieves nothing: Apple and others would just put their transaction processing system in a tax haven ].
The interesting thing is that these practices cost "local" tax payers HUGE amounts of extra taxes. So it's entirely possible that what we're seeing here could set a precedent that benefits 500 million people across the EU... Let's hope so...
You seem to be trying to make the case that all Apple thinks all it has to do is move all it's billions to the US, play the US off against the Europeans and their piles of cash will be safe from the EU. Even if that assessment is true I'm having trouble believing that the US leadership can possibly be that short sighted since it would sour their relationship with a whole string of their oldest and most important allies (although I have no trouble believing President Trump would be that stupid). Apple (along
Re: (Score:2)
U.S. Corporations need to pay U.S. taxes. (Score:3)
Re:U.S. Corporations need to pay U.S. taxes. (Score:5, Insightful)
One of the most fucked up parts of being an U.S. citizen is that even if you work, live, breath on foreign soil you still need to report everything to the US tax office.
Basically the only country in the world that will keep fucking you over even after you try to leave it behind for ever. Glad I'm not a 'citizen'.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Basically the only country in the world that will keep fucking you over even after you try to leave it behind for ever. Glad I'm not a 'citizen'.
Except for Australia, India, and the many members of the EU, which incidentally if any have double taxation agreements with any of the former countries you're also screwed.
I.e. Australia as an agreement for double taxation with the Netherlands. So if you're Dutch and live in Australia you need to report your income in the Netherlands. If you live in Canada you do not. Things are much more complicated than just the USA, though looking through the rules I believe the USA has the most onerous requirements for
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The difference is that US citizenship carries certain obligations. One such obligation is a requirement to file taxes in the US, irrespective of where you live. The US is only one of two countries with this requirement, the other is Eritrea [wikipedia.org].
So yes, I can see why some US citizens may wish to denounce their citizenship. But as you say, citizens of most other countries certainly wouldn't bother.
There was another poster here saying that they thought people should only hold citizenship of one country. I disagree
Re:U.S. Corporations need to pay U.S. taxes. (Score:4, Insightful)
Demonstrating, yet again, that the US only cares about its own, and nothing and nobody else. Such an insular country and people, obsessed with money (you mention rich foreigners, nowhere do you discuss any other aspect they may have).
And who the hell wants a baby that's going to be taxed when it's born to foreign parents, lived its life on foreign soil, and never knew the US at all? That's baby tourism. What you're talking about before that is actually immigration, which is universal (they are 30,000 people in France at the moment trying to get to the UK, the demand has little to do with it being a benefit to the country they are trying to get to).
Those people coming in to the US, they have citizenship of other countries. Those countries - without exception - do not tax them while they spend their lives in the US. The US tax people who have left the US, however. Until their denounce their citizenships entirely.
This means that your students never stray outside your borders. They can't. They can't afford to be taxed by others and by the US at the same time.
This means that your professors and other academics cannot travel and work outside the US. Not without being penalised much more than their peers in other countries, or denouncing their citizenship - which is a one-way street. If they want to go work on a project on an Australian telescope, they are double-taxed all they time they do, unless they decide to leave the US permanently and live and work in the other hundreds of countries the world over that don't do that to them.
What you've got is a system that keeps all the worst - the "baby tourists", the illegal immigrants, the jobless and the stupid - and punishes anyone who wants to see the world, work internationally, or do any kind of international collaboration. It's called brain-drain and double-taxation is the PERFECT way to cause it.
And the problem is that it's a self-reinforcing problem. The more stupid people that stay and the more clever, innovative, and internationally-demanded that leave, the more people left behind think it's a "good thing", and you end up with a Donald Trump situation where the whole world are looking at you thinking "You fucking idiots" and yet half your country are cheering him on because everyone with a brain already left or will be forced out.
You're not alone - Brexit is going to have roughly the same effect unless they can guarantee rights for EU people already working here, but we're not stupid enough to tax them for even trying to go and work with the rest of the world
My girlfriend is a Dr (which means something over here), and Italian - Italy PAID HER to come to the UK. They PAID HER to study here. They do not tax her while she's not at home. The UK PAY HER over the odds to come here, as only a handful of people can do her job, which is taxed in the UK only.
She works in a NHS hospital diagnosing genetic diseases and cancers.
Her friends, almost to a person, are all EU, or foreign citizens. Mexico, Spain, France, Italy, Romania, Poland, Russia. They ALL PAID their people to come to the UK, get educations, make the big bucks and send money home. Because they know that nothing beats international experience, recognition, education and talent. They don't tax anything while they're not on their home soil.
Those people are going to retire back to the country, or they are going to qualify quickly and bring back foreign expertise, techniques, standards and better ways of doing things - for free. They are going to earn bigger money than their home countries could afford (my gf literally laughs at what Italy will pay her to do the same job over there) and send it home. And they will have well-rounded, collaborative careers.
The US are basically fining people for wanting to go to the rest of the world. You can't study abroad. You can't work abroad. Even places like China and Korea don't stop that for their academics. Hell, you get less holidays than just about every other country in the
You forgot Eritrea (Score:2)
Eritrea is the only other country that taxes the revenue of its citizen worldwide. /s
You might know Eritrea as being extremely high on the scale of respecting human rights.
Re: (Score:3)
Thank you for the extra information. I agree entirely with the parent poster's spirit, though they did make a few mistakes over the double-taxation which you helpfully corrected.
However, your information on holidays while correct, still supports the parent poster's message: the US does not grant enough holiday time to its citizens to visit the world. As someone who has lived and worked in Australia, the USA, Canada, and the UK, I know that the USA was the absolute worst when it came to pay, benefits, and w
Lower Corporate Tax Rate (Score:5, Interesting)
I would be all for lowering their taxes, on one condition.
American workers only within the US.
You want the tax breaks ? You quit going the H1B route cheating the US workforce out of a job.
You hire foreign labor ? Your tax rate will increase to compensate. Pretty simple. Do the math, set the rates to make hiring US workers a financial win for the company. Price of doing business in the US I'm afraid.
Don't like it ? Move your company to India or Ireland or wherever you want. See how well you do when you're denied access to the US market.
Those that are gaming the system can just gtfo or deal with the tax man.
Sounds like a negotation tactic (Score:2)
Proit (Score:5, Interesting)
It's easy to make more profit than your competitors when you're aren't paying any tax, in any country that you operate in.
Strangely bad for PR when it gets on the news, though. And strangely ends up changing from a hush-hush golf-and-a-posh-meal secret deal with the local ministers to laws being changed to prevent it happening when it does make the news.
Starbucks found that out in the UK.
So, technically, Apple don't make 40% of the profits in the Silicon Valley. Because those profits aren't properly taxed. And they aren't registered as profit in Silicon Valley at all. They are registered as profit only in Ireland. Which was charging them basically 0% tax. They are the LEAST profitable company in Silicon Valley, or else the US taxman would have had their share a long time ago.
But they are in fact the most profitable in Ireland, while also being the least taxed. Strange that.
I could earn twice what I do if I didn't have to pay tax.
And I could make any company outstrip all its competitors if it didn't have to pay tax (get company, make no changes, stop paying tax, bang, you just doubled your profit most likely, and can lower prices or buy suppliers to put your competitors out of the market).
I'm much more interested in an article entitled "Who pays the most tax in Silicon Valley?"
Re: (Score:2)
I could earn twice what I do if I didn't have to pay tax.
If you're paying 50% tax, you're a complete moron who has some REALLY bad tax advice...
Just a guess... (Score:2)
It looks like Apple is assuming Trump will be in office by next year. I doubt that they have any intention of importing their money just to get it confiscated.
Re: (Score:2)
you people who think the Clinton's aren't mega-corporate bitches too are amusing
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, 'cause Hillary is the big evil socialist-marxist-tax-them-fuckers-out-the-wazoo bitch.
She's a bitch all right. But the only marxist in this race is Trump. And he's more of the Groucho kind.
How interesting.... (Score:2)
Cook is saying that Apple will repatriate profits...next year. As in after Obama is out of office. Clearly, Apple has not been able to negotiate an agreement with the Obama administration that they can live with. By saying next year Cook is basically saying that he has given up on this administration. Trump has already come out publicly against the EU decision.
Interestingly the Obama administration is also against the EU decision. Why? I can think of two possible reasons:
1) They would rather get their own g
Re: (Score:3)
Translation (Score:2)
We noticed that foreign tax havens aren't so reliable, so we'll try some domestic tax havens for a change. We'll bite the bullet and probably have to pay twice the tax we had to pay in Ireland (which would probably be a whooping 0.01% [cnn.com] instead of the 0.005% so far).
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft accounts for 95% of the software security problems of the planet.
As an IT support contractor for 20+ years, I give thanks to Microsoft for providing daily job security.
Re: (Score:2)
Dude, you gotta look for something better, like, I don't know, being a professional poker player or HVAC or something. Sheet metal work pays good and you don't have to deal with Microsoft products.
Re: (Score:2)
Dude, you gotta look for something better, like, I don't know, being a professional poker player or HVAC or something. Sheet metal work pays good and you don't have to deal with Microsoft products.
I'm making easy money as it is with Microsoft products. Meanwhile, I can focus on alternative streams of income that will eventually replace my IT job.
Re: (Score:3)
Thank you for your service.
Re: (Score:3)
And 99% of AC cheap shots.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
most likely a result of there tax haven (Ireland) no longer being as safe a place as they thought to hide there stolen billions.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:rats fleeing the sinking ship (Score:5, Insightful)
"it means exactly as it was meant to mean. They made an illegal deal with the Irish government to act as a tax haven to shelter their earnings from other countries. You can call it profit shifting, tax minimisation or whatever the hell you want, but it has been declared illegal finally and I call it theft."
Not at all, it has been considered as an illegal subsidy/gift _from_ Ireland to Apple and the Irish are now 'forced' to ask for that 'gift' back, just like other countries before them.
Re: (Score:2)
it means exactly as it was meant to mean
Then you STILL don't know what it means...
I'd explain it to you, but you likely aren't listening, so what's the point?
Re:He's just changing robbers. (Score:5, Insightful)
If you want to live in a civilised society, taxes are the price you pay.
Re: (Score:2)
If you want to live in a civilised society, taxes are the price you pay.
Funny, that's the same line the Mafia uses when offering protection!
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, the mafia says "thats a really nice civilised society you got there. real shame if something bad were to happen to it". Not to be confused with their other greatest hit "Fuck you, pay me".
Re: (Score:2)
If you want to live in a civilised society, taxes are the price you pay.
I suspect you don't quite know what your money goes towards, how much you really pay, and how much of it is really buying civilization...
Ignorance is rampant, sadly...
Re: (Score:2)
"If you want to live in a a thieving, gangster, racketeering society for your statement to make some sense, taxes are the price you pay."
I'm not sure that helped.
Re:He's just changing robbers. (Score:5, Insightful)
You want freedom from government interference? Move to Somalia, central Mexico dominated by drug cartels or Southeast Asia where they grow opium. No "oppressive" government there.
In contrast consider Norway. I've been there and it is one of the best run societies I have ever seen. Lot of government regulation and it always ranks near or at the top for overall quality of life.
Since things in the US suck so much because of the "ebil gumment" why don't you "self deport" and go to one of the Libertard havens that exist all over the world? Since all problems result from government interfering with your precious sovereign liberty, you should be about to create a paradise on earth anywhere there is no effective central control. Parts of North Africa are lawless right now, and with the recent death of Uzbekistan's dictator I bet you and your best Libertarian buds could go over their and create the perfect society.
Can you leave tomorrow? I'd be happy to drive you to the airport. Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.
Re:He's just changing robbers. (Score:4, Interesting)
Sigh. There are many on the American right who try to lecture us on places they've obviously never been, based on a few factoids cherry-picked from Wikipedia.
Re:He's just changing robbers. (Score:4, Insightful)
In summary, what works in Norway does not and will not work here in the United States,
Because?
unless you believe that the US government should be run entirely according to the culture, traditions and ideas of northern European white men. Funny, but that doesn't strike me as a very liberal idea and yet the liberals keep gushing about Norway. Go figure.
There is a strong correlation between countries that use regulations to improve quality of life and succeed, and those that don't and don't. The American fascination with "freedom" is causing a lot of your problems.
Re:He's just changing robbers. (Score:4, Interesting)
If you ever keep an eye on those OECD comparison things, there's a whole host of countries that do consistently better than the US on education, health, crime, corruption, social welfare, life expectancy etc. So take Norway out, let's compare Sweden, Denmark, Netherlands, France, Germany, UK, Ireland, Iceland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, Singapore, Japan etc etc and you will see a strong correlation between appropriate regulation and quality of life.
Conversely if you look at the worst places in the world, Somalia, Sierra Leone, Afghanistan etc they all have next to no rules, you can do what ever you an get away with and the people suffer as a consequence.
The US is the richest nation on earth with the most abundant natural resources. It should win at everything, but it doesn't.
Why do you think that is?
Re:Trump 2016! (Score:5, Funny)
"Make America great again! Lower takes and make other countries pay for our walls!"
Since you obviously don't even know how 'taxes' is spelled it raises the question:
Is that you, Donald?
Time for a very old joke (Score:2)
G: No - dollars, dollars!
C: Atsa right - he lives in Dollars Taxes.
Re: (Score:2)
Prosecutor: Something must be done! War would mean a prohibitive increase in our taxes.
Chicolini: Hey, I got an uncle lives in Taxes.
Prosecutor: No, I'm talking about taxes - money, dollars!
Chicolini: Dollars! There's-a where my uncle lives! Dollars, Taxes!
Re: (Score:2)
Given that most of the other EU countries are seeing precisely zip of Apple's taxes anyway (because Ireland are charging them at a rate of 0.005%), every country won't be sorry to see them go either.
Literally, they are doing masses of business in the EU and paying "less tax than a sausage stall".
If they are a US company taxing themselves in the US, then we have taxes that capture that when they sell product in the EU. If they are a EU company taxing themselves in the EU, then we see direct taxes from them.
Re: (Score:2)
While that is the excuse there are hardly any jobs at stake - what to look for is a money trail into specific pockets.
Pretty fucking sordid isn't it?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not as such. The Irish government has been looking the other way with taxes and the jobs are only enough to retain a "paper presence" as the headquarters instead of actually being the real headquarters. Even if the "6000 jobs" is real (which I very much doubt) there are layoffs bigger than that all the time that hardly make the papers.
Profits have been staggering, so a reduction isn't going to kill Apple